Featured

How CJMR Helped Kazeem Ayinde Regain Freedom After 25Years in Jail

Published

5 months ago

July 28, 2024

Eric

By Hezekiah Deboboye Olujobi

“Wrongful accusation, wrongful arrest, wrongful detention, wrongful prosecution, and wrongful conviction. Don’t blame the judge who passed the judgment; blame the police and the false witnesses. The prosecution can only work based on the evidence supplied to him by the police, the judge can only work based on the evidence before him.”

It was the week following our successful efforts in securing the freedom of Olushina Ajayi after 21 years when Ejire, one of our associates, approached us to share another heartbreaking case.

Ejire: “Sir, there is a man in Kirikiri Maximum Security prison, the oldest on death row, sentenced to death for a crime he did not commit.”

Me: “How do you know he is innocent?”

Ejire: “We were together in Agodi prison before he was condemned, and we met again on death row in Ibara, Abeokuta. Every day, he cursed his accuser for sending him to the gallows unjustly.”

Me: “How long has he been imprisoned?”

Ejire: “He has been on death row for 18 years.”

Me: “18 years on death row!”

This revelation compelled me to delve deeper into the legal battle of those ensnared in the web of injustice. As a layperson, faced with such a claim of innocence, where does one begin to seek justice?

When someone not versed in the law is approached with a plea for help, how does one navigate the complexities of the legal system to right a wrong? As we worked on securing his release, more individuals with similar grievances sought our assistance.

The next day, I received a call from Kirikiri Maximum Prison; it was the man in question. He shared his story and pleaded his innocence. I promised to visit him but stressed the importance of hearing his wife’s account. Shortly after, his brother, Honorable Malruf, and other family members visited our office to share their side of the story.

During the meeting, his wife recounted the events that led to her husband’s unjust imprisonment for 23 years. The gravity of their ordeal became apparent as we listened to their heartbreaking tale.”
The woman said, “My husband was not in Ibadan on the day the night guard was killed. He went to Lagos with my second wife to see her brother who had an accident. The murder incident happened on February 16, 1998. My husband traveled to Lagos with his second wife on the morning of February 16, 1998, and returned on February 17, 1998. The police came to arrest him on the morning of February 18. I provided all these statements to the police and before the judge, yet my husband was sentenced to death. My husband had a previous misunderstanding with Kehinde Ilori, the woman who owns a shop opposite our house. It was the same police in charge of that case who came to arrest my husband. My husband did not kill the night guard, Kareem Ayuba. He had no quarrel with him. My husband was a victim of circumstances.”

I was emotionally moved by the story of this woman. How can someone be maltreated in this way? Emotions must be set aside. Let me have the court record to enable me to study it and verify the truth of the woman’s statements.

This was how I began my voyage of discovery to unravel the truth about Kazeem Ayinde’s story. I applied for the certified true copy of the judgment and the case file from the High Court Registry on Ring Road. It was shocking to hear that the record had not yet returned from the Court of Appeal. I went to the Court of Appeal with my application and discovered from the records that it was transmitted to the Supreme Court on June 17, 2017, and has not yet been returned. Can I have the judgment of the Court of Appeal? I applied and it was made available for my reading. I have a contact person at the Supreme Court whom I contacted to help me confirm the status of the case. She said the case has not yet been assigned. Ah! This is 2019.

It is the state’s practice that before one can be granted amnesty, they must have exhausted the appeal to the Supreme Court or withdraw their further appeal. However, in this case, this man has spent a solid 18 years waiting for his appeal to be completed at the Supreme Court. From the day of his conviction to the Court of Appeal judgment, it took 15 solid years. I went through the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which provided insight into the case file and the trial of the lower court. It is quite possible to deduce the facts of the matter in this case.

Based on the information provided from the appeal court judgment:

1. There was a previous misunderstanding between the complainant PW3 and Kazeem Ayinde, which led to a wrongful accusation.
2. The deceased, a night guide, was also wrongly accused and arrested in a previous case with the appellant by the complainant in this case.
3. The appellant raised an alibi that he was not in Ibadan on the day of the incident but the police did not investigate his claim.
4. Kazeem Ayinde was sentenced to death solely based on the dying declaration statement of the deceased.
5. The court relied on the evidence of PW1, PW3, and PW4 to convict the appellant.
6. The appellant maintained his innocence throughout the trial.
7. The appellant spent a total of 23 years in prison before his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment and later granted total amnesty after 24 years and 10 months behind bars.

ROOT OF BITTERNESS
As the investigation into Kazeem Ayinde’s case continued, it was revealed that a previous misunderstanding with PW3 Kehinde Ilori in November 1997 had led to false accusations against him. Kazeem was wrongly accused of breaking into Kehinde’s shop and stealing a bag of rice. Kehinde, utilizing her connections to the police, reported the alleged theft to the Iyaganku Police Station.

The following day, a senior police officer visited the station and questioned the detainees about the reasons for their arrests. Kazeem explained the circumstances that led to his arrest in Oje, prompting the senior officer to challenge the arresting officer, pointing out that Oje was not under the jurisdiction of Iyaganku. With no evidence linking Kazeem to the alleged crime, he was subsequently released from Iyaganku Police Station.

However, the aftermath of this incident would set off a chain of events that would have far-reaching consequences for Kazeem.

Following Kazeem Ayinde’s release from the false allegations at Iyaganku Police Station, a significant turn of events unfolded. A week later, a thief was apprehended at a crime scene in a different location. Initially suspected of armed robbery, the thief confessed to the police that his criminal specialty was breaking into houses and shops when the owners were absent. He admitted to various past criminal activities, including the burglary at PW3 Kehinde Ilori’s shop where the bag of rice was stolen.

The thief led the police to Kehinde’s shop and confessed to breaking in and stealing the rice. Interestingly, prior to this revelation, Kehinde had already taken action by arresting the night guard under suspicion of being involved in the burglary. This crucial information was documented in the Certified True Copy of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Upon learning of the thief’s confession and arrest, someone informed Kazeem about the developments. Fueled by a mix of vindication and frustration, Kazeem confronted Kehinde at her shop, pointing out the injustice he had faced and implying that divine judgment would prevail.

In response to Kazeem’s confrontation, Kehinde, unwilling to admit her wrongdoing, took drastic action. She collaborated with a police officer, PW4, who had testified against Kazeem previously, to implicate him as a co-perpetrator in the crime. This marked the beginning of a new chapter in Kazeem’s tumultuous journey, as he found himself ensnared in a web of deceit and false accusations that would cast a shadow over his life for the next 24 years.

Our visit to Kazeem Ayinde in Kirikiri

To every man crying persistently on the claim of the innocence of the crime behind the bar there is another side of his story

During our visit to Kazeem Ayinde in Kirikiri prison, Apapa Lagos, he shed more light on what actually transpired. Here is an excerpt of his own side of the story: “When I was informed in the evening that the police had arrested the real perpetrator of the crime, I went and challenged her on the need to apologize for defaming my character. Moreover, why should you keep quiet after the police have arrested the real perpetrator of the crime? I told her, ‘May God judge you.’ The following day, I challenged her (Kehinde Ilori). She brought the police to come and arrest me. This same police officer, PW4, locked me up in the cell with the criminal along with the same night guard who was later killed. The criminal and I were charged in court, and the night guard was released from the police station. When we got to court, my lawyer applied for my bail, and I was granted bail by the court.” The night guard never made any statement against me. What could have been the reason for me to kill him?
When the murder of Kareem Ayuba occurred, PW3 also played a significant role in advocating for the case. She suggested that I should be arrested again and implicated in the murder of Kareem Ayuba, who was a night guard on the street. While I was attending court for the shop burglary case, the police arrived at my house three days after Kareem Ayuba’s murder, resulting in me facing two separate cases.

1. The case involving the shop of Kehinde Ilori, where she was the complainant.
2. The murder case of Ayuba Kareem, the night guard on the street.

The authorities claimed that the night guard mentioned my name, Kazeem Pele, because I have three marks (Pele). The question arises: if he truly mentioned my name before his death, why did the police wait until the third day to arrest me?

As a result, I was remanded in Agodi prison facing two cases with the same complainant and the same Investigation Police Officer. As the legal proceedings unfolded, I was eventually discharged and acquitted in the first case, while the actual perpetrator received a three-year prison sentence. I maintain that I had no motive to harm Ayuba and am innocent of the accusations against me.

After reviewing the judgment of the Court of Appeal, it is evident that there are significant concerns regarding the reliance on dying declarations as evidence. The law stipulates specific criteria that must be met before an accused person can be convicted of murder. These include proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the deceased has died, that the accused unlawfully killed the deceased, and that the death was a direct result of the accused’s actions to the exclusion of other probable causes.

Key questions arise from this case: Was it indeed the appellant who killed the deceased? Can the death of the deceased be directly linked to the appellant? Were there witnesses who saw the appellant inflicting the fatal injury on the deceased? Did anyone hear the deceased cry out or mention the appellant’s name during the incident? What was the surrounding environment like at the time of the incident? And most crucially, what could have been the motive for killing the deceased?

Regarding the motive, the Court’s ruling is based on the lack of direct evidence linking the appellant to the killing. Instead, the trial judge relied on statements made by the deceased to witnesses PW1 and PW2 while he lay injured, implicating the appellant as his assailant. These statements, combined with previous threats attributed to the appellant, were considered as a motive and used to connect the appellant to the death of the deceased.

The reliance on dying declarations and circumstantial evidence raises doubts about the fairness and accuracy of the judgment. The absence of concrete proof directly linking the appellant to the crime calls into question the validity of the conviction. It is essential to thoroughly examine all aspects of the case to ensure justice is served and the truth is revealed.
It is crucial to address the discrepancies and inconsistencies in the case, particularly concerning the death of the night guard and the evidence presented during the trial. The following points highlight the key issues raised:

1. Night Guard’s Role: The night guard was not a personal guard or employee of Kehinde Ilori, as portrayed in the court proceedings. He served as a guide for the community and was tragically murdered on a street junction in Oje, not in front of Kehinde Ilori’s house. There was no indication of a specific clash or conflict between the appellant and the deceased, making the motive for the alleged crime unclear.

2. Lack of Shop Break-in Reports: Contrary to the narrative presented, there were no reports of shop break-ins in the vicinity that night, which could have led to the night guard witnessing the appellant committing a crime. The absence of such incidents raises doubts about the circumstances surrounding the night guard’s death and the alleged involvement of the appellant.

3. Evidence of PW4: The testimony of PW4, Sgt Adeyera Adegoke, played a significant role in the conviction of the appellant. His account of the dying declaration made by the deceased, implicating the appellant in the attack, was a crucial piece of evidence. However, questions arise about the reliability of this testimony and whether it was the sole basis for the conviction.

4. Witness Testimonies: Prior to PW4’s evidence, testimonies from PW1, PW2, and PW3 indicated that they heard the deceased mention the appellant’s name during the incident. The consistency of this claim among multiple witnesses raises concerns about potential biases or inaccuracies in the accounts provided.

5. **Court’s Decision**: The Court’s ruling, based on the dying declaration and testimonies, concluded that the appellant was responsible for the fatal injuries inflicted on the deceased. This decision was influenced by the statements made by the deceased before his death, as reported by witnesses and the police officer.

In light of these discrepancies and uncertainties surrounding the case, further scrutiny of the evidence and a comprehensive review of the circumstances leading to the night guard’s death are necessary to ensure a fair and just assessment of the appellant’s involvement in the alleged crime.

HOW CREDIBLE ARE THESE EVIDENCE?
If detail matters in any trial, reasoning, logic and analysis must follow. The scenario here according to the record of the court is very clear; We shall replay it.

1. Lack of Threats: The court questioned whether the appellant had threatened to harm the deceased due to his role as a witness in a previous case. The court’s assertion that the appellant terminated the life of the deceased to destroy evidence against him is undermined by the fact that the appellant was discharged in the Magistrate Court. This raises doubts about the motive attributed to the appellant and weakens the prosecution’s case.

2. Scene of the Crime: A visit to the scene of the crime revealed important details about the proximity of the appellant’s house to the incident location, the shop of PW3, and the nearby hospital and police station. The practical considerations of transporting the wounded victim to the hospital or the police station raise questions about the actions taken by witnesses and law enforcement officers in response to the incident.

3. Community Response: The reluctance of people in the community to volunteer information or cooperate with the police, as observed during the fact-finding mission, sheds light on the challenges of gathering accurate and reliable evidence in such cases. The lack of thorough investigation and engagement with witnesses by law enforcement further complicates the case and raises doubts about the integrity of the evidence presented in court.

4. Appeal Process: The court’s criticism of the appellant’s counsel for not effectively challenging the prosecution’s case through cross-examination highlights potential shortcomings in the defense strategy. Despite the purpose of the appeal being to seek redress and correct any miscarriage of justice, the failure of the appeal, even up to the Supreme Court, underscores the challenges faced in overturning convictions.

5. Freedom and Gratitude: After 24 years and 10 months behind bars, Kazeem Ayinde finally gained his freedom through the intervention of the Board of Mercy and the recommendation to the Executive Governor of Oyo State. His release and expression of gratitude to Governor Seyi Makinde and the CJMR team signify a glimmer of hope and justice after enduring 24 years and 10 months of injustice.

The case of Kazeem Ayinde serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities and flaws within the legal system, emphasizing the importance of thorough investigations, fair trials, and avenues for redress to ensure that justice prevails.
My advice for the lawyer is to make an effort to visit their client in prison, and for the judge to carefully weigh the evidence before making a conviction. This conviction has not only affected me but also my entire family and my children.

Prov 31:8-9. Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,
for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly;
defend the rights of the poor and needy.”

Don’t keep quiet.
Reach out to us on phone call or whatsapp: +234-8030488093
Visit our website at www.cjmr.com.ng
To Donate to our work 1012189729 Zenith Bank Plc. Centre for Justice

Featured

Dangote Refinery, a Wonder of Modern Technology – Japan Ambassador, Business Community

Published

3 days ago

December 16, 2024

Eric

The Dangote Refinery and Petrochemicals complex has been hailed as an astonishing masterpiece, showcasing Nigeria’s technological advancements on the global stage.

This accolade was shared by a delegation from the Japanese Business Community in Nigeria, led by Japan’s Ambassador-designate to Nigeria, Suzuki Hideo. The Dangote Group also reiterated that its petroleum products are in demand worldwide, as it expands its polypropylene section to reduce Nigeria’s reliance on imported polypropylene, a crucial material used in packaging, textiles, and the automotive manufacturing industries.

The Japanese delegation, which toured the impressive facilities housing both the Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals as well as Dangote Fertilisers, commended the state-of-the-art technology on display, noting that it reinforces Nigeria’s role as the gateway to Africa.

Managing Director of the Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), Takashi Oku, remarked that while Nigeria remains the gateway to Africa, the Dangote Refinery stands as a remarkable project that showcases the country’s technological progress. He added that the facility, as the world’s largest single-train refinery, is a point of immense pride for Nigeria. JETRO is Japan’s governmental organisation for trade and investment.

“We had heard about the excellence of the Dangote Refinery through the media but seeing it in person has left us truly amazed by its vastness and grandeur. It demonstrates that Nigeria’s population is not only growing but also advancing in technology. We are keen to collaborate with Nigerian companies, especially Dangote Refinery,” he said.

Emphasising that the refinery has bolstered Nigeria’s leading position in Africa, he further noted that the facility serves as an ideal introduction to the country for the global community.

Managing Director of Itochu Nigeria Limited, Masahiro Tsuno, also praised the sheer size and automation of the Dangote Refinery, calling it a miracle and one of the wonders of the world.

“I’ve seen many standalone refineries across the globe, including in Vietnam and the Middle East. However, this size of a refinery built by one single investor is probably a miracle in the world. And I’m just actually witnessing a miracle, to be honest, today,” he said. Tsuno indicated that his company would seek collaboration with the refinery across various sectors, including polypropylene and other petroleum products.

Commending the ambassador-designate and his team, which described the Dangote Petroleum Refinery as a wonder of modern technology, Vice President of Oil and Gas, Dangote Industries Limited, Devakumar Edwin, explained that the facility is the vision of a Nigerian investor- Aliko Dangote, designed and built by Nigerians, and intended to serve the global market.

He said that it is a point of pride that a Nigerian company not only designed but also built the world’s largest single-train refinery complex. Dangote Industries Limited, a Nigerian company, acted as the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) contractor for the refinery. In the process, cutting-edge technologies from around the world were incorporated to ensure that the facility meets the highest standards. Edwin assured the ambassador-designate and the delegation that the company is open to collaboration, always striving to maintain the best possible standards.

“Even now, we have a lot of Japanese equipment inside both the refinery and the fertiliser plant. There are significant opportunities for collaboration, as we always seek the latest technology in any business we engage in. For instance, our cement plant laboratory is managed by robots, and we always embrace advanced technology. With Japan’s focus on technological innovation, there is ample scope for cooperation and for supplying various types of technology,” he said.

Edwin also stated that the Dangote Petrochemical project will significantly boost investment in downstream industries, creating substantial value, generating employment, increasing tax revenues, reducing foreign exchange outflows, and contributing to Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

He confirmed that products from the refinery meet international standards and are already being exported globally.

“In recent weeks, we’ve exported petrol to Cameroon, Ghana, Angola, and South Africa among others. Diesel has gone all over the world, and jet fuel is being heavily exported to European markets. Our products are already making their mark internationally,” he said.

He further added that by leveraging Africa’s vast crude oil resources to produce refined products locally, the Dangote Group aims to create a virtuous cycle of industrial development, job creation, and economic prosperity.

Featured

ICOBA 84-86 Set Donates N20m to Endowment

Published

3 days ago

December 15, 2024

Eric

The Christmas/End of Year party of the Igbobi College Old Boys Association (ICOBA) was filled with excitement, pomp and pageantry as the 84-86 set celebrated its 40th anniversary of leaving the school.
The highlight of the event was the donation of N20 million from the set’s endowment to serve as a seed fund for the national body’s endowment through the National ICOBA. The donation was received by Mr Femi Banwo, President ICOBA International and Mr Kunle Elebute, Chairman ICOBA National Endowment Committee

The 84-86 set’s Board of Trustees Endowment Committee had established an independent endowment in 2009 with a vision to create a lasting legacy for the set. Speaking at the occasion, the Chairman of the ICOBA 84-86 Board of Trustees and Endowment Committee, Dr. Falil Ayo Abina, expressed his delight, stating that it was a dream come true.

Dr. Abina explained that one of the core lessons learned at Igbobi College was “self-denial.”
He reminisced about the Self-Denial Fund (SDF), where students were taught to contribute their weekly “widow’s mite” to share with the less privileged in society. Dr. Abina emphasized that when the endowment committee conceived the idea of the endowment 15 years ago, they had this legacy in mind, aiming to serve a purpose greater than self.

The donation of N20 million to the national endowment is expected to inspire others within the alumni and other school alumni associations to follow suit.
This generous donation is the first in ICOBA’s history and arguably in Nigeria and sub-Saharan Africa.

The 13-member endowment committee, also include Demola Ipaye, Fola Laguda, Gbenga Aina, Demola Oladeinde, Jimi Onanuga, Abayomi Alabi, Kwami Adadevoh, Bayo Ayoade, Tunde Sadare, Wole Ogunbajo, Tunji Akinwummi, and Lanre Olusola, worked tirelessly to make this vision a reality and it was indeed mission accomplished for the ‘Nobles Nigerians‘ as Igbobians are called.

Featured

Father Cries Out for Justice over Two Sons Wrongly Sentenced to Death

Published

3 days ago

December 15, 2024

Eric

By Hezekiah Olujobi

“It is said that the judiciary is the last hope of a common man, but what happens when a common man cannot get justice? The purpose of seeking justice is forfeited.”

An Oshogbo High Court judge sentenced two brothers from Cotonou to death for armed robbery and murder. The judge admitted the confessional statement as the best evidence to convict without considering the circumstances that proved such evidence to be ridiculous, fabricated, and unjust. A police officer had taken money from the victim with the promise to apprehend the criminals and then presented the innocent brothers as the perpetrators of the crime.

Ignoring the evidence that proved their innocence added more pain to their existence and prolonged their journey for freedom through the rigors of the appeal process. This is indeed an obvious injustice. Even in the absence of strong evidence to convict these two brothers, the judge chose to send them to the gallows for execution, despite the concocted and manipulated confessional statement from a police officer who arrested the innocent individuals and presented them to the victim as the culprits.

With such allegations of heinous crimes against innocent people, our hope for justice hangs in the balance. Despite all the evidence made available to the Attorney General of the state, they still proceeded to prosecute the brothers, while the court set aside the evidence and held sacred the lies concocted by the SARS police officers.

Now that the judgment has been passed and a death sentence hangs over these poor individuals, what does the judgment entail, and what proof exists that they are innocent?

On November 15, 2017, the complaint in this case came from Oshogbo to the Adeniji Adele police station in Lagos State, where a particular police officer was informed about a robbery and murder incident that occurred on October 12, 2017, in Oshogbo, Osun State. The victim claimed he was robbed of his Hilux van at about 10:00 PM, and the armed robbers killed his wife. His wife was buried immediately according to Muslim rites.

The victim came with a photocopy of his vehicle particulars and a photograph of the deceased. Within a short period of seven days, on November 22, 2017, the police arrested the first defendant, who was tortured into confessing to the crime and implicating his elder brother as the major suspect. Three days after the arrest, the complainant was invited to see one of the alleged robbers, and he wrote his statement on November 25, 2017. Exactly two months after his report to the Lagos State police officer, the second defendant, the elder brother of the first defendant, was arrested.

Without any identification parade or any legitimate confessional statement, the two brothers, who share the same parents, were charged in court for armed robbery and murder. On November 10, 2020, the case opened for trial before the High Court of Justice, presided over by Hon. Justice A. O. Oyebiyi at the Oshogbo High Court of Justice. Three witnesses were called during the trial: the complainant and two police officers. On November 12, 2020, the two brothers were sentenced to death without any medical or police report certifying the death of the deceased before the court. No witnesses corroborated that such a crime actually took place on October 12, 2017. No police report established that such an incident occurred in Oshogbo on the said date at the said location.

The basis for conviction was that the court accepted the prosecution’s submission to convict the two brothers based on the confessional statement. During the trial, the first defendant explained how the police officer, Adeniyi Aina, who arrested him, sent for him through his boss, who brought him to do POP work in Oshogbo, tricking him into coming to Lagos. The first defendant stated before the court that the police officer had previously arrested him for a case of stealing in Oshogbo in 2016, where a thief broke into a house near where he was doing his POP work. He was detained and later reminded in Ilesha prison, where he sent for his boss, Earnest Carpo, and his elder brother, Monday Sode, who came from Bayelsa to stand as a second surety. The first defendant also indicated that PW2 was the police officer in charge of the previous case of stealing, and he jumped bail for the trial because he had no transport fare to attend court.

To establish the story, the Centre for Justice, Mercy, and Reconciliation (CJMR) applied for the certified true copy (CTC) of the charge sheet of the previous case, the enrollment order, and the bail bonds of the two sureties, which indicated the names of the elder brother, Monday Sode, and Ernest Carpo as the sureties in the case. The evidence of the second defendant during his defense was cogent and remained unshaken.

What evidence did the police officers present in this case regarding what led to the brothers’ arrest? PW2, Inspector Adeniyi Aina, testified before the court about how the complainant reported a case of armed robbery and murder to him in Lagos on November 15, 2017, and how he demanded the IMEI number of the phone with the network provider MTN, number 07031107798. The phone was found to be with the second defendant. He stated that he used a soft target, someone he used to call regularly, to link the first defendant to the case. The first defendant was eventually arrested at Barger Bus Stop in Lagos.

Unfortunately, the officer gave his evidence at a time when we took over the case from the lawyer who was previously handling it. The judge seemed desperate to rush the case and did not listen to our lawyer. The PW2 contradicted himself when he stated that the phone with the second defendant was not the stolen one. This raises questions about how he obtained the phone number he used to link the defendants to the crime.

Throughout the trial, the police officer never mentioned how he knew the two defendants. This shows how police can lie recklessly to destroy innocent lives. How did he arrest these two individuals and link them to the robbery and murder incident that occurred on October 12, 2017? He claimed, “I demanded the IMEI number of the phone with the network provider MTN, number 07031107798.” What a contradictory statement! The complainant testified during the trial that he did not know the serial number of his phone. If he reported that his phone was stolen and could not provide the receipt or the serial number, how could it be possible to track the phone? The officer stated that the SIM card had been removed and replaced with another MTN network provider.

Contrary to the evidence of PW2, PW3, CSP Omoyele Adekunle of Federal SARS, testified as follows:

“I am CSP Omoyele Adekunle, a police officer serving in the Osun State Command. On November 23, 2017, I was at Federal SARS, Lagos. I know the defendants very well. I was investigating a robbery/murder case transferred from ICP to my department, and I was detailed to investigate. We were informed of a murder. The vehicle was taken away, but the victim’s phone was left in the vehicle. It was the victim’s wife who was killed. They took the victim away towards Ikirun Road. He was stripped naked and pushed out of the vehicle. They escaped with the vehicle. He told us a phone was left in the vehicle. We got the number and sent for tracking. We knew it was then in Cotonou and placed an alert on it. When the number rang, we tracked it to Ikeja. The first defendant was arrested with the phone. He initially denied involvement but later confessed after some arrests were made connecting him to the phone. It was when he saw the persons arrested that he opened up. He had earlier given the phone to someone among those arrested. He then confessed to the crime. During the investigation, he mentioned the second defendant, stating that they had come together to perpetrate the crime.”

The victim was invited and identified both defendants and the phone as the one taken during the robbery. However, according to the statement made by the victim on November 25, 2017, he said the incident happened at about 10:00 PM, and there was no electricity. The criminals emerged from the corner of his shop and slapped him three times. How could he possibly identify the criminals at that time of night?

In the evidence provided by PW3, CSP Omoyele stated that the phone was lost on the date of the incident. He mentioned that Ernest Albert, from the tracking analysis, changed the SIM card in the phone. It must be noted that CSP Omoyele indicated that the phone was recovered from Ernest Albert, who inserted his SIM into the stolen phone.

During cross-examination, it was revealed that the defendants were not arrested at the scene. The case was reported to the police after a few months. The complainant stated that he would identify those who attacked him if he saw them. The investigation began by tracking the lost IMEI number of the phone. The defendant was using the phone to call, and the phone tracked was with the defendant at the time of tracking. However, no phone was tendered in this case.

These are just a few inconsistencies in this trial.

Imole Sode and Monday are two brothers from the same parents. Their parents came to Nigeria from Cotonou, and they were seven children born to their parents. Monday enrolled his brother in a POP apprenticeship in Lagos. Imole and his master got a POP job in Oshogbo on a contract basis. Along the line, a thief broke into a nearby house, and he was arrested by police officer Adeniyi Aina. He was on bail for that offense when he jumped bail for the case.

On October 12, 2017, there was a robbery and murder in Oshogbo, and the case was transferred to SCID Oshogbo, where Inspector Adeyemi Aina was assigned to investigate. According to the complainant, the officer collected a significant amount of money from him with the promise to recover his vehicle and apprehend the culprits. Shortly after this incident, Inspector Adeniyi Aina was transferred to Federal SARS Adeniji Adele. On November 15, 2017, the complainant traced the police officer to Lagos to follow up on his case.

The officer devised a scheme. What should he do to please the victim? He sent for the one who jumped bail and his brother, shot them in the legs, and coerced the younger brother into writing statements to implicate himself in the robbery and murder. His elder brother denied any knowledge of the crime, as he was based in Bayelsa and had never been to Oshogbo before.

Eventually, they were sentenced to death by hanging. Presently, the two brothers are on death row, waiting for execution for a crime they knew nothing about.

—

The case of the two brothers exemplifies a series of inconsistencies and contradictions that point to a miscarriage of justice. From the lack of corroborative evidence and identification issues to coerced confessions and police misconduct, the narrative is riddled with flaws that undermine the legitimacy of the conviction.

This is another journey to the Court of Appeal and the Appeal process is not easy. The cost of justice is very expensive and long process. Who pay for it

Now that the judgment has been passed and a death sentence hangs over these poor individuals, what does the judgment entail, and what proof exists that they are innocent?

Contrary to the evidence of PW2, PW3, CSP Omoyele Adekunle of Federal SARS, testified as follows:

These are just a few inconsistencies in this trial.

The officer devised a scheme. What should he do to please the victim? He sent for the one who jumped bail and his brother, shot them in the legs, and coerced the younger brother into writing statements to implicate himself in thethe robbery and murder. His elder brother denied any knowledge of the crime, as he was based in Bayelsa and had never been to Oshogbo before.

Eventually, they were sentenced to death by hanging. Presently, the two brothers are on death row, waiting for execution for a crime they knew nothing about.

—

This is another journey to the Court of Appeal and the Appeal process is not easy. The cost of justice is very expensive and long process. Who pay for it

For more details on collaboration or partnership contact us at https//www.cjmr.com.ng

Or +2348025782527

Hezekiah Olujobi is the Executive Director, CJMR