Hang him to death, all the ripe pussies wea dey poly,na this small the idiot go rape

cococandy:
Also wondering why he can’t be held responsible for protecting the child as well. Let’s imagine that the rapist is an entire person that’s not him, why is the wife the only one expected to protect the kid? Wasn’t she his ward as well?

The opening post of the thread that I've read suggests that the police/the government who are responsible for handling criminal matters brought all the adults to court to nail them for the death of the child under their care.

The charges/counts filed against the Mother was neglecting a child under her care. I believe it was to nail her for a very short period because maybe she knew her husband or step son were bad people with criminal history capable of doing that and because of love or what the society would say she still stayed with them without taking extra effort to protect her child. Or maybe a child under her care died for unexplainable reasons.

The police definitely brought 4 counts/charges of rape and murder against the father and the step son( who is still at large). They wanted the father to go to prison forever- punishment for rape or be sentenced to death or life imprisonment for the murder of the child.

But let's face it without bias, from the facts of the case, it is the step son of the man who has escaped that most likely raped the child. If after evidence given, it is discovered that the husband didn't rape his child or murder her but the step son alone without his knowledge, the man would never go in for rape or murder. The court gives justice without emotions but according to law. It is better for 99 guilty persons to walk free than one innocent person to be punished for a crime he wasn't part of.

Why would the mother of the child be sentenced to 5 months imprisonment and the father is discharged and acquitted without consequence?

The court does not give you what you didn't pray the court for. The prosecution asked the court to sentence the mother to imprisonment for neglecting her child which led to her death and the court reduced her sentence to 5 months ( criminal negligence that results in death ordinarily should be up to 2 years imprisonment). She was found guilty of negligence.
The prosecution asked the Court to sentence the father to death /life imprisonment for rape/murder. The evidence tendered did not link the father to rape or murder and he was acquitted. It doesn't mean the father of the child is not as negligent has the mother or even more negligent than the mother. It means that the charges against father were more severe and if the prosecution brought a concurrent charge of negligence against the father alongside rape and murder, the charge of negligence would automatically disqualify that of murder and rape because you don't rape someone negligently and the judge would consider those who brought such matter stupid.

Karlovych:
What a very sick verdict! I can't remember the last time a Nigerian court found anyone guilty for the crime they committed, foolish country.

Don't mind our wicked lawyers. When they see money, case will change. They will quote and unquote and turn the constitution upside down. She should go to the Supreme Court.

This is why some people like jungle justice. That wicked man should have been burnt to death.

If they had obtained a sperms sample as well as a video with the girl telling what happened to her, the man would have been convicted.


What we should do when justice is not served is to alienate and not allow such individuals have contact with minors and deprive him of earning a living.


Where is the son by the way?

The Police should go to the Appeal Court and if necessary up to the Supreme Court. She deserves justice.

Please for those of you saying "Justice has failed the child",please read well..JUSTICE DID NOT FAIL THE CHILD,RATHER OUR NONCHALANT MEDICAL CREW FAILED THE CHILD..even simple autopsy dey hard this useless country

IamAsiri:


There is a difference between "the husband didn't do it" and "it couldn't be proven that the husband did it". The latter most times is usually due to incompetence in the hands of the prosecutors or the policemen needed to provide evidence (deliberately or just plain incompetence).

well if you can't prove it, then you have no right to say he did it.

Why should we take away the life of a man based on mere words?

cococandy:


so how was she supposed to protect the girl from rapists if the rapist is unknown?
This society is so chronically and maliciously anti woman it’s nauseating.
Okay let’s say the man didn’t do it, why was he not convicted alongside the wife for failing to protect the child, was the child not his responsibility too?

Turns my stomach

you are mistaking the case.

The man was sued for rape and the death of the child in the state court. He was acquitted because well he didn't do any of the above.

The woman on the other hand was sued by an agency in another court for irresponsibility not for the rape of the child.

Those are two different allegations.

Now would you sue the goat you accused of eating a yam for not protecting the yam or for actually eating the yam?

There's nothing anti woman there. So rest your little feminist head and apply a little logic. Secondly, if the rape allegation is dropped, NATIP which sued the woman can still sue the man.

ETHICALLYrlght:


The opening post of the thread that I've read suggests that the police/the government who are responsible for handling criminal matters brought all the adults to court to nail them for the death of the child under their care.

The charges/counts filed against the Mother was neglecting a child under her care. I believe it was to nail her for a very short period because maybe she knew her husband or step son were bad people with criminal history capable of doing that and because of love or what the society would say she still stayed with them without taking extra effort to protect her child

The police definitely brought 4 counts/charges of rape and murder against the father and the step son( who is still at large). They wanted the father to go to prison forever- punishment for rape or be sentenced to death or life imprisonment for the murder of the child.

But let's face it without bias, from the facts of the case, it is the step son of the man who has escaped that most likely raped the child. If after evidence given, it is discovered that the husband didn't rape his child or murder her but the step son alone without his knowledge, the man would never go in for rape or murder. The court gives justice without emotions but according to law. It is better for 99 guilty persons to walk free than one innocent person to be punished for a crime he wasn't part of.

Why would the mother of the child be sentenced to 5 months imprisonment and the father is discharged and acquitted without consequence?

The court does not give you what you didn't pray the court for. The prosecution asked the court to sentence the mother to imprisonment for neglecting her child which led to her death and the court sentenced reduced her sentence to 5 months ( criminal negligence that results in death ordinarily should be up to 2 years imprisonment). She was found guilty of negligence.
The prosecution asked the Court to sentence the father to death /life imprisonment for rape/murder. The evidence tendered did not link the father to rape or murder and he was acquitted. It doesn't mean the father of the child is not as negligent has the mother or even more negligent than the mother. It means that the charges against father were more severe and if the prosecution brought a concurrent charge of negligence against the father alongside rape and murder, the charge of negligence would automatically disqualify that of murder and rape because you don't rape someone negligently and the judge would consider those who brought such matter stupid.

feminist ordinarily cannot think logically.

They just look things and the next thing is to play the victim card.

bitbillionaire:
@the bolded: YES. You have to believe In the Nigerian judiciary!

You see, the judiciary is not Father Christmas dashing justice out of mercy, sentiment or emotion! You need to be able to prove beyond REASONABLE DOUBT, with solid evidence, that the person you are accusing actually committed the offence. I don't know why it's so hard for people to get this!

In this case, the police failed to do their job thoroughly. So it's not the judiciary's fault.

Then how did the court recently find a politician guilty of stealing 43 billion and gave him only 750,000 to pay as fine and to forfeit his house in Abuja of 125million naira, what sort of nonsense judgement is that, for the court to find him guilty of stealing 43 billion it means EFCC did their work well but the judiciary in Nigeria is for the highest bidder, and yet you are here telling me that it is the fault of the Police...

WoundedLamb:


Whatever she's accused of? From all indications, you don't understand any bit of this report but you're already fast to call out the woman. Do you think this is a case of woman vs her husband where one party's guilt vindicates the other? Do you even realize why the judgments are said to be contradictory? Her guilt implies her husband did rap.e the child. Do you guys ever take a break to hold your fellow men accused? Wow.

You no go school.....women agitation would work against women in the long run

She claim her child was raped........but couldn't prove it

Then NAPTIP take her on on being an accomplice in her claim....even though she can't prove it.

Conclusion don't be a false alermist

cococandy:


so how was she supposed to protect the girl from rapists if the rapist is unknown?
This society is so chronically and maliciously anti woman it’s nauseating.
Okay let’s say the man didn’t do it, why was he not convicted alongside the wife for failing to protect the child, was the child not his responsibility too?

Turns my stomach

You're really thinking well

Women way of thinking is baffling.....

When you stop assuming, you'll understand perspectives properly

She dragged the man to court for raping the deceased child........and failed to prove her claims beyond reasonable doubt....then you are assuming the accused was supposed to be the protector of the victim at the same time ?

fkj950ax:


The judge held that police investigators failed to subject the defendant to medical examination in order to match his specimen with the findings in the medical reports that were presented before the court.

How could the police not do this? So fûckin incompetent.

The Judge is bias, since the man admitted he raped her, they should have also sentence him the way his wife was sentenced.

kingphilip:
If you know say you try read like 10 lines of the first post come discover say e de confusing and scroll down see say e de too long, gather here make we know ourselves.

There is nothing confusing here..
Statr high court tried the husband and his son over rape case and they were freed and acquitted..
While the federal high court tried the wife cos naptip filed a case against her for negligence and failure to protect the late child thereby leading to her defilement by her husband and child.

I wish naptip will takeup the case against the husband too so justice will be done on behalf of the deceased and her family.
This is a clear case of judicial rascality..
Even after all the evidences both in tape and other medium, u still freed these.demons...

kazyhm:


You no go school.....women agitation would work against women in the long run

She claim her child was raped........but couldn't prove it

Then NAPTIP take her on on being an accomplice in her claim....even though she can't prove it.

Conclusion don't be a false alermist

I really tried to make sense of your post so I could, at least, reply. But nope, I couldn't. What exactly are you saying? That the court finding her guilty of not protecting the child doesn't imply the child was actually raped? You think she'll be jailed even for a minute for being accomplice to a crime that cannot be proven? Accomplice to what? So why are the two courts said to contradict each other? Dude, if her husband is presented before the same court that jailed her, he's going straight to prison cause the judgment against his wife has already implicated him.

You probably think the court of law is Nairaland where y'all argue without logic.

WoundedLamb:


I really tried to make sense of your post so I could, at least, reply. But nope, I couldn't. What exactly are you saying? That the court finding her guilty of not protecting the child doesn't imply the child was actually raped? You think she'll be jailed for even a minute for being accomplice to a crime that cannot be proven? Accomplice to what? So why are the two courts said to contradict each other? Dude, if her husband is presented before the same court that jailed her, he's going straight to prison cause the judgment against his wife has already implicated him.

You probably think the court of law is Nairaland where y'all argue without logic.

You missed one fact (evidence) from the case that set the man free....

The FMC found the death was natural
The police found the death was by sexual assault.

This is what I think happened.
The police from the autopsy found some irregularities and form a theory of rape................

To establish and prove the rape case, they needed to conduct DNA test on sample of the sperm found on her (if any) then compare it to a sample from the supposed perpetrator.........

Now I think the samples did not match (or evidence was not found on the victim) so the police decided to remove that aspect hoping/praying/assuming the judge would or might not ask. But unfortunately, the judge was diligent and thorough....because it is better for 10 criminals escape justice than for one innocent person to be punished.....

And by the way.... between FMC Makurdi and Police forensic pathologist......which should be more reliable?

Now, the other charges that convicted the women is entirely different and file by a different body and sources........the husband was not joined in the suite or probably no evidence linking the man to the charges, probably because the women was the witness of the crime.........she watches on while the crime was perpetrated and unfortunately for her.....no prove and the victim is not alive to testify..........

kazyhm:


You missed one point from the case that acquainted the man....

The FMC found the death was natural
The police found the death was by sexual assault.

The is what I think happened.
The police from the autopsy found some irregularities and form a theory to back the theory of what might have happened....then concluded she was raped.........

To prove the rape case, they need to take the conduct DNA sample of the sperm found on her then compare it to a sample from the supposed perpetrator.........

Now I think the samples did not match so the police decided to remove that aspect hoping/praying/assuming the judge would not ask. But unfortunately, the judge is diligent and thorough....because it is better for 10 criminals escape justice than for one innocent person be punished.....

And by the way.... between FMC Makurdi and Police forensic pathologist......which should be more reliable?

You've explained how the judge ended up freeing the man. And according to your explanation, it's possible the man did it but there wasn't just enough evidence against him. That's OK. I was never disputing the judgment.

If you read the post you quoted, I told the guy that finding the wife guilty invariably implies the federal court would find the husband guilty as well. Then you quoted me to call me an illiterate only for you to come back to argue something I never disputed. I told the dude he cannot support the wife's punishment without implicating the husband. That's the contradiction here and I pointed it out to the person I quoted because he obviously thought it was a man vs woman case where one party's guilt would vindicate the other. The person I quoted was quick to side with the man even without understanding the story. Anything not hold a man accountable was fine by him. And I said if that man appears before the federal court, he's not getting out free.

So tell me how that makes me an illiterate and how this your response full of hypothesis invalidates my submission.

WoundedLamb:


You've explained how the judge ended up freeing the man. And according to your explanation, it's possible the man did it but there wasn't just enough evidence against him. That's OK. I was never disputing the judgment.

If you read the post you quoted, I told the guy that finding the wife guilty invariably implies the federal court would find the husband guilty as well. Then you quoted me to call me an illiterate only for you to come back to argue something I never disputed. I told the dude he cannot support the wife's punishment without implicating the husband. That's the contradiction here and I pointed it out to the person I quoted because he obviously thought it was a man vs woman case where one party's guilt would vindicate the other. The person I quoted was quick to side with the man even without understanding the story. Anything not hold a man accountable was fine by him. And I said if that man appears before the federal court, he's not getting out free.

So tell me how that makes me an illiterate and how this your response full of hypothesis invalidates my submission.

Check the post you replied for update.

kazyhm:


Check the post you replied for update.

Sorry, I'm done with you. I'm not going to look out for your update like some mobile app. Just read carefully next time before you jump in to insult people. I only replied you cause I wanted to know the thought process of people like you.

Premiumwriter:
well if you can't prove it, then you have no right to say he did it.

Why should we take away the life of a man based on mere words?

But you can categorically say that he didn't, just because there was no definite proof that he did, even though the late poor raped girl attested to it before she died?

IamAsiri:


But you can categorically say that he didn't, just because there was no definite proof that he did, even though the late poor raped girl attested to it before she died?

how would you like to be convicted and sentenced to death if I said you killed my friend yesterday?

immortalcrown:
I am a man. Nothing justifies rape. Let us (men) learn to avoid every form of intimacy with ladies who either do not want us or are too young for us. Please. Rape allegations, in most cases, are false. But silly men do things that bring shame upon the male gender.

could you please direct us to where men are learning how to rape?

Brendaniel:
So the judiciary still failed to give justice to this young girl, for the son to still be at large tells a lot and for the courts to give conflicting sentences for the wife and the husband, finding the wife guilty of negligence of the actions of her husband against the girl that lead to her death and then finding the man not guilty of a crime his wife is been jailed for due to his actions against the same girl for the same case, does this even make sense?

And someone will tell me I should believe in the Nigerian judiciary system

justice without proof abi?
May same happen to the men in your life say amen

Cromagnon:
could you please direct us to where men are learning how to rape?

Could you explain why you consider this your question an appropriate response to my comment?

Cromagnon:
justice without proof abi?
May same happen to the men in your life say amen

Did you read the article at all, please go through it if you did not...

Premiumwriter:
how would you like to be convicted and sentenced to death if I said you killed my friend yesterday?

Maybe you go through my first statement and stop embarrassing yourself online.

IamAsiri:


Maybe you go through my first statement and stop embarrassing yourself online.

I think you're the one embarrassing yourself.

The girl in the video accused him. It is not a proof that he did it.

Anyone can accuse anyone. But it must be proven with evidence before the person can be convicted.

If he was caught molesting the girl on video that's different.

THE GIRL HAS DIED FOR NOTHING!

Premiumwriter:
I think you're the one embarrassing yourself.

The girl in the video accused him. It is not a proof that he did it.

Anyone can accuse anyone. But it must be proven with evidence before the person can be convicted.

If he was caught molesting the girl on video that's different.

I hope you saw that I didn't say that he did it. I only told you in the first place that you can't throw out a case in the court of law based on the fact that you presume the defendant is innocent alone, like you affirmatively said as if you were the defendant's lawyer (even if you were, it doesn't categorically state that he is) but also based on the fact that it couldn't be proven beyond reasonable doubt that he isn't. But I was surprised at your reply as a "premium writer"; I just felt you should know better (though case might be personal to you, it still doesn't mean that the man "didn't" rape her like you concluded. Nobody can know that side of the story except for the man himself, the late girl who indicted him before she died, and the other molester who is on the run). I wish you would understand my point again and not resort to wishing my enemy convicted. God bless you.

IamAsiri:


I hope you saw that I didn't say that he did it. I only told you in the first place that you can't throw out a case in the court of law based on the fact that you presume the defendant is innocent alone, like you affirmatively said as if you were the defendant's lawyer (even if you were, it doesn't categorically state that he is) but also based on the fact that it couldn't be proven beyond reasonable doubt that he isn't. But I was surprised at your reply as a "premium writer"; I just felt you should know better (though case might be personal to you, it still doesn't mean that the man "didn't" rape her like you concluded. Nobody can know that side of the story except for the man himself, the late girl who indicted him before she died, and the other molester who is on the run). I wish you would understand my point again and not resort to wishing my enemy convicted. God bless you.

stop trying to shame me into accepting your position.

What the little girl said in the video is mere accusations. It is not an admissible evidence that the man raped her.

And yes, you can throw out a case out of the court if there is insufficient evidence. It's not on the court or the accused to provide evidence.

In fact, cases are won because there is sufficient evidence or lost because of inadequate evidence.

Anything else beside this is corruption and injustice.