joshua
An IIorin high court, presided by Justice Ibrahim Yusuf, on Tuesday refused to grant bail to eight accused persons alleged to have raped and murdered a 24-year-old University of Ilorin student, Olajide Blessing Omowumi.
The arraignment of the accused persons could not commence last Wednesday because of the inability of three of the suspects to produce legal representation.
The suspects; Abdulazeez Ismail, Ajala Moses Oluwatimileyin (aka Jacklord), Oyeyemi Timileyin Omogbolahan, Abdulkarim Shuaib (aka Easy), Kareem Oshioyemi Rasheed (Rashworld), Abdullateef Abdulrahman, Daud Bashir Adebayo (aka Bashman) and Akande Taiye Oladoja, were on Wednesday arraigned before Justice Ibrahim Yusuf of an Ilorin high court.
It is recalled that the Kwara state Police command had confirmed suspected rape and murder of a 300 Level student of the University of Ilorin in her residence located at Tanke area of the Ilorin metropolis on June 2, 2021.
The deceased, said to be staying with her elder sister at Tanke area, until her death was a student of Agricultural Science Department from Oke-Opin community in the Ekiti local government area of Kwara state.
The defendants were brought before the court by the Kwara state government in suit No KWS/33c/c/2021, on 11-count charge bordering on armed robbery, illegal possession of firearms and rape.
Three of the defendants, Abdulazeez Ismail, Ajala Moses Oluwatimileyin (aka Jacklord) and Oyeyemi Timileyin Omogbolahan,
were said to have conspired among themselves, “to rob one Olajide Gloria Blessing Omowumi also known as “Wumi” (now deceased) of her Samsung Galaxy A2 Core handset and carted away other items, including one black Acer aspire, one series laptop, one Samsung drive, one pink wireless mouse, one white handheld mini sewing machine, one infinix charger and one gold colour wintouch tab while armed with offensive weapon including a black wooden pistol gun”.
The prosecution also accused five others of aiding and abetting the receipt of stolen items which include Samsung Galaxy A2 Core handset and some other computer gadgets being proceeds of armed robbery.
The charge also accused Abdulazeez Ismail, Kareem Oshioyemi Rasheed and Abdulkarim Shuaib of stealing a sum of N116,000 from the GTB account of the deceased.
The eight accused persons, who were allowed to listen to the counts against them, pleaded not guilty to every count as it relates to each of them.
Thereafter, the prosecution counsel, who is also the attorney general and commisioner for Justice, Salman Jawondo, filed an application to call additional three witnesses, which was granted by the court.
The seventh accused persons who is charged with aiding and abetting and receiving property; product of armed robbery also filed an application for bail, which was heard and dismissed.
The case is adjourned till tomorrow, Wednesday for hearing.
According to the court, hearing will be day to day and hearing will start tomorrow, Wednesday.
In dismissing the bail application of the seventh accused person, presiding judge said counsel to the defendants did not give satisfactory condition for acceding to his request.
“Generally, bail is at the discretion of the court but in this circumstance, the counsel failed to give satisfactory reasons to grant his request. I am not inclined to grant the request as the case in question borders on capital offence”, he said.
Speaking with journalists after the court proceedings, counsel to the seventh accused person, Mr. Sikiru Solagberu, explained that, “The application I filed is for the court to grant my own client the 7th defendant bail pending the hearing determination of the case. My opinion is predicated on the fact that the offence for which he was charged even though looking at it from all angles is a capital offence but in a special circumstance, the courts do grant bail to a defendant or an applicant even if he is charged for capital offence but because of sentiments attached to the case, usually, people will not want to hear you filling a case for the defendant. But professionally, the law, especially the federal constitution presumed every defendant accused of any offence to be innocent until proved guilty. What we have before the court is your own statement against my own statement. So it has not been proved. Anybody can couch any charges with different nomenclatures; murder, man slaughter. It is when you go to the nitty gritty of the cases, the ingredient and all the necessary things that you will be able to come and say the court has convicted somebody but as it were, we believe that the court can allow the defendant to sought for mercy as they have been in custody for the past one month now. In his own case, the court should endure for and the proof before the court now is premature, nobody can convict on that. The court looked at it because of the severity which was my own argument that the court should not look at the severity of the offence but rather, they should look at the material put forth before the court to say court do not grant. I would rather look at that this stage, no material is before the court to be able to refuse bail. The court ruling was that base on the severity and the punishment, it is refusing bail”.
End.
