sapiosexual1:
The man should kuku coman buy over our ministry of sports, infact we would dash him the entire ministry. That useless Dalung, a product of The Legendary Daura President, Cassandra The 1st, has turned our team to a public donation basket.
.
.
Growing up we used to be told by our elders and teachers that 'charity begins at home' buh ever since The Dullard came to power, it's either the saying has ceased to be true or Our home is not Nigeria. Today Chinese bailout, tomorrow Japanese donation, next tomorrow Canadian company. What are we even doing to help ourselves gan sef?

I'm genuinely curious, what is the origin of this Cassandra nickname??

ikbnice:
Doctors have the worst handwriting I have ever seen. Well, I believe this is to enable them hide the names prescribed drugs to prevent self medication.

Erm, so when you get to the pharmacy and buy the drugs, won't it be clearly written on the package/container??

Charmarlegne:
your comment is not only funny, but worrying. I guess you are not married, that is probably why you would defend the deceased by quoting illegality as legal. Just know that any man sleeping with someone's wife and vice versa is walking on very thin ice. If this guy gets a good lawyer, he will get off with only manslaughter.The lawyer can argue that he gave the statement under duress. To the guys who Bleep people's wives, please respect the man small and go Bleep the wife in a hotel. Not her matrimonial bed. Nuff said.

It has nothing to do with defending the deceased. It's about defending the law itself. like i earlier asked, what then happens if you got to visit someone and you happen to offend a member of their household, can they then kill you and claim you attempted to rape someone as the justification? the scene can be arranged to make it look like you did, and you won't be alive to tell your side of the story. Would that be justice?

At the bolded, sure the lawyer could try to argue that but the question is, is there even a single shred of evidence that duress was applied in any way? i wish you good luck trying to prove duress in a court of law

also hope you know that making an allegation of duress would mean making a specific accusation against an innocent police officer? Guys come on

nedu2000:
it happened in the accused bedroom for heaven's sake!!unless there's proof of kidnap he will walk free,i expect his wife to testify in his favor

does the bedroom belong exclusively to the accused? it also belongs to his wife and she invited him in.

and the one thing you are all missing is that both of them have already confessed. so where is he walking free to?

1stCitizen:




Why are you so slow to learn. Let us pretend that you never defined provocation as this last comment which is seeks to identify what constitutes provocation is diametrically opposed to that definition . I repeat during your lecture research did you not study the concept of suddenness and context of act in the case of sexual infidelity. Hurry along.... do some more research and return for evaluation....even slow learners learn.


HINT

"Sexual infidelity is not subject to a blanket exclusion"

Find out where this came from and read thoroughly. You must learn

you are a madman if you think i'm going to sit here at my laptop and play with you all day.

1stCitizen:


You failed to research where they mentioned context and suddenness which fits the case in question. I deliberately did not expatiate to allow you to do more research and come back....please do not spend eternity. The best method to teach.

i thought i asked you to read to the bottom of the page? must i do everything for you?? are you impaired in some way sir?

the conditions of the new law specifically state that sexual infidelity does not count as a triggering factor.

as i said from the first time i quoted you, you are boldly going on about something you do not know anything about.

anyway those who want to know can check the link i posted.

1stCitizen:


It is a pleasure to note that I have triggered you to do some course work which is part of lecturing(No wonder it took time to respond, you must be a slow reader) only that you have not learnt what the the sign " " means. It is usually thought at Kindergarten level.


It was a pleasure schooling you.

nope, sir lecturer who doesn't know what he is talking about... i'm actually just a person with a job

1stCitizen:


Please note that I am not arguing with you but lecturing you. Please keep your Arsenal analogy for the intellectually deficient few. Since you mentioned Arsenal, let me take the UK for an example.

The defence of provocation is found in the Homicide Act 1957.

"Provocation is some act, or series of acts done (now includes words)... which would cause in any reasonable person and actually causes in the accused, a sudden and temporary loss of self-control, rendering the accused so subject to passion as to make him or her for the moment not master of his or her mind."

The requirements of the defence of provocation under this Act 1957 are:


1. The defendant must have been provoked to lose their self control. Someone fvcking your wife on your bed and in your house is a provocation

2. The provocation must be such as to make a reasonable man do as the defendant did. Someone fvcking your wife on your bed and in your house is enough to make you do the unreasonable.

Note that there is no requirement in the Act 1957 that the provocative act was deliberate or aimed at the victim(Your ManU jersey example is dead on arrival). Some lawyers have even taken this further like a case of extreme noise causing the defendant to murder the noise maker

Like I said I would prefer you remain ignorant as it takes time to school others not willing to learn

you are lecturing me?

ok mr google lecturer. Read to the end of the page on this link and come back with more lectures.

http://e-lawresources.co.uk/Provocation.php

note that the law you reference has been repealed.but let me not talk too much. just do yourself a favour and read to the end.

Pirates of the Caribbean for sure...been watching that since i was a small boy and it have never do

Black Hawk Down

1stCitizen:


Nobody said the two are the same. Read well before you fall or crash into a comment. I agreed with him that the man could walk free in other parts of the world and gave you how he can defend himself.

I could have schooled you with various precedents as regards this but I would love you to remain ignorant since you are ITK

Even your provocation argument is tenuous.

Provocation is when someone does something to you with the intent of provoking a response from you.

An example of provocation is wearing Manchester utd jersey to a bar full of Arsenal supporters and singing songs to taunt them after they lost the Champions league final.

Sleeping with ones wife while one is away is not provocation given that you did not intend for the man to find out and that is why you did it while he was not there.

thank you sir.

Those of you saying the man should go scott free, please think about the big picture. If such a precedent is set, then you are no longer safe the moment you set foot in someone else's home regardless of why you are there.

If you offend anyone there, they could kill you and claim you attempted to rape their daughter or sister. They could plant a weapon in your pocket and claim you were an armed robber. Etc. If the law would accept the testimony of only the living and ignore the total body of evidence, then none of us is safe.

Pangea:


What do you call a stranger attacking you, right in your own bedroom st 12am?

i call it a story you just made up since the original story shows clearly that the so called stranger was attacked and not the other way around

tete7000:



I disagree with you but take side with the one you quoted. When you enter another's matrimonial home, be ready to face the consequence. There was even a fight before the killing, the man could claim he was acting in self defence.

yes he could claim self defense but it would not hold up in court. why? because he attacked the man first and it was therefore the victim who was truly acting in self defense. and as for being in this matrimonial home, the law does not take culture into account. legally the wife is a co-owner of the home and has every right to invite a visitor in. it is not the visitor's fault if the other owner of the home is not happy to find him there when he gets back

1stCitizen:


He is right. In the western world he can use the defense of provocation and walk away as a free man.

1. provocation and self defense are not the same argument

2. you are boldly saying something that you do not know anything about!

Antarch:


What evidence is there to validate the highlighted assertion? Oral testimony of the wife?

Her own self-confessions at this time would be subsequently discarded as induced by duress while in police custody. When the case comes up in court, she will claim that the man gained access into her house and forcefully raped her. In the ensuing chaos, her husband returned home and tried to fight off the rapist and in the process ended up killing him.

In the absence of contrary evidence, and in the spirit of fairness, I'm not sure any judge would prefer to doubt this version of events. This man did what most men would do in similar circumstances. The letter and spirit of the law would be in his favour.

Check my previous post.

1. if he was not invited in then he must have forced his way in. is there any sign of forced entry? typically signs would include broken locks or windows
2. if she was raped he must have forced her. is there any sign of a struggle such as bruises around the womans neck or other parts of the body?
3. did neighbors hear any shouts or screams for help?

Antarch:


You can't expose a lie without establishing the truth. In this case, what is the truth and what is a lie depends entirely on the testimony of the two principal witnesses - who happen to be the husband and wife involved. Thankfully, prima facie evidence lends credence to whatever they choose to claim, because the dead intruder (that's what he was) cannot prove otherwise. So what exactly are you going to say about this?

Frankly, there is no way to twist this. No court would give this man a hard time.

here are some basic truths:

1. absence of forced entry means the man was invited into the home
2. no signs of a physical struggle between the man and the women to corroborate rape theory
3. no arms found on the supposed intruder
4. no witness who heard screams or shouts for help

how do you prove the rape theory in the absence of these?


besides my question based on your statement was did the guy not commit a crime or you are saying he can get away with a crime?

nedu2000:
I don't think mr igbokwe committed a crime. After he could claim the guy was an intruder and tried attacking him. #freeigbokwe

you don't think he committed a crime or you think he could get away with telling a lie to cover a crime? because the two are not the same thing sir.

Pangea:
Mr. Igbokwe should be released asap!
He has a right to self defence!
If this happened in a sane society?
It's an open and shut case
That man committed suicide

do you know what is legally defined as self defense??

Antarch:
I don't see why he should be paraded in such a humiliating manner as if he is a common criminal. The prima facie facts of the case indicate that he had valid grounds and also provide some extenuation for his action. A very good lawyer can get him off the hook with a very light sentence for manslaughter.

The provocation is evident and beyond doubt. No man would pretend to be a gentleman if he witnesses a strange person making love to his own wife and desecrating his matrimonial bed in his own home.

nope. the best he can argue is extenuating circumstances but murder is murder.

the deceased was a guest in his home, invited by a co-owner of that home and had every legal right to be there, and every legal right to make love to the woman given that it was consensual. It's going to be very hard to get him a light sentence.

Bants:
Why was the wife arrested...I don't get it...

That is just what i have been wondering all morning. Why was she arrested is being paraded barefoot?

hmmm.

chelseaboi:
This is not a mistake.....d athlete knew that the doping officers were lookn for him...maybe he just took a banned substance that morning....it can be weed or anything......WC may take hrs or minutes to clear......this is exactly wat happened....

Can you give me an example of a banned substance whose traces can disappear within minutes?


Besides, most of these drug tests are random and athletes are not given forewarning so how would he know they were looking for him? Plus if he was avoiding the officials, he could simply have stayed away from the olympic village or hopped into town for the day. He didn't have to give anyone his pass. Especially given that officials themselves say Rotich found out and submitted his samples "right away"

Hiroto:
D officials are too harsh

They shd av given dem a chance to rectify their mistake

okay... here's a chance for you to go back and read the full story and come back and rectify your comment

i am beginning to wonder if we should not just rent out this country to America or back to England

nuelzz04:
he ain't mad....d guy sabi packaging ......d fact DAT he wears a suit will probably make his noodles cost alittle costlier

in other words he is probably pricing himself out of the market due to a valueless input into his value chain?

coldsummer:
[size=18pt]Nigerians with mediocrity. So this is the kind of achievements we are comfortable celebrating. People have come up with some technological innovations, children have built houses with woods, air planes have been built, cars and motor bikes to mention a few. No one is celebrating or making effort to further encourage them in what really matters, but we dance our hearts out over a road side seller who decides to look good in doing his business.

Since people know that the new trend in getting recognised in what you do is not in how well you are able to do it but how good you make people think you look while doing, more people are buying into it.


LAZY MINDS.[/size]

if not that you were in a hurry to be noticed, you would have observed that hardly anyone is celebrating him and most of the comments are derogatory.

The funniest thing is that most of those commenting on this thread have HPV (if you are sexually active) but don't know it.

so keep laughing at the guy until your own begins to show.

SWORD419:
eyyah he have ruined her life

let us hope she has been given post exposure prophylaxis!!

big bros, the solution is simple but i'm worried you might not be able to implement it.

STOP NEGOTIATING WITH YOUR WIFE.

Lay down the law and stop being so "nice". Next time mama visits, take her out with your wife and make sure they have a nice time, then tell them in no uncertain terms that you will not tolerate the intrusion any longer because you did not leave your Fathers house to come and be under someone else's parents.

You are a man. You are the commander of your home. Act like it.

i just don't understand some things we go through in this country... KAI harasses man and tears his clothing, soldiers come and break the windshield of KAI vehicle, police arrive and fire in the air to disperse the crowd.

each incident could have been handled without recourse to violence. btw isn't the vehicle destroyed the property of the government? so what sense have these soldiers made by vandalizing it?

i'm beginning to hate all these beauty pageants. so because you won some obscure competition like that, you wont let us have rest??

JustHere2Observ:


You sef grow some sense. You made your point already why add insults

lol.... yes ma

JustHere2Observ:
Oloshi, if wife has nudes of other men or sends to another, she gets sent out. She finds nudes of other women on Hubby's phone, she gets sent out still. Either way she looses.

Was that why she got sent out or she got sent out because she slapped the man thereby proving her violent instincts which has given the man cause to fear for his life?

Grow some sense.