A High Court at the Federal Capital Territory rejected forensic documents and other exhibits sought to be admitted against Lawal in the trial.
The Judge held that both EFCC and the defendants did not dispute the fact that the documents were generated through computer but said that Section 84 of the Evidence Act, which relates to admission of such documents were not complied with by EFCC.
Lawal had told the court that the forensic laboratory report generated from the computer was not admissible in law because they were not in their original form and not certified as required by law. He had argued that the printed hardcopy obtained from the Compact Disc is not the original source but the iPhone.
John Itodo, counsel for the second defendant, Napoleon Idenala, counsel for the third defendant, Ocholi Okutepa, counsel for the fourth and sixth defendant, Emmanuel Oru, counsel for the fifth defendant all aligned themselves with Olujimi’s submission and adopted it as their arguments.
From the onset, it was obvious nothing will come out of the trial.