February 16, 2010
{joomplu:598}{joomplu:585}{joomplu:579}A day after their failed attempt to quash criminal charges of money launderingnat the Court of Appeal in the UK, court proceedings commenced in the criminal trial of three James ibori’s associates in London today.Predictably, Ibori’s high-priced lawyers resorted to delay tactics to prolong court proceedings at the Southwark Crown Court where Judge Christopher Harding set the trial rolling.
articleadslinks
At the court session, which began at about 2:15 PM, the defense lawyer representing Mrs Okoronkwo, reiterated his earlier application that the statement given in November 2006 by Udoamaka Okoronkwo be set aside on the premise that it was obtained under duress by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), but the prosecution counsel quickly responded by saying that they have brought their witness, the interrogating officer with the EFCC, to court today to be cross-examined with respect to the circumstance of the 2006 interrogation. The defense had argued that Mr. Bello, the EFCC officer who interrogated Mrs. Okoronkwo was a “thuggish and brutal interrogator” and the circumstances under which the statement was obtained was unacceptable. The prosecution said this was a pack of ‘lies’, that the statement was given voluntarily by Mrs Okoronkwo, and they have brought in their witness to prove it in open court.
At the point the defence team prayed the court to adjourn the interrogation of witnesses until next week because their witness, a certain Nigerian lawyer, was not in court today and is unable to travel until weekend at the earliest. They said it will only be possible for them to bring him to court next week. The prosecuting counsel countered that it is the responsibility of the defense to bring in their witnesses, and that they (the prosecution team) had carried out their investigation from British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, among others, and found that there are “plenty of flights available from Nigeria today and tomorrow and all through the week”. The arguments went back and forth, and the prosecution asked for time to respond to the new application by the defense. The court went on 30 minutes recess.
When the court resumed it was agreed that the cross-examination of the prosecution witness, Mr Bello, can begin on Friday, and continue next week Tuesday when the defense have brought in their own witness. The judge asked to ascertain whether the defense plan to bring in more than one witness. The defense lawyer said they are bringing in only one witness.
The proceedings then turned to the appointment of the jury and when they will be sworn in. The judge explained that 24 members of the public have been chosen for the jury duty, and 12 of them will be selected in a random process, and request for release- on account of child care, examination, and employment related issues, among others- will be considered individually. In addition, the judge explained that individuals connected in any way to individuals and organisations associated with the case will also be exempted. Outside that, requests for release have to be presented by individuals in the open court, to ensure there are no questions or allegations about whether the jury had been predetermined by the court. The 24 people were invited in briefly, and the procedures were explained to them, and they were instructed to report back to court by 10:00 am on Thursday.
The defense lawyer was not done with his ‘requests’, however. He explained that Mrs Okoronkwo has an ‘hospital appointment’ about 10:40 AM tomorrow, and may not be able to make it to court, except the court insists. The judge ruled, in response, that the swearing in of the jury can continue without Mrs Okoronkwo’s presence in court.
As the court was about to adjourn, the defense lawyer made a new application that “the curfew and the tag” on Ibori’s mistress be lifted, because it has caused a “lot of stress and intrusion to her private life”. The curfew, the court was told, is between 11:30pm and 6:00am, and the defense counsel claimed that ‘she was arrested in handcuffs last week because the police said the tag was not on her about 3:00 am”. The tag, according to the lawyer, “was in her daughter’s bedroom at the time”.
The prosecution responded by saying that they are not aware of the sudden “application”, and would want time to conduct their own investigations on the claims about “intrusion and stress on Okoronkwo’s private life”.
The proceedings continue tomorrow. The judge explained that the trial is expected to last for between 6 to 8 weeks, excluding the week of Easter Monday. The trial, he said, should be concluded latest by the week of 23rd April, more likely before that.
articleadsbanner
articleadslinks
At the court session, which began at about 2:15 PM, the defense lawyer representing Mrs Okoronkwo, reiterated his earlier application that the statement given in November 2006 by Udoamaka Okoronkwo be set aside on the premise that it was obtained under duress by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), but the prosecution counsel quickly responded by saying that they have brought their witness, the interrogating officer with the EFCC, to court today to be cross-examined with respect to the circumstance of the 2006 interrogation. The defense had argued that Mr. Bello, the EFCC officer who interrogated Mrs. Okoronkwo was a “thuggish and brutal interrogator” and the circumstances under which the statement was obtained was unacceptable. The prosecution said this was a pack of ‘lies’, that the statement was given voluntarily by Mrs Okoronkwo, and they have brought in their witness to prove it in open court.
At the point the defence team prayed the court to adjourn the interrogation of witnesses until next week because their witness, a certain Nigerian lawyer, was not in court today and is unable to travel until weekend at the earliest. They said it will only be possible for them to bring him to court next week. The prosecuting counsel countered that it is the responsibility of the defense to bring in their witnesses, and that they (the prosecution team) had carried out their investigation from British Airways and Virgin Atlantic, among others, and found that there are “plenty of flights available from Nigeria today and tomorrow and all through the week”. The arguments went back and forth, and the prosecution asked for time to respond to the new application by the defense. The court went on 30 minutes recess.
When the court resumed it was agreed that the cross-examination of the prosecution witness, Mr Bello, can begin on Friday, and continue next week Tuesday when the defense have brought in their own witness. The judge asked to ascertain whether the defense plan to bring in more than one witness. The defense lawyer said they are bringing in only one witness.
The proceedings then turned to the appointment of the jury and when they will be sworn in. The judge explained that 24 members of the public have been chosen for the jury duty, and 12 of them will be selected in a random process, and request for release- on account of child care, examination, and employment related issues, among others- will be considered individually. In addition, the judge explained that individuals connected in any way to individuals and organisations associated with the case will also be exempted. Outside that, requests for release have to be presented by individuals in the open court, to ensure there are no questions or allegations about whether the jury had been predetermined by the court. The 24 people were invited in briefly, and the procedures were explained to them, and they were instructed to report back to court by 10:00 am on Thursday.
The defense lawyer was not done with his ‘requests’, however. He explained that Mrs Okoronkwo has an ‘hospital appointment’ about 10:40 AM tomorrow, and may not be able to make it to court, except the court insists. The judge ruled, in response, that the swearing in of the jury can continue without Mrs Okoronkwo’s presence in court.
As the court was about to adjourn, the defense lawyer made a new application that “the curfew and the tag” on Ibori’s mistress be lifted, because it has caused a “lot of stress and intrusion to her private life”. The curfew, the court was told, is between 11:30pm and 6:00am, and the defense counsel claimed that ‘she was arrested in handcuffs last week because the police said the tag was not on her about 3:00 am”. The tag, according to the lawyer, “was in her daughter’s bedroom at the time”.
The prosecution responded by saying that they are not aware of the sudden “application”, and would want time to conduct their own investigations on the claims about “intrusion and stress on Okoronkwo’s private life”.
The proceedings continue tomorrow. The judge explained that the trial is expected to last for between 6 to 8 weeks, excluding the week of Easter Monday. The trial, he said, should be concluded latest by the week of 23rd April, more likely before that.
articleadsbanner
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });