Delivering judgment, Falola said that the plaintiff, Miss
Helen Okpara, failed to tender enough exhibits to convince the court beyond
reasonable doubt that she was raped by the monarch.
The judge also held that the plaintiff, who accused the
monarch of raping her at his private residence in Osogbo, failed to prove that
she was raped.
He said a case of rape could only be established with
exhibits such as bed sheet, the victim’s pant and a medical report indicating
forceful penetration, adding that the prosecutor failed to tender all these.
Falola said Okpara also failed to show the bruises on her
private part as evidence that she was raped.
He further said the prosecutor failed to show to the court
the plaintiff’s torn clothes as she had claimed in her submissions before the
court.
While stressing that a case of rape must be proved with
injuries sustained on the private part as well as other parts of the body,
Falola said the court was not convinced that Okpara sustained any injury.
Falola said the court was able to establish the fact that
Okpara and the monarch had been having regular sexual relationship before a
misunderstanding ensued between them.
He, however, condemned such relationship involving a
traditional ruler, saying his action had brought his stool into disrepute as
well as disgrace to his family and community.
But Mr Femi Adedokun, the counsel to both Okpara and the
state government, said he would seek advice from the Attorney-General and
Commissioner for Justice before considering appealing the judgment.
On his part, the defence counsel, Mr Taofeeq Tewogbade,
commended the judgment, describing it as “God’s judgment which came at the
appointed time.’’
from vanguard
No comments:
Post a Comment