Connect with us


Bolanle Raheem’s Murder: Vandi Knows Fate On October 9th.

Convict the defendant and disregard issues raised by the defence.



Bolanle Raheem’s Murder: Vandi Knows Fate On October 9th.
Bolanle Raheem’s Murder: Vandi Knows Fate On October 9th.

Justice Ibironke Harrison of the Lagos State High Court sitting at the Tafawa Balewa Square will on October 9 deliver judgment in the trial of suspended Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Drambi Vandi, the alleged killer of Lagos-based lawyer Mrs Omobolanle Raheem.

Justice Harrison fixed the date for judgment after the prosecution team led by the state’s Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Babajide Martins and the defence counsel, Jude Ugwu, adopted their final written addresses on Friday.


Barr Godwin Ikoiwak Allegedly Murdered by Wife

Police Arrest Lovers For Allegedly Killing Their Newborn Baby.

Vigilante, Two Others Arrested Over Kidnap And Murder In Anambra.

Nigerian-born musician murdered in UK over fake watch.

The Lagos State government had arraigned Vandi before the court for allegedly shooting the 41-year-old pregnant lawyer to death at the Ajah underbridge checkpoint on December 25, 2022.

The defendant pleaded not guilty to the one-count charge of murder contrary to Section 223 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.

Upon the close of the 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.

While adopting his client’s final written address, Ugwu urged the court to dismiss the charge because the case of the prosecution is based on hearsay, circumstantial evidence and is not compelling enough to convict the defendant.

But Martins urged the judge to the court to convict the defendant and disregard issues raised by the defence in its address and reply on points of law.

The DPP also argued that the contradictions in the evidence of witnesses raised by the defence are not fatal to lead to a miscarriage of justice.

He also maintained that the ballistician’s evidence in court did not exonerate the defendant and never mentioned that the bullet did not emanate from the defendant’s gun.

Martins further submitted that the ballistician mentioned during his testimony the bullet was damaged and shattered. Martins insisted that the testimony of the witness and the prosecution witness directly indicted the defendant.

He also directed the court’s attention to the Investigative Police Officer’s testimony, to the effect that the softer husband of 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 a mufti.


Click Button Below to Join Our Telegram Groups
WhatsApp Telegram

For Advert Inquiries & News/Article Publishing

Call:+2348033888791, +2347069999005

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.