Forgery: Trial of ex-LAUTECH staffer stalls as counsel disagree over admissibility of evidence
Disagreement over admissibility of an uncertified public document has stalled the ongoing trial of an ex-staffer of Ladoke Akintola University of Technology Teaching Hospital, Osogbo, Jimoh Basirat, who is facing trial for allegedly forging a certificate of Ordinary National Diploma, OND, which she presented to the management of the hospital.
Basirat, a ward assistant at the hospital, was slammed with six count charge bothering on forgery, conspiracy and fraud, had earlier approached an Osun State High Court to challenge her dismissal, but Justice Yinka Aderibigbe,had struck out the matter out on technical ground.
She was later dragged before an Osogbo Chief Magistrate Court by the management of Lautech teaching hospital for forgery of her ND result with which she allegedly earned promotion in the organisation.
At the resume hearing of the matter, Mrs. Oyindamola Daramola, head of legal department of the hospital, under cross examination by counsel to the accuse person, Barrister Yinka Muyiwa, stated that though she recognised the letter written by the hospital to the management of Osun state Polytechnic, Iree requesting verification of result presented by the accused, but added that she was not the author of the letter.
The trial was however brought to abrupt end, when Muyiwa pleaded with the court to admit the letter written to Ospoly by Lautech authorities to demand verification of the accused person’s result as evidence.
Prosecusion counsel, Barrister Moses Faremi, however opposed the move, insisting that admitting the letter would contravene dictate of Evidence Act, because it was not a certified copy.
But counsel to the accused, Barrister Muyiwa, urged the court to disregard the claim of the prosecution and admit the letter because of its relevance to the matter, saying it would also allow the case to progress without further delay.
0 Response to "Forgery: Trial of ex-LAUTECH staffer stalls as counsel disagree over admissibility of evidence"
Post a Comment