Admin l Thursday, October 18, 2017
IKEJA, Lagos, Nigeria – Notorious kidnapper, Chukwudubem Onwuamadike, alias Evans and five others were today re-arraigned before a Lagos High Court, sitting in Ikeja.
The Lagos State Government also amended the charges preferred against Evans and his accomplices, this time, charging him under Section 2(1) of the kidnapping Prohibition Law of Lagos State, 2017, punishable either with life imprisonment or death.
The Lagos State Kidnapping Prohibition Law prescribes maximum penalty of death if the victim(s) dies in custody and life imprisonment in other cases. The prosecution, led by the Director of Public Prosecution, Titilayo Shitta-Bey, told the court that the amendment only affected the law and punishment under which count two preferred against the defendants was filed.
Evans and his accomplices, Uche Amadi, Okwuchukwu Nwachukwu, Chilaka Ifeanyi, Victor Aduba and one female, Ogechi Uchechukwu, were rearraigned before Justice Hakeem Oshodi on two counts bordering on kidnapping and Conspiracy which they pleaded not guilty to. According to Shitta-Bey, Evans and his accomplices committed the offence in February 14, 2017 around 7:45pm along Obokun Street, Ilupeju, Lagos.
Shitta-Bey said that the defendants between February 14 and April 12 along Obokun Street, Ilupeju, Lagos, while armed with guns and other dangerous weapons, captured and detained one Mr. Duru Donatus and collected a ransom of 223,000 Euros for the release of Donatus, contrary to Section 2(1) of the kidnapping Prohibition Law of Lagos State, 2017.
Earlier in the day, counsel to Evans counsel, Olukoya Ogungbeje informed the court that the prosecution just served the defense counsels the amended charge in the open court and prayed the court to grant him an adjournment to enable him confer with his clients about the amended charge.
The prosecution however objected. “We’re opposing their application for adjournment, we pray that this court allow the charge to be read to the defendants and they should take their plea. Section 155(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law does not allow any formal application to amend charges, all the court need to do is to take fresh plea from the defendants.
“The application for adjournment was calculated to delay this matter by the defence counsels; the particulars of the offence did not change just the count two which the law under which was stated was changed and the punishment”, Shitta-Bey said.
While granting the defendants an adjournment, Justice Oshodi said, “In the interest of justice, the court would exercise its discretion to oblige the first, second, third, fifth and sixth defendants adjournment. He adjourned until November 3, 2017 for trial.
