maclatunji:

1. The woman was initially charged to court for Manslaughter based on on the old Lagos State Road Traffic Law 2003.

2. The Prosecutor says: "Biko, I don't like the charge" and he withdraws it probably because he knows he cannot win that case. However, he believes that Yinka drove recklessly and has decided to charge her for that crime:

The new charge read, “That you Yinka Johnson ‘on August 10, at about 8:30am at Mega Chicken, Ikota Ajah expressway Lekki, Lagos did drive your Land Rover Jeep with registration No- CY 276 LSD on the highway recklessly by driving your vehicle against oncoming vehicle and without reasonable consideration for other road users and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 7(b) of the Lagos State Road Traffic Law 2012.”

This new charge is based on the new Lagos State Road Traffic Law 2012.

3. Yinka's lawyer was arguing that the new law was not yet being implemented on August 10 when the said offence occured:

Attempts by the lawyer of the accused, Emeka Okpoko to argue that his client cannot be charged under the new traffic law as it is yet to be enforced proved abortive.

Mr Okpoko argued that various publications in some newspapers gave the impression that the law was yet to take effect as government planned to carry out public enlightenment on the said law before implementing it.

4. Judge says "shut-up" Yinka's Lawyer, the new law was in effect at the time of the alleged crime and can be used against Yinka (August 10, 2012):
The trial Magistrate, Jacob Adegun ruled that the Prosecution has the right to substitute the charge under the law.

I agree with the judge (I am not a lawyer but I am not ignorant ).

This is why: Fashola signs Lagos Road Traffic Bill into law http://www.vanguardngr.com/2012/08/fashola-signs-lagos-road-traffic-bill-into-law/ on August 2, 2012.

Wilfred_ng:
"Feeling" for her is what I don't understand here. She earlier got released over this case. Now more fingers points on her from another direction. It is very possible that Mrs Johnson has some questions to answer on that case.

Those Nigerians on costly JEEPS have their way of forcing through traffic. After all, they can pay it off in court. Let her face it, so others can learn. That's my take on this!

Subsidize Garri:

Shattap jor!!

Too much high handedness by the mods led to this..

If you cant tell civil disobedience when you see one, then you must still be a juvenile..

Seun needs to address the concerns of the Garri activists..

Imagine what use to be only about 5 - 10 people spreading like wild fire and Seun thinks banning everybody is the solution..

If he doesnt handle this matter well, the GARRI movement may just be the death of Nairaland as we know it..

Never in my over 7 years on Nairaland has there been an uprising like this before.. Not even the complaints during Nairaland migration from the old site to the New site compares..

This movement was brought about by the constant disregard for Nairalanders and their requests.. We are Nairaland. The posters cant be treated like dirt forever.. Now its time to stick it to the man.

Vox Populi, Vox dei. The voice of the people is the voice of God!

This is the time for negotiations not Antagonism..

#LongLiveGarri

justokey: I agree she should face the law. But lawyers in the house please bail me out...Can she be tried with this new law since she committed the offence before the law was signed and gazatted?

justokey: I agree she should face the law. But lawyers in the house please bail me out...Can she be tried with this new law since she committed the offence before the law was signed and gazatted?

texazzpete:

Your take is silly and betrays your Poverty mentality. Why single out Nigerians driving costly jeeps? There are far more Nigerians driving cheaper sedans that take the one-way option. This your complaint about rich people may very well be a Freudian slip.

hardbody:

The old law can be referenced into the new law and by 'savings' the new law will take over the provisions of the repealed law. What the law frowns at is to make a law operative in retrospect. In simple terms, YES, if i was the prosecution, i will contest vigorously that she can be tried on the new law, so long as teh transition is captured vides teh opeartion of 'savings'.

However, this is not to say that i agree with the facts of the case, i have never really been interested in reading the matter up. If her hands are not clean, let the law take its course. However, i find it difficult to sympathize with the LASTMA guy, those buf00ns should all be killed off.

Wilfred_ng:
"Feeling" for her is what I don't understand here. She earlier got released over this case. Now more fingers points on her from another direction. It is very possible that Mrs Johnson has some questions to answer on that case.

Those Nigerians on costly JEEPS have their way of forcing through traffic. After all, they can pay it off in court. Let her face it, so others can learn. That's my take on this!

ejunkie:
Ideally, wrong-doers should face the law straight. However this case is far from straight forward.

3. The new law was signed on the 2nd, August but only gazzeted in the last week of August. This incident occured on the 10th. So the law is not applicable because;
3.1 The law can not be applied before it is Gazzeted .
3.2 The state ministry of transport announced the law will commence from September. Here is an article quoting the Deputy Gov. and Attorney General of the state attesting to that fact - http://www.vanguardngr.com/2012/08/new-lagos-traffic-law-now-operational/

ejunkie:
4. This one way offence is debatable, as that is what the estate residents have to do to cross the road since the construction started. Why didnt Lastma put a warning there for drivers to desist. No, jump in front of the posh looking cars why don't you. (see attached pictures of how drivers drive the one way to cross the road). I am not saying it is right. But if state construction, creates a potential for reckless driving, should the state not provide adequate warnings and signs?

ejunkie:
5. Finally, if the state wants to make an example of everybody, then the state should stop this witch hunt against this woman and start with the Lastma Officials that swore false testimony then we will all know for a fact that the law is being upheld. A woman's reputation has been damaged and she has suffered detention in Panti for days and no one goes unpunished? truly we hail Nigeria. Eko o ni o ti fe' ba'a je'

ejunkie: @ Akainzo

As i mentioned earlier the case is debatable.

You failed to address the fact that the State itself announced that the law was not enforceable till September 1. Following this, you cannot retro-actively enforce a law. That in itself voids the application of the law in this case.

ejunkie: With regards to the traffic offence charge, if the charge cannot be dropped after putting her through such an ordeal, then where is fairness in justice? Where is our humanity?? We might as well apply the law of the Jungle.

ejunkie: You mentioned that she should press charges against the Lastma officials....well, name 1 case where an average memeber of the Nigerian public has pressed charges against public authority and won.
Lets not talk like our heads are in the sand. [/bold]

ejunkie: Everyday, people's lives, rights and well being are being violated by the authorities we look to for protection. The only reason why shes not still sleeping in Panti was because of the public outcry and all the eye witness that came forward to refute the Lastma false accusations.

The bottom line is, the woman has been through enough. What the state is now doing is being the worst bully on the block.

"Feeling" for her is what I don't understand here. She earlier got released over this case. Now more fingers points on her from another direction. It is very possible that Mrs Johnson has some questions to answer on that case.

Those Nigerians on costly JEEPS have their way of forcing through traffic. After all, they can pay it off in court. Let her face it, so others can learn. That's my take on this!

Akainzo:

I am aware that Fashola stated explicitly on signing the bill that it takes immediate effect. The only way it would take effect at any later time than when signed into law, is if there is a provision in the law itself for a future enforcement. In this case, there was none, thus the law took immediate effect upon being signed into law.



If you were OJ Simpson's relative, would you have abandoned the civil case that found him guilty? Does being falsely accused of another charge remove you from the one you actually committed?



Yeah, sure I can, do you remember the case of Miss Uzoma Okere , you can read it up here: https://www.nairaland.com/468031/assault-arogundade-navy-lose-appeal



Everyday also, people's lives, rights and well being are being violated by ordinary well to do people who take the laws into their hands jsut because they have money and can get away with it. There is no sentiments in this issue, she drove against traffic, that is an offence, both under the old law and the new law. It is therefore surprising that you'd be asking for her to walk free after breakinhg the law while asking for the same government to be stedfast in implementing the laws to protect its citizens.

ejunkie:

I knew you would reference the Naval case. She only won cause Fashola did PR with her case. I am happy he did though, because it benefited a hapless citizen, but that certainly doesn't prove that an average person can challenge the authorities and win.

Fact still remains that there's massive grounds for compassion in the application of the law. If robbers and killers in our nation are going scott free in the face of the law just cause of money an connection...then the state should do right and let her off after her ordeal. Yes, it may sound foreign to you but the law is actually supposed to be compassionate in cases such as this.

After all, if she had money or connection, this wont be happening.