Breaking News
Translate

Alleged N1.3b fraud against Lamido: Judge advises EFCC to put house in order

Kindly Share This Story:
Lamido, PDP
Sule Lamido

Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday advised the EFCC to put its house in order to tender evidence in the trial of former Jigawa Governor, Sule Lamido.

The EFCC charged Lamido, with 43 counts amended charge bordering on abuse of office and money laundering to the tune of N1.35 billion.

Also read: Updated: Drama as armed DSS operatives move to rearrest Sowore in court

Lamido was arraigned alongside two of his sons; Aminu and Mustapha, Aminu Abubakar, Bamaina Holdings Ltd and Speeds International Ltd for allegedly defrauding Jigawa.

Justice Ojukwu said that there was a lot of untidiness between the prosecution and its a witness (PW15), Mr Michael Wetkas in the tendering of bank cheque transactions of the defendants.

“You were to spend time with the witness to decide on what you want to do in court in order to have a seamless proceeding,” she said.

Justice Ojukwu urged the prosecution to rehearse with its a witness before coming to court.

“How do you want the witness to tender the evidence because you are having frictions between your questions and his answer.

“Try to bring the defence along to see how he can align with you in probably presenting a schedule.

“And if not, it could be just between the prosecution and it’s witness.

“You have forwarded many cheques and not all tallies so I will admit the ones that tally with the amount earlier stated by the witness,” she said.

Justice Ojukwu adjourned for continuation of trial until Feb. 20.

Prosecution counsel, M.S Abubakar, said that he wanted the court to admit the bank cheques as evidence in the case.

Abubakar appreciated the indulgence and patience of the Judge as he battled presenting the ‘complex’ transactions.

Counsel to the defendants, Joe Agi, said that he was not opposed to the application to tender the cheques by the prosecution because they were evidence of transactions carried out by the defendants.

Earlier, the court had admitted some of the cheques presented to the court as evidence by the prosecution through their witness,  but at some point, the agency was in contradiction with its witness.

Vanguard

Kindly Share This Story:
All rights reserved. This material and any other digital content on this platform may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, written or distributed in full or in part, without written permission from VANGUARD NEWS.

Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!