Breaking News
Translate

Kudirat was killed with special bullets — Dr Falomo

Justice Mojisola Dada of an Ikeja high court was yesterday told how the late Alhaja Kudirat, wife of the late politician, Chief M.K.O. Abiola was killed with a special bullet ‘ probably from a professional’.

This testimony came just as  Justice Dada and the lead defence counsel, Mr Olalekan Ojo, exchanged hot words over the    conduct of the lawyer while the  proceeding was  on.

At the resumed hearing of the case, the personal physician to the late Abiola”s family, Dr.  Ore Falomo, was put into the witness box by the prosecution who   disclosed how late Kudirat was  rushed into the hospital and how medical doctors battled in vain to save   her life.

*Late Kudirat Abiola, assassinated with special bullet.
*Late Kudirat Abiola, assassinated with special bullet.

Dr Falomo who  was led in evidence by the state Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, Mrs Bola Ogungbesan,   said that the woman was killed with a special bullet which was recovered from her brain by a team of medical doctors.

He said that he and a team of neurosurgeons operated on Kudirat and “retrieved a white cylindrical bullet that had some marks on it from her brain”.

He added   that the bullet was forcefully taken away by the police for investigation after the post mortem. He said the police claimed that the bullets would help them in their investigation.

He told the court that if medical ethics had been obeyed   , the bullets were supposed to be given to the family of the deceased since it was recovered from her body.

The lead defence counsel however disagreed with Dr Falomo, stating that he could not have stated the type of bullet used since he is not a ballistician.

However, deep into the proceedings, the defence team led by Mr. Olalekan Ojo in his cross examinations asked  Falomo some questions which he decided not to answer.

Rather than allow the court to wade into the matter, Ojo told the witness that he must respond to his questions telling him that he is a well known person in the society.

When the court decided to intervene, the presiding judge asked the lawyer to move on. But  Ojo took exceptions to Falomo’s position, saying the witness   was not cooperating and that the court should not ignore the matter.

This however infuriated the Judge, who cautioned the counsel to watch his utterances in court. Ojo’s response provoked an   argument with the judge. Justice Dada was annoyed with Ojo over the  manner he addressed the witness, asking him to act like a gentleman of the bar.

The Judge   said, “There must be a level of respect from the Bar to the Bench. Do every case with humility. You must know how to conduct yourself in court.

“You are indulging in so many frivolities and the court didn’t brief you. So, your liberties should be at the expense of the defendants. The witness in the witness box is an old man. So, treat him with courtesy.”

Ojo, who apparently was not ready to concede anything to the court, replied in like manner, saying, “My Lord, point of correction , sir. I am not arrogant at all. I am doing my job. I am not arrogant at all.  I want to inform you that   the Bar deserves  some level of respect.”

At this juncture, other lawyers in court apologised  on his behalf.

Responding to questions from Ojo, Falomo said during cross- examination,  that he made all his statements in June 1996 at Adeniji Adele police station but was however confronted with a statement that was purportedly made by him on October 26, 1999. Falomo admitted to making the statement but claimed that the date on the statement was not correct.

Ojo however sought to tender the statement as a contradiction to the testimony of the witness when he said all statements were made in June 1996.

“Somebody must be lying: if the witness is correct.  Then something must be wrong with those in charge of taking the statement. And with respect, those in charge of this prosecution. This document is relevant to the credibility of the witness and for the court to be able to take any address from the parties; the document ought to be in court as evidence.”

Justice Dada in her ruling on the statement said, “It is trite in law that the date on the statement is an integral part of the statement.” She therefore overruled the opposition of the prosecution by admitting the statement in evidence.

After the cross examination and admission of evidence, the witness was discharged and the case was further adjourned till July14, 2009 for continuation of trial.


Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.