The Court of Appeal in Lagos on Friday quashed life imprisonment sentence on Medical Director of Optimal Cancer Care Foundation, Dr Olufemi Olaleye over alleged defilement of his wife’s 16-year-old niece.
Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court had on Oct. 24, 2023, sentenced Olaleye to life imprisonment over alleged defilement of the minor.
The lower court had held that the prosecution proved the two-count charge of defilement and sexual assault by penetration against Olaleye.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, Olaleye’s new counsel, Dr Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), appealed the decision of the lower court.
His appeal was successful as the appellate justices, Justice Olukayode Bada, Justice Mohammad Sirajo and Justice Folasade Ojo, in a unanimous judgment on Friday exonerated him of the charge.
The lead judge, Justice Baba, read the judgment which was adopted by the other justices.
In his judgment, he held that the trial court erred in law by convicting Olaleye, based on a tainted and unreliable evidence of his estranged wife, Oluremi, and the alleged survivor.
The appellate court said there were material contradictions in the evidence gathered by the prosecution which should not have been relied upon by the lower court.
Bada also faulted the evidence of the forensic specialist, and that of the investigating police officer.
The appellate court held that the lower court descended in the arena and interfered in the proceedings by bridging the yawning gaps in the prosecution’s case.
The court of appeal also questioned why the prosecution failed to present material witnesses such as two family members who witnessed Olaleye’s alleged confession.
”Prosecution’s case was bereft of any credible evidence that the survivor was a child.
“It was on record that the trial court came to conclusion on age based on the evidence of the witnesses, even though none gave evidence of experiencing her birth.
“Since none of the witnesses gave evidence on birth, the trial court was wrong to rely on their evidence that the survivor was a child, as evidence of all the witnesses on the issue of age was hearsay.
“Age was critical and 16 years was a boarder line age which the court could not determine by just seeing the witness,” Baba held.
The appellate court added that a trial-within-trial should have been conducted during trial to verify the voluntariness of Olaleye’s’s confessional statements while in police custody.
“Olaleye said he made the statement under duress after he was detained for six days.
“To make matters worse, the trial court went to rely on the said statement even though it acknowledged that the appellant said it was written under duress.
“The issue of voluntariness was raised in respect of his statements and since his statements were not voluntary, the lower court ought to have ordered a trial-within-trial.
“Failure of the trial court to conduct inquiry leaves the age in doubt and is resolved in favour of the appellant,” Baba held.
The appellate judge, however, held that failure to conduct trial-within-trial was fatal to the prosecution’s case and rendered the exhibits useless.
On the issue of the WhatsApp message on Olaleye’s phone, appellate court held that the prosecution could not puncture the case of the appellant that his phone was with his wife as she had admitted.
According to appellate court, there is a possibility that the email was contrived at the time PW1 (Olaleye’s wife) had access to appellant’s phone.
The court also held that the WhatsApp conversation from the appellant’s phone might not have been from him.
The appellate court also held that the trial judge was wrong not to have believed the appellant when no contrary evidence was adduced.
The appellate court, therefore, held that Olaleye’s wife was a tainted witness, as her conduct showed she was motivated by greed and her desire to take over her husband’s assets while he was in custody.
“The testimony of PW1 is not logical and an affront to reasoning. A woman who said, they were asleep, gave evidence on all that happened when they were asleep.
“The decision of the lower court is hereby set aside
“With the resolution of all issues in favour of the appellant, the appeal is allowed meritoriously, and the appellant is hereby discharged and acquitted,” Baba held.
(NAN)
