May 4, 2010
It is a tough time for the defense lawyers of associates of former Governor James Ibori who are standing trial in London on money laundering charges. It’s a bad day when defense lawyers effectively concede the substantive grounds, but resort to hanging desperately to technicalities,” said a lawyer who has followed the case, adding, “That’s what’s been happening throughout the case.” Our sources in London stated that the trial is nearing its close.
In the dock are Ibori’s mistress, Udoamaka Okoronkwo, his sister, Christine Ibie-Ibori, and his former personal aide, Bimpe Pogoson. Also facing legal trouble are Ibori’s lawyer, Bhadresh Gohil, and his wife, Theresa Nkoyo Ibori.
At the Southwark Crown Court presided over by Justice Christopher Harding, the former governor’s defense lawyers could not refute the prosecution’s argument that Ms. Okoronkwo “handled paper work and transfer of funds” on behalf of Ibori using a company owned by the former governor in the UK Island of Guernsey.
The prosecution had earlier presented evidence to show that Ibori’s sister, Christine, had, along with one Mr. Desar and two others, been used by Ibori to criminally acquire various properties in the UK. Unable to discredit the evidence, Christine Ibori’s defense team sought to argue that she was actually “hoodwinked” by the men into taking part in the criminal deals. Even so, the prosecution countered that that there was no evidence that she was hoodwinked, and that “even if Mr Desar and others were less than scrupulous in their dealings, the very fact does not necessarily exonerate Christine Ibori since she had been proven to be part of the shady deals.”
On Ms Okoronkwo, both the prosecution and defense essentially agreed that she, among other things, handled the transfer of funds provided by James Ibori for the purchase of corporate vehicles for the Guernsey-based company, Zacon and Zetah. Finding itself against the ropes, the defense team argued the technicality that Okoronkwo was not guilty of “management of funds for the company” as stated in the prosecution’s opening statement, adding that in “Company Law”, “handling paper work” is not the same as management. In response, the prosecution appealed to a ‘common sense’ definition of the word ‘manage’, but the defense insisted that it has a different meaning on ‘point of law’.
Both the prosecution and defense lawyers engaged in lengthy argument on the issue, with the judge interjecting questions during the animated exchanges that lasted more than 30 minutes. The prosecution argued that even if the word ‘manage’ was not admissible, the case against Ibori’s mistress has been proven on the substance that she illegally handled criminal funds. When the judge accepted the prosecution’s submission, the defense lawyers argued at length with him, insisting that the original indictment, on which the case had been conducted, was that of “management” rather than “handling of criminal funds”.
“The judge was rather amazed at the objections raised by the defense team, but promised to take a look at their arguments and other documentary evidence and make his views known in a subsequent court session,” according to a lawyer who observed the hearing.
The hearing continues, but may be concluded as early as this week, according to our sources.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });