josite:


go further please,quote the relevant section so we learn more.

I can't be specific as to the section now because I am not armed with the Establishment Act right. However, they are plothora of decided cases in that regard, which further gives more credence to the unambiguous provision of the EFCC establishment Act earlier mentioned. Bro, I won't mislead you.

josite:



someone i know was involved in a case in england where police came to search pursuant to a search warrant in connection to a traffic offence and when they came in found marijuana and seeks to make a case out of it,the english court said the exhibits were illegally obtained and refuse to try them for the drug related offence.CAN EVEN GIVE YOU THE CITATION OF THE CASE but again that is England expecting a supreme court of nigeria case from you.all the same thanks for the response.

I understand the scenario you just painted. The officers were there to execute a warrant in respect of a stated offence only to discover marijuana in the course of executing the search warrant. I don't know about what is obtainable in England but I know that in Nigeria such evidence is admissible.

Otapipia:

Any piece of evidence, however obtained is admissible to establish a fact in issue. Thus, an evidence obtained during the conduct of a search without a search warrant is admissible evidence notwithstanding that is was illegally obtained.

evidence act 2011 geta sections now,which section?

ckmayoca:


If I send 1500 airtime to someone helping my sibling monitor his admission for urgent call back does that implies it's a bribe? Abegi jare.

Bribery has to be defined before it is called one and not by assumption.

Which admission status is the judge monitoring for a lawyer who has a case under his review.

If all Nigerians are like you and do not see anything wrong in a judge receiving money from a lawyer whose case is before him, then Nigeria is beyond saving.

No judge is even supposed to receive money from any body other than his employer because that person could face him someday and he will not give due justice. Thats why judges don't socialize unnecessarily. Judges live a private life and are paid well to sheild themselves of returning favours.

ckmayoca:


If the giver or reciever confirm it's a bribe.

So a giver and taker of bribes cannot be convicted until they admit to the crime?

praxisnetworks:
;EFCC is a very corrupt organization. How can you tender illegally obtained exhibits in a court of law? They are just fooling Nigerians with fake anti corruption charges. Now I am waiting to see how they'll wriggle out of this..... I think someone should sue EFCC for wasting taxpayers money and causing unnecessary and unneeded media distractions.

you see, illegally obtained evidence is still admissible as the chief rule guiding admissibility is relevance though the court has the discretion to weigh it's options

ckmayoca:
Common 225000 for a judge and u called that chicken fee a bribe?. Cash that can't even secure u a job if u lobby with it. EFCC wan robe this guy oh. Is the judge that cheap?

many days for the thief but one day for the owner. On that day that belongs to the owner,a thief that has been stealing billions will be caught on his way to steal just 5Naira and u will be amazed that he was caught for something that isn't too valuable. The judge has been receiving millions for long.it was just time karma remembered him and it was for something very small!!!

rusher14:
I take it the judge is of the Islamic faith.

If so, I believe the burial is usually done expeditiously (24 -48hrs).

I think someone is being conservative with the truth.

Also, what a terrible person the judge would be not to acknowledge some thanks for the support towards his father's burial.

Lastly, what correspondence took place for Tarfa to know the judge's bank details? Abi he don sabi the account tay tay?

If you are not security or intelligent officer base on posers you raised here, my friend you are doing temporary work at wherever you engage at present. Some of what you raised are so fundamental

ckmayoca:
Common 225000 for a judge and u called that chicken fee a bribe?. Cash that can't even secure u a job if u lobby with it. EFCC wan robe this guy oh. Is the judge that cheap?

God bless you my brother!!! How much is Tarfa's legal fee that he will bribe such an amount? Just want to clog him

praxisnetworks:
;EFCC is a very corrupt organization. How can you tender illegally obtained exhibits in a court of law? They are just fooling Nigerians with fake anti corruption charges. Now I am waiting to see how they'll wriggle out of this..... I think someone should sue EFCC for wasting taxpayers money and causing unnecessary and unneeded media distractions.

why not you should do the job your self.

Simple questions, "did u send money to justice yunusa's account?" Answer: "yes" "was it N225,000" Answer: "yes" case closed.

Conflict of interest 101.
ready for Year two with the carryover.

daretodiffer:
I hate you

hian, women n I hate u

Let me predict here how it will all end.

1.Ricky tarfa will not be convicted.

2.the nba will hopefully make the conclusion of the criminal trial unnecessary by taking it upon itself to "punish tafa" by suspension of his SANship for a period to accommodate the yearnings of the public for rebuke for a behaviour that cannot be totally said to be appropriate by any sense of construction.

3.the judge will be retired.

i expect by now,tafa himself is persuading himself of the alternative routes out of all these because really there is a way out and that is the honest truth .

efcc too should realize in a criminal trial the case has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt and the principle is to allow 7 guilty to go scott free rather than one single innocent man be convicted.

at this very crucial moment,i recommend to tafa a study of the masterstrokes delivered by president Clinton in the lewinsky affair when the former decides to judge himself before he is judged by putting a mild construction/label on his own unpresidential act by admitting he had an inappropriate relationship with lewinsky and by so doing split the american senate into almost 2 equal part when the impeachment vote was taken.if Clinton had bulldozed his way through the accusation and do not admit a moral failure,sympathy for his position that later turn the tide around in his favour would not have been gotten.

josite:


you are very wrong ,profoundly wrong.mtn will not divulge your calls and info except by a court order in lawful pursuit of investigations into a crime.quote me anywhere.

This is what happens when you jump into the middle of a discourse without following getting a handle on what the core issue is about.

The discourse wasn't about of EFCC needed a court order or not, it was if they needed the consent of you the phone owner. Hope this helps you.

Akainzo:


This is what happens when you jump into the middle of a discourse without following getting a handle on what the core issue is about.

The discourse wasn't about of EFCC needed a court order or not, it was if they needed the consent of you the phone owner. Hope this helps you.

you obviously had a problem with english and therefore need to go back and get the point being made.and i restate my statement.
"......mtn will not divulge your calls and info except by a court order in lawful pursuit of investigations into a crime..".

to even begin to think either the efcc or the service provider should or should not ask the phone owner for consent is certainly puerile because the efcc or the service providers already knows what the response of the phone owner will be in that circumstance.hope you are helped.if not ,im here to offer further help.afterall its saturday.

josite:


you obviously had a problem with english and therefore need to go back and get the point being made.and i restate my statement.
"......mtn will not divulge your calls and info except by a court order in lawful pursuit of investigations into a crime..".

to even begin to think either the efcc or the service provider should or should not ask the phone owner for consent is certainly puerile because the efcc or the service providers already knows what the response of the phone owner will be in that circumstance.hope you are helped.if not ,im here to offer further help.afterall its saturday.

Hmmm, sorry I can't help your comprehension issues since you aren't about to read to understand before jumping in. Ciao!

(Akainzo:Sorry to bust your bubble, the phone in your hand is your own, the money in your account is your own.
However all over the world, the transacional details in your account are the property of the bank, which is why you'd have to ask the bank for your statement and they even charge you for it.
The phone in your hand and whatever is on it is your own, however all communications with it through the Telecoms operator is the property of the operator not you. They can cut you off, stop data to you or even deny your access to use their property. You'd be free to use your phone as a camera or radio if you so wish.)

again let me with profound respect to you ,correct a misleading information you put out to the public in your quoted statement,the money in your account is not your own,it belongs to the bank and the bank is free to do whatever with the money subject to the proviso that the same be made available back to you on demand sure this is new on you,buble burster.my communication with mtn does not belong to mtn,they remain mine and mtn cannot use my messages anyhow and they cannot block me anyhow and or deny me acess to data ive paid for and if they do that ,im entitled to sue.

josite:
(Akainzo:Sorry to bust your bubble, the phone in your hand is your own, the money in your account is your own.
However all over the world, the transacional details in your account are the property of the bank, which is why you'd have to ask the bank for your statement and they even charge you for it.
The phone in your hand and whatever is on it is your own, however all communications with it through the Telecoms operator is the property of the operator not you. They can cut you off, stop data to you or even deny your access to use their property. You'd be free to use your phone as a camera or radio if you so wish.)

again let me with profound respect to you ,correct a misleading information you put out to the public in your quoted statement,the money in your account is not your own,it belongs to the bank and the bank is free to do whatever with the money subject to the proviso that the same be made available back to you on demand sure this is new on you,buble burster.my communication with mtn does not belong to mtn,they remain mine and mtn cannot use my messages anyhow and they cannot block me anyhow and or deny me acess to data ive paid for and if they do that ,im entitled to sue.

Hmmmm, I see you are sure bent on going down a slippery slope.

Go through what you wrote up there in a calmer time, and then read the "T&C" of your SIM Card purchase. Note: an ability to sue has nothing to do with "ownership".

deucelaw:


I had a discussion with a prominent Legal practitioner (SAN) yesterday and was told that is a tip of the rot in the Judicial system, the SANs of their status ensure they take cases to certain Judges that they can bribe to get judgement. I was told he has been doing it like many others but his cup is full this time.

He was actually reported to the Efcc by one of the parties to case he is handling and they have massive evidence

All the useless SANs that followed him to court should be ashamed of themselves.

Akainzo:


Sorry to bust your bubble, the phone in your hand is your own, the money in your account is your own.

However all over the world, the transactional details in your account are the property of the bank, which is why you'd have to ask the bank for your statement and they even charge you for it

The phone in your hand and whatever is on it is your own, however all communications with it through the Telecoms operator is the property of the operator not you. They can cut you off, stop data to you or even deny your access to use their property. You'd be free to use your phone as a camera or radio if you so wish.

Friend there are terms and conditions attached to that can you answer this question. Can the bank publish my statement of account into public domain without my consent cos its their property?

So the telecom pole can send my chats to public domain without my consent. Pls use ur someth oh ng now

lagosrd:


Friend there are terms and conditions attached to that can you answer this question. Can the bank publish my statement of account into public domain without my consent cos its their property?

So the telecom pole can send my chats to public domain without my consent. Pls use ur someth oh ng now

thank u my broda ,ask him o.but u have to be careful,he will rather burst your bubble rather than give an answer of peace.

lagosrd:


Friend there are terms and conditions attached to that can you answer this question. Can the bank publish my statement of account into public domain without my consent cos its their property?

So the telecom pole can send my chats to public domain without my consent. Pls use ur someth oh ng now

You confuse "Privacy" with "ownership", they are not the same.

Your body is yours but if you walk out in public naked, you'd be guilty of indecent exposure. Does this analogy help to clarify things for you?

praxisnetworks:
;EFCC is a very corrupt organization. How can you tender illegally obtained exhibits in a court of law? They are just fooling Nigerians with fake anti corruption charges. Now I am waiting to see how they'll wriggle out of this..... I think someone should sue EFCC for wasting taxpayers money and causing unnecessary and unneeded media distractions.

Receive sense bro .!!!

Akainzo:



You confuse "Privacy" with "ownership", they are not the same.

Your body is yours but if you walk out in public naked, you'd be guilty of indecent exposure. Does this analogy help to clarify things for you?

Still don't get your argument. Does ownership to you involves betrayal of trust. Kindly get the latest on why and how iPhone manufacturers apple have refused to unlock one of the shooters phone. Pls research well and listen to int'l and local news and not dwell on whatever illegalities happening now in nigeria. God bless you brov

Lying as a professional!

lagosrd:



Still don't get your argument. Does ownership to you involves betrayal of trust. Kindly get the latest on why and how iPhone manufacturers apple have refused to unlock one of the shooters phone. Pls research well and listen to int'l and local news and not dwell on whatever illegalities happening now in nigeria. God bless you brov

Seems you are suffering from the effects of not being able to connect dots but looking at stuff in isolation. Like I have said, "Privacy" is not to be confused with "Ownership".

Let me now help you on the Apple case as regards the Bernardino shooter. The FBI is not asking to have access to data already with the phone companies, they are trying to have access to PERSONAL DATA of the shooter which is stored locally on the phone. Local data is not to be confused with Call Record, Text Messages and Cloud data.
Apple is rightly refusing to unlock the phone because the PHYSICAL PHONE is the property of the shooter and not Apple or the Telecoms company.


So once again, I state to you: Do not confuse "Privacy" with "Ownership".

Akainzo:



Seems you are suffering from the effects of not being able to connect dots but looking at stuff in isolation. Like I have said, "Privacy" is not to be confused with "Ownership".

Let me now help you on the Apple case as regards the Bernardino shooter. The FBI is not asking to have access to data already with the phone companies, they are trying to have access to PERSONAL DATA of the shooter which is stored locally on the phone. Local data is not to be confused with Call Record, Text Messages and Cloud data.
Apple is rightly refusing to unlock the phone because the PHYSICAL PHONE is the property of the shooter and not Apple or the Telecoms company.


So once again, I state to you: Do not confuse "Privacy" with "Ownership".

I don't know why am even replying you cause your post is getting insultive. Since you know all then proceed to the supreme court and do the needful.my advise is that you would have been a better human being if only you respect other people's opinion

lagosrd:


I don't know why am even replying you cause your post is getting insultive. Since you know all then proceed to the supreme court and do the needful.my advise is that you would have been a better human being if only you respect other people's opinion

Thanks for the advice, though I'm not sure I insulted you. I all the same do apologise for making you feel insulted

I sincerely hope we both learned something from the discourse. Have a lovely day.