BOLANLE RAHEEM’S MURDER: LAGOS COURT SET TO DELIVER JUDGMENT ON OCT 9
Read Time:3 Minute, 21 Second
By Aishat Momoh. O.
… State Government, Vandi’s Counsel Adopts Final Written Addresses…
Justice Ibironke Harrison of the Lagos State High Court sitting at the Tafawa Balewa Square annex, Igbosere has fixed the 9th of October for Judgement in the murder trial of lawyer, Bolanle Raheem.
Justice Harrison, informed the court in her ruling at the resumption of the trial on Thursday, after the defense counsel, Jude Ugwu, had announced the adoption of final written address on behalf of his client.
A suspended Assistant Superintendent of Police, Drambi Vandi, is standing trial for allegedly shooting the 41-year old pregnant realtor at the Ajah underbridge checkpoint, on December 25, 2022.
Upon the close of case of both sides, the Director of Public Prosecutions in the state, Babajide Martins and defence counsel, Jude Ugwu informed the court that they were ready to adopt their final written addresses.
The Defence Counsel, informed the court that the Defendant’s final written address was filed and dated 20th June 2023, and in reaction to the Prosecution’s written address, a reply on points of law was filed on the 12th of July, 2023.
The Defence Counsel relied on all the paragraphs of the written address in support and adopted same as the argument for the case of the defence, urging the court to uphold the argument and discharge the defendant.
Mr Ugwu, argued that the case of the prosecution is based on hearsay and circumstantial evidence and was not compelling enough to convict the defendant.
The Prosecution informed the court that the prosecution’s written address was filed on the 5th July 2023. He relied on all the arguments therein and prayed the court to convict the defendant.
The Prosecution urged the court to disregard issues raised by the defence in its final written address and reply on points of law. He added that the issues about contradictions raised by the defence are not fatal nor can occasion a miscarriage of justice.
“The ballistician’s evidence in court did not exonerate the defendant and never mentioned that the bullet did not emanate from the gun of the defendant.
The ballistician mentioned during his testimony in court that the bullet was so damaged and shattered, making it difficult for identification.
The testimonies by PW6 and PW7 respectively directly testified against the defendant, directing the court’s attention to the IPO’s- (PW7) testimony, to the effect that the sister and husband to the deceased held on to the defendant after the shooting, and the fact that he was seen taking cover under the staircase of the hospital without his uniform and wearing mufti.
PW6 testified that the defendant asked him for one ammunition after the incident.”
The prosecution argued that the action taken by the defendant to fire the ammunition was deliberate and direct in killing the deceased.
Another counsel, Olakitan Bolu-Agbaje, representing the deceased’s family and
Abiye Tam-George representing the Nigerian Bar Association were also present at the hearing.
Only the defendant had testified in his own defence.
In his testimony before the court, he told Justice Harrison that the bullet presented in court which was said to have killed Bolanle Raheem did not come from the rifle he carried on that day while claiming that he had never seen the bullet until it was tendered in court.
“It must pass through at least four objects, and this is not the ammunition in my rifle on the 25th of December, 2023. The rifle is automatic. By using this bullet, you must cork the rifle and anyone around that area will hear the noise of the cork.
“Once it is fired, the shell will fall on the right side on the ground near the person that fired it and it will remain at the point of fire. The noise will be so loud when fired.
“I’ve never come across this exhibit before even all through my training and it’s not the type of of ammunition used by the police.” the witness had said.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
100 %
0
0