IamV:


The court have held that the ruling on the objections will be delivered on the final day.
.

Okutekpa SAN then notes that the FAYEMI case, there was a mistake, that it is 2008 8 NWLR (PT. 1089) and not 2019 as cited before. He apologizes.

IamV:


The Court:

The Court have now admitted the Flash Drive and tagged it Exhibit PBH3.

As the court pleases.

IamV:


Note that the drive above was for one (PBH1), they are now tendering the second with respect to PBH2.

Now to objection;

1st Respondent:
No objections

2nd and 3rd Respondents:
No objections

4th Respondent:
No objections

garfield1:


Lol lol lol.mistakes upon mistakes from obi's team.cc penguin2.obi will fail

Error that has been rectified instantly, with the Court acknowledgement is making you happy? Is this the defense you are hoping on?

Chai!! .. Lamidi Garfield1 Apapa...give us tangible sceneries, your points are stale as rotten Amala...spits

garfield1:


Lol lol lol.mistakes upon mistakes from obi's team.cc penguin2.obi will fail

M4A1carbine:
Error that has been rectified instantly, with the Court acknowledgement is making you happy? Us this the defense you are hoping on?

Chai!! .. Lamidi Garfield1 Apapa...give us tangible sceneries, your points are stale as rotten Amala...spits

M4A1carbine:
Error that has been rectified instantly, with the Court acknowledgement is making you happy? Is this the defense you are hoping on?

Chai!! .. Lamidi Garfield1 Apapa...give us tangible sceneries, your points are stale as rotten Amala...spits

Ddeliverer007:


I really don’t understand. You know what’s right, but you are happy to support what’s wrong? I really don’t understand you people.

Reinaldo:
Peter Obi is coming

M4A1carbine:
Error that has been rectified instantly, with the Court acknowledgement is making you happy? Us this the defense you are hoping on?

Chai!! .. Lamidi Garfield1 Apapa...give us tangible sceneries, your points are stale as rotten Amala...spits

tinsel:

Obi is just playing to the gallery.

M4A1carbine:
When a Yoruba man uses an IGBO moniker to push narratives, know that it's CORNfused and senile. No time to engage losers

sonature1:
LP lawyers haven't even said a word about all the CTC tendered in evidence. I thought they would even use figures to show how Peter Obi won.

IamV:


The Court:

The second flash drive tendered is now admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibit PBH4.

^{As the court pleases.}

garfield1:


If the court allows the witness to testify,by the time he is done,lp time is up today.same delay tactics will continue till obi time lapse

emmanuelbrown26:
Na we dey here. See as body dey pepper dem
Go to court!!
Go to court!!!!
LP dun go court una still dey get sleepless night.

garfield1:


But I told you na that they are dumping evidence in court.from the case so far,they have abandoned all other grounds and what to focus on substantial irregularities

Loonyy:


At least This Boy is Giving Una Sleepless Night

jnrbayano:


A tacit admittance of wrongdoing from INEC and APC that necessitated them play a dirty tactics to try to subvert justice

Delay tactics won't stop the inevitable

Peter Obi is coming

IamV:


The court have held that the ruling on the objections will be delivered on the final day.


[b]Okutekpa SAN then notes that the FAYEMI case, there was a mistake, that it is 2008 8 NWLR (PT. 1089) and not 2019 as cited before. He apologizes

IamV:


Okutekpa SAN:

He now applies that Exhibit PBH3 (first drivel) to be played and that the head of technical and head of INEC server Ikwueto SAN , put on the device and play it.

2nd and 3rd Respondents:

They object to the playing of the drive on the basis that no copy have been Served on the respondents and cannot be able to prepare for it. That they are entitled to be served for them to play it and know the content. And until they are served, they object to it.

Pinhero SAN for INEC:

They are indifferent from their side (for the first time).
That the evidence is before the court and see no reason why it should not be played.

4th Respondent:

They align with 2nd and 3rd Respondents, that they should be served to enable them prepare for cross-examination.

SangoOlukosoOba:
The rainy season is fast approaching! Peter should channel this financial wastage into maize farming.

Lukepeter:
Why wasn't the video provided to the other respondent much earlier?

They have nothing to prosecute their part of the proceedings, just useless delay tactics. This tactic has also been highlighted by Alhaji Alfa Lamidi Garfield1 Apapa .. Nairaland'lead Counsel's for Agbadorian rodents

IamV:


Okutekpa SAN:

He now applies that Exhibit PBH3 (first drivel) to be played and that the head of technical and head of INEC server Ikwueto SAN , put on the device and play it.

2nd and 3rd Respondents:

They object to the playing of the drive on the basis that no copy have been Served on the respondents and cannot be able to prepare for it. That they are entitled to be served for them to play it and know the content. And until they are served, they object to it.

Pinhero SAN for INEC:

They are indifferent from their side (for the first time).
That the evidence is before the court and see no reason why it should not be played.

4th Respondent:

They align with 2nd and 3rd Respondents, that they should be served to enable them prepare for cross-examination.

IamV:


Okutekpa SAN:

He noted that the objection is most misconceived as the drive must be played in open court. He refers the court to PEO Memo.
He noted that they listed it and are not obligated to play it. That it must be played before they even think of cross+examination or not.
He refers the court to GEO MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER & ORS. V. NATIONAL DIRECTORATE OF EMPLOYMENT (2013) LPELR-20796 (CA) AT 33-34

'that is a complete misconception of the law regarding audio cassette.
it must be played in open court.
when that is done, opportunity is given for cross-examination.

[ The court holds that the case is not in line with the objection ]

IamV:


Okutekpa SAN:

He now applies that Exhibit PBH3 (first drivel) to be played and that the head of technical and head of INEC server Ikwueto SAN , put on the device and play it.

2nd and 3rd Respondents:

They object to the playing of the drive on the basis that no copy have been Served on the respondents and cannot be able to prepare for it. That they are entitled to be served for them to play it and know the content. And until they are served, they object to it.

Pinhero SAN for INEC:

They are indifferent from their side (for the first time).
That the evidence is before the court and see no reason why it should not be played.

4th Respondent:

They align with 2nd and 3rd Respondents, that they should be served to enable them prepare for cross-examination.