₦airaland Forum

the custom chief can't trace the line, why report a case you can't remember the details when you are the principal witness/petitioner. I smell, someone should watch his back.

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

The day we make it clear that there isn't any difference between big and small thief, is the day we will begin to get it most right in this battle against corruption!

It is still enough because it was the PA that collected the money and the P A answer for himself unless there is a phone conversation that the CCT chair directed the petitioner to pay the money into the PA's account. Again, if you are xtian or conversant with the bible remember the Gehazi and Elisha story!

hmmm...

senatorbayor:
If truly the EFCC made such pronouncement, I feel its not encouraging to the fight against corruption.

Alleging that the evidence were not substantial enough is a decoy. what they need to have done was to invite the petitioner and the PA to Danaldi for questioning, take their statements and take up the matter from there.

Since the PA had admitted taking the money from Mr rasheed who was standing trial is enough evidence to prosecute the PA who will now tell the EFCC if his boss was in the picture or not.

Downplaying such accusation to me is not too healthy for our fight against corruption.

The EFCC is not a court of law to pronounce that an evidence or allegation brought before it is not substantial.

I look up to a situation where any one who also present frivolous allegations without base in order to score cheap political point or otherwise is prosecuted for such act. May be this will curtail such frivolities and distractions for our public officers who are ready to discharge their duties in line with the constitutional provisions.

the efcc might not be a court of law, but no security outfit is compelled to take all cases to court for prosecution, if the evidence is not substantial enough, you discard it so as not to waste resources.
however, on this case, I dey confused myself, because the dots seems not to be on a straight line.

OYAY:
It is still enough because it was the PA that collected the money and the P A answer for himself unless there is a phone conversation that the CCT chair directed the petitioner to pay the money into the PA's account. Again, if you are xtian or conversant with the bible remember the Gehazi and Elisha story!

You made sense there. Problem is, a little more grilling will get the PA to spill it out. There's a connect.

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

The day we make it clear that there isn't any difference between big and small thief, is the day we will begin to get it most right in this battle against corruption!

If you read well, the person to be tried is the PA not him

MathsChic:
Lol thanks

i fine pass u.

lordmayor4:
If you read well, the person to be tried is the PA not him

Yes boss, I concur. Only I kind of feel that there may be a connect somewhere between the PA and his boss. He might have acted on instructions.

drss:
i fine pass u.

I'm sure you are

thefakestan:
U can get it from d network


If the phone was lost i'm sure the network providers have records of text messages and call, plus if the commission is serious about it they can retrieve it.




ThefakeStan

My guy dont fall for d gimmick


Since buhari took over tell me 1 person who seem to take side with him that has been getting invitation letter from efcc?

free2ryhme:
Dandeson1, u saw a pic of a girl showing you what she expects you to see and you type those words out of insecurity . You r such a daft

you are sickening

I'm a girl proud of her looks and sexuality

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

The day we make it clear that there isn't any difference between big and small thief, is the day we will begin to get it most right in this battle against corruption!

Can you please cook up another story and file another petition against him... Awon eleregbe

HzRF:
My guy dont fall for d gimmick


Since buhari took over tell me 1 person who seem to take side with him that has been getting invitation letter from efcc?

Well I was only stating the obvious, if the. Judiciary is compromised then we are in deep mess, because that's suppose to be the last point of call for every citizen.


ThefakeStan

MathsChic:
I'm sure you are

finer than micheal jackson himself. If u see me u will fall down n faint in slow motion.

drss:
finer than micheal jackson himself. If u see me u will fall down n faint in slow motion.

Lool. Slow motion? Christ!
Funny pic on profile though. I think i have that disorder, i must confess.

MathsChic:
Lool. Slow motion? Christ!
Funny pic on profile though. I think i have that disorder, i must confess.

my own case is worse. Cant spend 5 minutes without internet. Right now to go n bath is a problem.

MathsChic:
Okay. Don't prosecute him and continue to encourage a corrupt public sector.

How mathematical are u?

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

We are talking about the law here and the law doesn't give room for assumptions, sentiments, emotions, perception but facts. Hard facts!!!
So if your staff uses your name/company name to defraud a customer, then you agree that we should just arrest you and sentence you to jail in place of your staff??

a little more grilling will get the PA to spill it out. There's a connect somewhere.

This is what you should advocate and not the assumption that doesn't hold water you displayed above.

alfred5:
Supreme Court stops Saraki's trial.

for your dream?

simplisity:
How mathematical are u?

Very, actually. I love maths and sorta do it everyday at work.

MathsChic:
Very, actually. I love maths and sorta do it everyday at work.

I like competing, to cheer up my brain.

OlujobaSamuel:
the efcc might not be a court of law, but no security outfit is compelled to take all cases to court for prosecution, if the evidence is not substantial enough, you discard it so as not to waste resources.
however, on this case, I dey confused myself, because the dots seems not to be on a straight line.

on your last submissions. (" I dey confused myself, because the dots seems not to be on a straight line"
I rest my case and that is the crux

simplisity:
I like competing, to cheer up my brain.

then you should visit the maths thread, interesting problems every other day.

MathsChic:
then you should visit the maths thread, interesting problems every other day.

Yes, always a problem to solve.

War start!!!!!

PDP DEY SMELL ABEG! DANLADI TAKE A BOW AND GO! Discharge the innocents and convict the guity.Suspicion does not exist in the eyes of the law. O YE WAILERS YOUR SADNESS IS OUR HAPPINESS!
Deal With It Or Die With It!
The Truth Has Spoken!No Lie Only Truth!

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

The day we make it clear that there isn't any difference between big and small thief, is the day we will begin to get it most right in this battle against corruption!

a little more grilling will get the PA to spill it out. There's a connect somewhere.

You don't understand evidence.

Dandeson1:
my God, Ur beauty is overwhelming; D

You sure say na the beauty dey overwhelming abi na booby dem sample you dey burst your brain?

malton:
If this isn't sufficient evidence, what then is?

Seems this people want to tow GEJ's line of "...Money not even up to the price of Peugeot" thought.

The day we make it clear that there isn't any difference between big and small thief, is the day we will begin to get it most right in this battle against corruption!

a little more grilling will get the PA to spill it out. There's a connect somewhere.

Relax and use your brain!

If everyone was to be convicted on "hear-say", your GEJ and Allisson Madueke will be in prison by now!


*That Abdullahi is not the same person as Judge Umar Danladi
*That Adullahi received money does not equate to Judge Umar receiving it
*Merely accusing the Judge of being the one who asked him to collect the money is not enough evidence! Anyone can make a "claim"
*Evidence collected using "torture", is not admissible in court
*That the accuser (that Customs man) claimed to have "lost the evidence" is not the Judges fault! He killed his case himself
*To prosecute a Judge, who is currently exposed to a trial that is being turned "political"..... you need solid evidence otherwise the case will not only collapse in court, you will be forced to pay Hundreds of Millions of damages for tarnishing the image/reputation of that Judge!


Once again, "relax and think about it"...... put your "feelings/emotions" aside for a minute.

We just need to be "smart" about evidence gathering because it is only EVIDENCE that can "nail" the so-called "Big thief"!
Remember they have enough money to hire "smart Lawyers"...... not illiterates like me and you!
And the Law is all about "smart and legal arguments"

Everyday for the thief, one day for the owner. We are watching them



Lastpage!

malton:
Yes boss, I concur. Only I kind of feel that there may be a connect somewhere between the PA and his boss. He might have acted on instructions.

The boss can easily deny. That's why it's good to always have it on paper than any other means. Phone talks can even be denied

MathsChic:
Okay. Don't prosecute him and continue to encourage a corrupt public sector.

This is not about encouragement, but witch-hunt. Are now defending the CCT chairman?