Court acquits Agbem, Yaasa of kidnap charges, says NPF didn't prove case beyond reasonable doubts

By Our Reporter

The Benue State High Court 3 has acquitted the Chairman, TAP Group of Companies, Mr Terwase Agbem and Mson Yaasa, since the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) had failed to prove their case of prima facie against them.

The trial Judge, Justice Maurice Ikpambese handed down the judgment on Tuesday in Makurdi.

Ikpambese discharged the defendants based on the merit of the case.  The judge further observed that media trial of suspects should be discouraged.

The judge held that the NPF tutored the witnesses to lie in the case brought against the defendants, stating that they lied that the defendants attempted to kidnap the Bursar of Joseph Sarwuan Tarka University Makurdi (JOSTUM), Benue State, Mr Emmanuel Timothy.

The persecuting counsel called four witnesses, PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4 to back up his claim against the defendants with documentary evidence tendered and were rejected for non compliance with section 19/2 of state administration of Criminal Justice Law 2019.

At the close of the prosecution of the counsel case, Counsel to  Agbem and Yaasa, Chief Fidelis Nomor raised the objection of "No case submission" formulating a singular issue for determination which was, whether the prosecutor had submitted enough evidence to compel the defendants to enter their defense.

Also, the defense counsel in his submission made reference to all the evidence of the witnesses and asked the court to discharge the accused.

In determining the main issue submitted by the counsel, the judge held that it is important to reproduce section 345/3 of the state administration of criminal justice law of.

The court held that it should be noted that prima facie case was not proved. The court did not find the defendants guilty. The evidence showing prima facie case was such that if  "uncontradicted" and if "Believed" it would have been sufficient enough to prove a case against the defendants.

The Court was surprised that the witness who broke the news of the alleged plan to kidnap the Bursar does not know the first defendant who was masterminding the plan to execute the kidnapping neither did he prove material involvement of the first defendant aside hearing that he had sent N105,000 to Chula the POS operator.

From cross examination, the court wondered whether the police arrested the defendants at unnamed filling station or at Halleydays Hotel in Makurdi.

The PW1 denied knowledge of the phone number used to transact kidnapping business with the first defendant  and the police also failed to check with the network operators the communication of PW1 and the first defandant.

The  court also held that the Police did not summon courage to bring Chula in whose POS the money was sent and received by the PW1 and the first defendant, also the Police did not investigate the record of the POS with the bank to find out how monies were sent and received by the PW1 if actually it was a true confession.

The court held therefore, that the Police didn't show thorough evidence to establish a prima facie case against the defendant for failing to do their job properly.

The PW1 even denied knowing PW2, the Police investigator, Inspector Odoko who is attached to Operation Zenda JTF.   PW2 stated that on the 21st day he was on Duty at operation Zenda JTF headquarters when Inspector Achaku came with PW1  and said the defendant were planning kidnapping and on the directives of CSP Gberindyer they mobilized and arrested the defendant.

The PW2 also denied meeting the Bursar which he was investigating his case. The busrar also denied any form of threat to release money or be kidnapped. PW3 also denied that the Bursar was threatened. He said that it was Gberindyer that went to the university to break the news to the Bursar that there were plans to kidnap him.

The court held that having thoroughly examined the evidence given by PW1 PW2 PW3 and PW4 apart from being contradictory as well as conflicting and no reasonable tribunal would use it to convict anyone.

The Police investigated the case and PW2 and PW3 testified at their instance and it shows that they conspired with PW1 and yet still failed to prove their Case.

The court asked who granted PW1 amnesty, stressing that he confessed before it that he was a kidnapper? Whether it was the governor of Benue State or who? The judge asked the police to prosecute PW1 or he would take it up with them personally.

"I have no doubt in my mind that the whole case is masterminded by the Police, and a cry of wolf wolf by the Police should not be taken seriously, PW1 PW2 PW3 story which they gave is contradictory and does not hold water to convict the defendants," he said.

On the second charge of threat to hostage taking was clearly denied by the Bursar who should have given evidence to show that he was threatened by the defendant. The court held that the man was not threatened at all but the Police carried that news.