zoedew:

In that case she should just have tendered the document and not attempt to speak to it as if she owned or made the document! It is not her document! Anyone could have downloaded it and presented it in court. She is not an expert witness in the eye of the law! Slant eye strategy!!!!🏃‍♂️🏃‍♂️🏃‍♂️🏃‍♂️🏃‍♂️

Are you now saying, she's no more cloud expert? Please is court a dumping ground that you submit document and not prove its viability. Go and google who an expert witness is and come back and edit your comment.

SwissMass:
What da hell is going on , the embittered labour party member had issues with INEC because her name wasn't published to contest election, imagine she came not on behalf of Amazon but on behalf of Peter Obi

Hmm... Is AMAZON a party to the suit? Why would anyone expect a witness brought by OBI/LP to be in court on behalf of Amazon and not OBI/LP?

WorldRichest:


You no dey read ni?

Can't you see from the report that the lazy youth was rubbished ni? She confirmed that she is a member of Labour Party and she sued INEC in the past. How can then be taken seriously? She also confirmed that AWS did not send her to come and represent them, so she is not in an official position to speak on the subject.

AWS will not come to give evidence against the President of the most populous black nation on earth because AWS is not owned by an idiot.

Several people on this thread keep saying she's a member of LP!!! she's a member of LP!!! so if she's a member of LP and so what? She claims she provided evidence from a publicly available information repository to support an argument that there was no network glitch on the INEC server on election day. The sensible argument here should be on the veracity of the information she provided, not whether she's OBI's daughter or whatever.

sangresan:
Can a so-called employee represent WAEC without official permission?

Can a policeman present a police report without IG approval?

All these people no dey reason.

If WAEC publicly posts my results online, I don't believe I need to be a staff of INEC and neither do I need WAEC's official permission to make references to my results which they already made available publicly on their website.

pasuma:
Shows you're ignorant of the topic in question, there's no way Amazon would have released the server status to her or anyone else, the service owner is the only one with the rights to access it.

I wonder what happened to the brains of all these Obidients

I think you're the one that does not understand the topic.

successmatters:
This is a big bone in the throat of INEC

If you know what's up you would flog LP lawyers for fielding this kind of candidate.

She rather dented the case rather than contributing anything.

Defendants' lawyer closing remark on the witness will go thus: "witness is an embittered LP member who has grudge against INEC for not publishing her name in the election she contested and is now standing as an expert. More so, the witness admitted she is neither a staff of Amazon nor was she authorizes by Amazon to speak on its behalf, she is rather looking for score to settle with INEC and therefore her evidence should be dismissed and declared none and void."




We learn every day

xenten:

If you know how law works you will know that this particular witness evidence will be totally dismissed. She was brought as an expert witness and she has confirmed herself that she is no expert witness to speak on the matter.

If you want to provide such downloaded evidence, just bring it since it's on public domain and defend what is there. If Amazon cannot send anyone officially to testify on the matter then never claim you have an Amazon expert as a witness.


We learn every day

obailala:

If WAEC publicly posts my results online, I don't believe I need to be a staff of INEC and neither do I need WAEC's official permission to make references to my results which they already made available publicly on their website.

Only waec can attedts to it's authenticity

soojar:


If you know what's up you would flog LP lawyers for fielding this kind of candidate.

She rather dented the case rather than contributing anything.

Defendants' lawyer closing remark on the witness will go thus: "witness is an embittered LP member who has grudge against INEC for not publishing her name in the election she contested and is now standing as an expert. More so, the witness admitted she is neither a staff of Amazon nor was she authorizes by Amazon to speak on its behalf, she is rather looking for score to settle with INEC and therefore her evidence should be dismissed and declared none and void."




We learn every day

We suppose to learn everyday but you've have not learnt anything.

Did she says, she's not an employee of Amazon?
I won't mind if you can reference me where she said so.

I also want to know where she said she has a score to settle with INEC, when a case she has with INEC had been resolved to her favour by the court. Hope you're not manufacturing another case on her head that she doesn't know.
Meanwhile, the case she has with INEC was it a case of life and death that will warrant her to be nursing grudge with the commission?

Just I had said, you've not learnt anything today.

IfnobeGod20:

We suppose to learn everyday but you've have not learnt anything.

Did she says, she's not an employee of Amazon?
I won't mind if you can reference me where she said so.

I also want to know where she said she has a score to settle with INEC, when a case she has with INEC had been resolved to her favour by the court. Hope you're not manufacturing another case on her head that she doesn't know.
Meanwhile, the case she has with INEC was it a case of life and death that will warrant her to be nursing grudge with the commission?

Just I had said, you've not learnt anything today.

There is quotation marks around the last statement to let you know it's my own write up of how the lawyers would shred the so called expert witness to pieces. So in simple terms the lawyers will suggest her intentions to the judges and based on her responses in the cross examination the judges will accept she is just a disgruntled member of LP seeking for score to settle with INEC and the opposition she lost against.

Please go back and read the report again, she agreed that she was neither employed by Amazon nor sent by them to represent the company. E.g If you are Microsoft certified does not make you an employee of Microsoft.

If we are not going to be clever by half, Amazon can never send any of it's employees to testify against a client especially as big as INEC hence the reason for LP to bring a local certified cloud engineer to act as an expert witness which she has now confirmed that she is not, as anybody can download her so called report from the internet.



We learn every day

INEC and APC lies exposed

senatordave1:


Only waec can attedts to it's authenticity

If you doubt the authenticity of a result posted by WAEC on its own website, then the onus is on you to go and sue WAEC to prove the authenticity.

obailala:
If you doubt the authenticity of a result posted by WAEC on its own website, then the onus is on you to go and sue WAEC to prove the authenticity.

No,you sue the person who was issued to.waec will only be subpoenaed

senatordave1:


No,you sue the person who was issued to.waec will only be subpoenaed

I provide you evidence for an argument from a known source. You claim the source is fake. In this scenario, the onus is on you to prove that the evidence is fake.

obailala:

I provide you evidence for an argument from a known source. You claim the source is fake. In this scenario, the onus is on you to prove that the evidence is fake.

The proof you brought is not conclusive according to you.your proof must be without doubt

senatordave1:


The proof you brought is not conclusive according to you.your proof must be without doubt

Where did you dig that from in my comment? I never mentioned anywhere that it isn't conclusive - You did!

If I provide conclusive evidence to support an argument and you claim my evidence isn't conclusive, you should be able to point out to me and the world why you think my evidence isn't conclusive.

obailala:
Where did you dig that from in my comment? I never mentioned anywhere that it isn't conclusive - You did!

If I provide conclusive evidence to support an argument and you claim my evidence isn't conclusive, you should be able to point out to me and the world why you think my evidence isn't conclusive.

She herself confirmed it is not conclusive and that it could have been from inec servers

soojar:


There is quotation marks around the last statement to let you know it's my own write up of how the lawyers would shred the so called expert witness to pieces. So in simple terms the lawyers will suggest her intentions to the judges and based on her responses in the cross examination the judges will accept she is just a disgruntled member of LP seeking for score to settle with INEC and the opposition she lost against.

Please go back and read the report again, she agreed that she was neither employed by Amazon nor sent by them to represent the company. E.g If you are Microsoft certified does not make you an employee of Microsoft.

If we are not going to be clever by half, Amazon can never send any of it's employees to testify against a client especially as big as INEC hence the reason for LP to bring a local certified cloud engineer to act as an expert witness which she has now confirmed that she is not, as anybody can download her so called report from the internet.



We learn every day

And you went in a lying spree. She said, she was not an employee of Amazon. Please where did you read that from?
Here below is the cross examination between her and the cross examiner. Please point out where she said that.

"1st Respondent Cross-examination [INEC] ]

Keys:
Q= questions by the first respondent cross examiner
A= Answers by the witness.
------

Q. Para 6 of your witness statement, you set out the software developing life cycle, I suggest to you that you missed an important element of the circle that is post production maintenance.

A. I didn't miss it out, different companies have different development life cycles.

Q. Frequently, it is at the post production maintenance stage that glitches and issues appear, correct?

A. That is incorrect, glitches appear during testing stage.

Q. The exhibit you tendered PCJ3, Speaks to the AWS Health Dashboard across all Regions, correct?

A. Yes

Q. In the Personal Health Dashboard for INEC ,services of AWS is not before the court .

A. The status is the same information with the Personal Health Dashboard which is general to all clients.

Q. AWS adopts a shared responsibility model for security of services.

A. Correct

Q. By shared, we refer to AWS part as well as customer's part .

A. Correct

Q. The part of AWS is what is dealt with in the exhibit you tendered.

A. The reports I tendered was to show health status of AWS services for all regions and not related to security.

Q. To know specifically what happened on application deployed by customers, you'll require a different report?

A. Not necessarily.

Q. I suggest to u necessarily

A. That is incorrect

Q. The reports have nothing to do with the application of INEC.

A. The applications are hosted on AWS services & if there is a glitch, it will impact the application.
The report shows the health report of AWS that can host apps.

Q. Are you familiar with AWS cloud trail?

A. Yes I am

Q. There is a cloud trail for INEC ?

A. There is a cloud trail for every API action made within that account.

Q. The cloud trail with respect of INEC is not before the court?

A. No! I do not have access to INEC infrastructure.

Q. Cloud trail is the best evidence for what happened In relation to INEC?

A. Incorrect

Q. It is not unusual for glitches to occur on apps or software deployed by companies ?

A. It is highly unusual for glitches pertaining to primary functions to occur in production (when available to public.)

Q. You are aware about the glitch on CBN E-naira ?

A. I'm not aware

Q. You're aware on MTN Momo PSB glitches ?

A. I don't, I'm only here on AWS

Q. You were a candidate of the LP in the last election ?

A. Yes, it's in my witness statement.

Q. You are not here on the authority of Amazon.

A. I'm here as an expert witness, not on Amazon

Q. You're here as a Labour Party activist.

A. That's incorrect

[ First respondent [INEC] cross examiner is done with cross examining the witness ]

[ 2nd & 3rd respondent [ Tinubu & shettima] cross examiner is about to cross examine the witness]

2nd and 3rd Respondents Cross-examination:

Q. Look at your letter tendered before the court. It has no author, no name.

A. There is, Employee Resource Center is the name of the author.

Q. May I suggest to you that Employee Resource Center is a person ?

A. It's a department that handles employment verification.

Q. The letter is not signed.

A. It's signed by employee resource center.

Q. There is a signature there?

A. This is the verification letter given to all employees within Amazon.

Q. You didn't attach iD cards

A. AWS does not issue identity cards.

Q. There is no appointment letter given to you

A. The appointment verification letter states my appointment date.

Q. This is not your first time in court.

A. I've been here a few times

Q. You have a Twitter handle ?

A. Yes

Q. This is your Twitter handle @*** ?[ not stated for some reasons ]

A. That's right

Q. You have put what you've watched on your Twitter handle.

A. That's incorrect.

Q. I suggest to you that you downloaded the reports from AWS site.

A. The reports are public information posted by Amazon.

Q. The reports are not your product.

A. They are, because I brought them to court.

Q. You contested election to House of Reps in the Labour Party ?

A. Yes

Q. What's your feeling about that, are you happy?

A. I'm Indifferent

Q. The authorship of this report is not yours

A. I brought them to court, so they are mine
Q. You contested primaries of LP in your constituency, did you win ?

A. I won

Q. Did you go to Court to file any action at all ?

A. Yes I did

Q. You sued INEC because INEC did not put your name on the list of candidate .

A. That's correct

Q. Your complain in court was that you made several effort to upload your data to INEC portal but it failed because of network failure.

A. Yes

Q. Do you agree that network failure is also a glitch and there was a glitch on the INEC site at that time.

A. I disagree, network failure could have happened on the side of the person performing the upload.

Q. You said in your affidavit that the INEC site crashed.

A. That's right

Q. Are you aware that in 2017 the AWS S3 cloud service experienced an out time on Tuesday 28 February 2017.

A. I was aware

Q. Are you aware that in 2021 that AWS was recorded to have over 27 outages?

A. I'm aware that's why I presented health status report.

Q. You know that LP, won the presidential election in 12 states & FCT

A. I'm here as an expert witness.

[ The cross examiner asked the witness the question again ]

A. I can't speak to the matter that is in court

Q. In Para 9, the polling unit result you referred to is form EC8A.

A. I believe so

Q. I suggest to you that when information on the result is uploaded, it is only the image that is transfered.

A. You could upload anything, I cannot speak to what is transmitted.

Q. You come from Cross-River State, which party won the presidential election in the state?

A. Yes, I do not know who won.

Q. Who's the president of USA ?

A. Joe Biden

Q. He contested against who ?

A. I'm not here as an election expert.

[ 2nd & 3rd respondents cross examiner is done with cross examining the witness.
The 4th respondent cross examiner is about to cross examine the witness ]

[ 4th Respondent cross-examination]

Q. You did not have or conduct any investigation on the application used by INEC in the election.

A. I conducted preliminary investigation on the IREV.

[ He asks the question again ,requiring straight answer ]

A. Para 9 says that I conducted Preliminary review of the INEC website

Q. It is not an application

A. It is

Q. Tell the court how many votes were affected by the glitch you talked about.

A. I'm not here as an election expert, according to my report, there was no glitches on AWS.

Q. Are you aware that between a customer of AWS and AWS itself there's usually what is known as non-disclosure agreement-NDA ?

A. I'm aware of a service level agreement, not an NDA

Q. Do you have a copy of this service level agreement between INEC and AWS ?

A. The service level agreement applies to all customers of AWS and I attached the link in my witness statement. I'm here to speak about general agreement between all customers and AWS.

Q. In this agreement, is there a clause about confidentiality of the operation of the application ?

A. I cannot state categorically.

Q. Are you aware that there will always be password protocol defining who can access and modify the application ?

A. I don't work for INEC and know Nothing about their password protocol.

Q. the report you downloaded, did you use any password ?

A. No I did not.

Q. You'll then agree with me that it is an open access information ?

A. That's correct, everything in my witness statement is open to the public

Q. You don't have the password protocol.

A. I don't.

Q. Password protocol contains how parties for an agreement , can go into and amend or adjust anything on the application.

A. I cannot speak to password protocols

Q. Can you on your own, modify the public information you accessed ?

A. No I can't

Q. You are not representing Amazon in this case ?

A. No I'm here as an expert witness.

Q. You're not representing INEC ?

A. No I'm not

Q. In CrossRiver, did you file any election petition ?

A. No i didn't

Q. Apart from the outage asked earlier, are you aware AWS glitch also affected Japan Brokers Sept 2, 2021 ?

A. I can't confirm that, the last glitch on Amazon was December 10, 2021.

Q. If it happened then, it can happen again .

A. Anything is possible

[ The 4th respondent cross examiner is done with cross examining the witness.]"

She only said, she wasn't in court on the authority of Amazon but on a personal capacity as an expert witness. Please I am expecting you to point where she said she's not an employee of Amazon.

Meanwhile, in your own submission, she has a score to settle with INEC for what reason? She has already won a case against INEC and her name was adequately represented during election as a candidate. So, which score does she has to settle again, when court had ventilated her request. Your so called lawyers must prove beyond reasonable doubt that she has score to settle. Remember she was not even at the tribunal to vent her election lost. So which score please?

Just I had said, you've not learnt anything today. Unlearn and learn, that will be better for you.

senatordave1:


She herself confirmed it is not conclusive and that it could have been from inec servers

Where did she say that?

obailala:
Where did she say that?

She said it's possible that there was network issue

senatordave1:


She said it's possible that there was network issue

Where did she say that?

obailala:
Where did she say that?

Reread her brief

IfnobeGod20:

We suppose to learn everyday but you've have not learnt anything.

Did she says, she's not an employee of Amazon?
I won't mind if you can reference me where she said so.

I also want to know where she said she has a score to settle with INEC, when a case she has with INEC had been resolved to her favour by the court. Hope you're not manufacturing another case on her head that she doesn't know.
Meanwhile, the case she has with INEC was it a case of life and death that will warrant her to be nursing grudge with the commission?

Just I had said, you've not learnt anything today.

Was she representing Amazon?
Was she representing herself
Did. Amazon send her there?
Was Amazon aware she was going there?
Did Amazon provide her with any documents
Did Amazon authorize her to use any of their documents there?
What do you mean by CASE OF LIFE AND DEATH?

Gajagojo:


Was she representing Amazon?
Was she representing herself
Did. Amazon send her there?
Was Amazon aware she was going there?
Did Amazon provide her with any documents
Did Amazon authorize her to use any of their documents there?
What do you mean by CASE OF LIFE AND DEATH?

You jumped into an issue, you know not the beginning and it would be difficult for you to understand why I used the words "life and death". Now go back and read our previous comments before the one you quoted.

IfnobeGod20:

You jumped into an issue, you no not the beginning and it would be difficult for you to understand why I used the words "life and death". Now go back and readvour previous comments before the one you quoted.

The beginning is in a secret place? Not this same Nairaland?