I reached these conclusions on the 28th February 2002 and since that
date this court has sat on a number of occasions to hear evidence on
behalf of the defence from witnesses who have attended to give
depositions. The American Government has also submitted evidence in
rebuttal.

I have received evidence on behalf of the Defence from a number of
witnesses, which I now summarize. Mr Morohundiya is an officer of the
National Drug Law Enforcement Agency in Nigeria, in the course of his
evidence he acknowledges that the defendant was an informant of the drug
agency and that he was aware of the existence of the defendant’s
brother, a man named Alhaji Adewale Adeshina Kashamu. “Alhaji” was a man
who was wanted by the agency for drugs offences. He told me that the
two brothers has a striking resemblance to each other. He also told me
about the policing of the border between Nigeria and Benin.

Maltre Claudine Mougni also gave evidence to me about the enforcement of border controls.

Reuben Nwako gave evidence to me as the former head of the
Directorate of Investigations of the National Drug Law Enforcement
Agency. He confirmed that the defendant had helped the Agency in
providing information as to the fighting of drug crime and that they
were also aware of Mr Kashamu’s brother, Adewale Kashamu, who was
regarded as a drug dealer.

Bagbonu Gaston the officer in charge of the Interpol Office in Benin
gave evidence about the defendant’s assistance to the police, and in
particular to the information he provided in relation to his brother and
those associated with him. He referred the documents dated 1993 and
1994. If those documents are valid documents there is clear evidence of
the assistance the defendant was providing. Mr Coleman on behalf of the
United States Government had to challenge those documents, making the
allegation that they had been fabricated and only recently inserted into
the archives of Interpol in Benin. I could find no evidence to support
that contention. I accept the evidence of Mr Gaston. That evidence,
coupled with the earlier evidence satisfies me that the defendant was
providing the Police and Drug Enforcement Agencies with information
about his brother and about the co-conspirators whose evidence of
identification forms the basis of the prosecution’s case.

To counter the evidence that the defendant was informing on his
brother and co-conspirators and to counter the suggestion that he has
been mistaken for his brother, the United States Government have
tendered in evidence three letters from the National Drug Law
Enforcement Agency dated 21st March 2001, 15th November 2001 and 8th May
2002. In these the Agency vehemently denies that the defendant was an
informant and maintains that Alhaji Adewale Adeshina Kashamu had died
before the defendant was wanted by the drug agency in 1994. It is
suggested that the defendant’s brother died whilst attempting to escape
from Customs in 1989. However, in the letter of the 8th May 2002 the
Agency acknowledges that Mr Adewale Kashamu had been properly issued
with a Nigerian passport in 1990 and that there was no evidence that he
died in the custody of Nigerian Customs. Other letters from the National
Drug Law Enforcement Agency acknowledge that Mr Kashamu was an
informant and that Alhaji Adewale Adeshina Kashamu was the subject of a
drug investigation which resulted in the closure of his motor car shop
in Lagos.

The Government seek to maintain that the defendant was not an
informant and that his brother died in 1989. The suggestion has been
put, but denied, that the letters retracting those allegations were
either forgeries or were written as a result of pressure from the
defendant, probably exerted by the defendant’s lawyer in Lagos. As to
the allegation that the letters were forgeries, I have received evidence
from handwriting experts. Mrs Maureen Ward Gandy on behalf of the
defendant concludes that the letters were “possibly” written by the same
writer but in the absence of any further evidence could not say they
were “most probably” written by the same writer. Mr Ada John Craske
examined the letters on behalf of the American Government and he is
unable to come to a conclusive decision.

On that inconclusive evidence from the handwriting experts, I cannot
be satisfied that the two “retraction” letters are forgeries. I
therefore have to look to the oral evidence that I have received from
the officers of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency. I have
concluded that the documents are authentic.

I then have to consider whether they are documents containing
statements of truth or whether pressure has been exerted upon the
officials which would cause them to write untruthful letters.

I have heard evidence from Mr Rafael Oluyede, who is Mr Kashamu’s
lawyer in Lagos. I have also read transcripts of interviews (currently
recorded) that he carried out in Lagos with officers of the National
Drug Law Enforcement Agency. I am satisfied that Mr Oluyedo put his
client’s case forcefully and indicated that High Court proceedings were
being contemplated. This may have provided a motive for writing
factually inaccurate letters.

The counter-argument advanced by the Defence is that similar but
different pressure was being exerted through the United States
Government’s agent in Lagos on the Agency to provide incriminating
letters.

I have been unable to resolve whether undue pressure was exerted
either by the United States Government or by the defendant. I therefore
looked at the provenance of the letters and in particular to the letters
produced by the Agency, allegedly being letters sent in 1993 and 1994
by the defendant. In respect of those documents I accept the evidence of
the various witnesses who have given evidence from the Enforcement
Agency and conclude that the letters were written by the defendant in
1993 and 1994.

As a result of the evidence that the Defence has placed before me and
the evidence which the Government has tendered in rebuttal, I find the
following facts:

1)That the defendant has a brother, Alhaji Adewale Adeshina Kashamu
who bears a striking resemblance to that of his brother, the defendant
before me.

2)That Burunji Kashamu was an informal to Interpol in Benin, Interpol
in Toga and to the National Law Drug Enforcement Agency in Nigeria.

3)He has provided that information since 1993 and has informed upon
his brother Alhaji Adewale Adeshima Kashamu and the co-conspirators
Fillmore and the Wolters sisters.

4)I am satisfied that Alhaji Adewale Adeshina Kashamu was not killed
in 1989 by Customs and I am satisfied that a bank account verified by
Alhaji’s address, passport and telephone numbers was being operated as
late as October 2000.

5)I am satisfied that the defendant had a proprietary interest in a
company known as Kasmal Company Limited which had a Daewoo car
dealership but I am satisfied from the documentary evidence that that
company was jointly directed by the defendant and his brother.

6)I have been provided with the dates on which the defendant was not
in the country of Benin but I found the evidence the relating to the
enforcement of the border between Nigeria and Benin unclear and
misleading. I have therefore attached little or no weight in it and
cannot reach any conclusions as to whether the meetings outlined by the
Wolters sisters could or could not have taken place.

In the light of these findings of fact, I have applied the following tests.

In relation to the abuse of process argument, the Defence have to
satisfy me that it is more likely than not that the United State
Government, through its agents, have acted in bad faith, in this case
knowingly bringing and continuing these proceedings when the Government
knew that the evidence it was putting forward was untrue and
misleading. I have found as a fact that certain of the assertions made
by the Government are untrue.

One significant example is in the evidence now before me is the claim
that Buruji Kashamu was not an informant. If the Government was aware
of that fact and persisted in putting forward such untruthful evidence,
it would plainly be evidence to support an abuse of process submission.
However, the evidence emanates from an Agency in Nigeria over which the
American Government has no authority. It is then passed to America and
then to this country and I cannot be satisfied that it was probable that
the Government knew that evidence was false. Although I, and no doubt
any trial judge, will be concerned at the lack of care by the United
State prosecuting authorities in examining and testing this evidence, I
am unable to conclude that the Defence have demonstrated that this was
probably done with the knowledge of the United States Government. In
those circumstances I do not find that there has been an abuse of
process.

I now turn to consider the submission that there is now no prime
facts case. I am applying the test agreed by Mr. Fitz Gerald and Mr.
Coleman that all the evidence taken as a whole must be sufficient to say
that there is a case to answer. Mr. Coleman points to my original
finding that the evidence originally tendered by the Government in those
proceedings amounted to a prime fact case when the Prosecution
concluded its case. He submits that the evidence I have now heard from
the Defense does not undermine the Identification evidence given by
Ellen Wolters and Catherine Wolters. Their evidence, he submits, is
still unequivocal and the evidence from the Defense merely gives rise to
issue on the credibility of their evidence which is essentially a
matter for the trial.

Ellen Wolters’ evidence is far from precise but she claims to have
met the man whom she knows as Alhaji sometime between January 1993 and
June 1995. On the basis of that meeting, in November 2000 she identifies
a photograph of the defendant as being the individual that she knows as
Alhaji. In my judgment the evidence of alleged voice recognition in
respect of the tape recording has no probative value whatsoever; indeed
there is no evidence of whose voice was recorded. Catherine Wolters
claims to have met Alhaji on one occasion in January 1993 and possibly
on another occasion in November 1993. She was asked to identify the
individual she knows as Alhaji in November 2000, some seven years after
she last saw him. For the reasons I gave earlier, I attach no weight to
the alleged recognition of a voice on a tape recording.

Against that evidence I have to weigh the facts that I have found
from the evidence adduced by the Defence. I am satisfied that the
defendant has a brother who bears a striking resemblance to him. The
brother was not killed in an incident with Customs in 1989 and his name
included the name Alhaji. I am satisfied that the defendant’s brother
was one of the co-conspirators in the drugs importation which involved
Catherine and Ellen Wolters. I am satisfied that the defendant informed
both Interpol and the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency of the
activities of this group

I am mindful of Mr Coleman’s submission that this is a matter of the
credibility of the identification witnesses which should essentially
remain a matter for a jury.

I am however satisfied that the overwhelming evidence here is such
that the identification evidence already tenuous , has now been so
undermined as to make it incredible and valueless. In those
circumstances there is then no prime facie case against the defendant
and I propose to discharge him.

Tim Workman

Designated District Judge

10 January 2003

Cull from Elombah.com

Dat guy has been under d radar since den...

In relation to the abuse of process argument, the Defence have to
satisfy me that it is more likely than not that the United State
Government, through its agents, have acted in bad faith, in this case
knowingly bringing and continuing these proceedings when the Government
knew that the evidence it was putting forward was untrue and
misleading. I have found as a fact that certain of the assertions made
by the Government are untrue.



It is a shame that most Nigerians who are calling for Kashamu's extradition to the US are very ignorant of the case. The bolded part from the UK court judgement says it all. Only deranged Nigerians will clamour for Kashamu to go and stand trial in a country where he will never get a fair trial. The UK is an unbiased party in this matter and the above judgement shows clearly that the Americans case against Kashamu was build on tissue of lies and deceit.

My only question is, why do you think USA want Kashamu behind bar if he's not guilty of the offence?

Besides, that he was not found guilty in UK for some flaws made by the prosecuting team does not necessarily mean that Kashamu is not guilty really.

This Case

PassingShot:
My only question is, why do you think USA want Kashamu behind bar if he's not guilty of the offence?

Besides, that he was not found guilty in UK for some flaws made by the prosecuting team does not necessarily mean that Kashamu is not guilty really.

This is just Nigerian Politics for you.
Scape-goat are been lead to the altar when the new administration has not started
Which country will extradite her own citizen to be prosecuted on a case which has already been judge.

PassingShot:
My only question is, why do you think USA want Kashamu behind bar if he's not guilty of the offence?

Besides, that he was not found guilty in UK for some flaws made by the prosecuting team does not necessarily mean that Kashamu is not guilty really.

American prosecutors build their career on the amount of convictions that they get. Once you are their target, they go all out to get you convicted whether you are guilty or not. The prosecutors in the UK did not make any mistake. They had a bad case and resulted to hiding key evidence and outright lies. The above judgement should tell you that Kashamu will never get a fair trial in the US. NDLEA should prosecute him in Nigeria if they have any case against him.

Impressive, this extradition hearing will be interesting to say the least. This already looks like advantage Buruji

atlwireles:
Impressive, this extradition hearing will be interesting to say the least. This already looks like advantage Buruji

exactly!
OBJ, Tinubu and Co are just after this man; forgetting that he is a senator elect.
I think it is time his people rise up to his defence.

comos:

exactly!
OBJ, Tinubu and Co are just after this man; forgetting that he is a senator elect.
I think it is time his people rise up to his defence.

Most Nigerians are too emotional to look at the facts of the case and see the hiding truth. Most people already found him guilty in their minds without any second taught that he might be innocent of the allegations. Only very few people can really stand up for him as it is now.