Sahara Reporters has it that Mr. Kamorudeen Bankole appeared in a confident manner. A manner in contrast to his prior ‘shaken’ court appearance, one in which reports went viral of his alleged assault on his wife, though he had admitted to his wife's family that he committed a brutal assault, and had promised to make restitution. Yet, his court actions today portrayed a total change of his intentions.
When his case was called at the Badagry Magistrate Court- Lagos state, his lawyer, Mr. Olaleye, had made a scrambled submission to the court. Olaleye had asked the court to grant his client “an assurance of protection” against what he called, “unfair media reporting of the proceedings”, and civil society's involvement in the case.
He said his client felt “intimidated” by the involvement of both civil society and the media. He cited unfair media reportage in publications on this odd story, and had alleged ‘public persecution’ of his client by open public comments on the pending case.
He ended his court submission in the hope that the court would grant his client total censorship of media coverage, and also, civil society’s involvement in the case. The attorney stated to the court that it was only a matter "between a husband and a wife".
Information had earlier leaked-out that Mr. Bankole had threatened to isolate Mrs. Fatima Bankole, the victim in this case, from civil society protections and media coverage. The threat, the leak implied, was one so as to ‘railroad and further punish’ her. The actions of his lawyer for many sitting in the courtroom today, may have proved the earlier leaked information right. However, it did not go as attorney Olaleye had planned.
Responding to the application, the presiding magistrate scoffed at the defense counsel over what the judge called, “the subverting of the court's attention", from substance in the matter. In short, the judge countered, it was a move to engage the court with Olaleye’s sentiments against the activities of the media, and civil society's concerns.
Although the magistrate enlightened Mr. Olaleye that extant laws permit the sharing and publishing of information, he also called for his “presentation of proof” that both the media, and civil society's activities had caused his client unwarranted public commentary in this case.
Olaleye failed to provide the publications he said had hurt his client, to back his argument in court.
Meanwhile, aside from alleging public "persecution" of Mr. Kamorudeen for the attack act on his wife, the counsel also accused an unknown public figure of sending threatening text messages that, he said, were sent to his client's phone.
In the end, Mr. Olaleye also did not provide evidence of the alleged text message threats. Nor did he provide information to the court that would lead to technical tracing of the text notes.
No comments:
Post a Comment