Wednesday, 24th April 2024
To guardian.ng
Search

Court fixes October 18 to rule on admissibility of Evans’ statements

By Yetunde Ayobami Ojo
31 August 2019   |   4:12 am
Justice Hakeem Oshodi of a Lagos High Court, sitting in Ikeja, has fixed October 18, 2019 to deliver ruling on the admissibility of alleged kidnap kingpin, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike...

Evans.

Justice Hakeem Oshodi of a Lagos High Court, sitting in Ikeja, has fixed October 18, 2019 to deliver ruling on the admissibility of alleged kidnap kingpin, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike alias Evans’ statements in his ongoing trial and others, over alleged kidnapping and murder.

The judge fixed the date after listening to the argument and submission from parties in the suit (prosecuting and defense counsel).

When the matter was called yesterday, the defendants’ counsel, Mr. Olarenwaju Ajanaku, argued on the manner the alleged extra-judicial statements were taken from them (defendants).

However, the new Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice in Lagos, Mr. Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), who is now leading the prosecution team, prayed the court to admit the evidence against the defendants.

Onigbanjo submitted that since the defendants had admitted that part of the statements was written by them and that the other part was not written by them, such statement could not be separated.

Evans and his co-defendants, Uche Amadi, Okwuchukwu Nwachukwu, Chilaka Ifeanyi, Victor Chukwunonso Aduba and a woman, Ogechi Uchechukwu, were all facing a-two count charge of conspiracy and kidnapping. The defendants were arraigned on a two-count charges of conspiracy and kidnapping of the Chief Executove Officer of Maydon Pharmaceitical Limited, Donatus Dunu from whose family they allegedly collected 223,000 Euro  (N100million) as ransom.

They pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

It would be recalled that, a prosecution witness, Inspector Idowu Haruna of Intelligence Response Team that arrested the defendants, had told the court the defendants were arrested. He also told court that their statements were not taken under duress but rather in a conducive environment.

In this article

0 Comments