Three policemen and four persons in Akwa Ibom State are to die by hanging for kidnapping, the state High Court in Uyo handed down the death sentence to the victims.
The court presided by Justice Joy Unwana (extended jurisdiction) convicted Cpl Emmanuel Charlie, Cpl Bassey Sunday (377812) and PC Mfon Bassey (478463) for the offence.
Other convicts are Ekaette Edet Moses, Fidelis Emmanson Jeremiah, Ndu Okon Johnny and Unyime Edem Etukakpan.
The fourth convict- a woman hired by the gang for N50,000 to cook for the victim, Deaconess Ime Anietie Ekanem, while they negotiated for her ransom- was also sentenced to death.
The state instituted suit No. HU/13c/2012 against eight members of the gang in 2012.
They were convicted on all three count charges of conspiracy to commit felony, kidnapping and counseling, aiding and sponsoring kidnapping.
According to Mrs. Itohowo Akpakwa, the 8th accused in her the confessional statement admitted as exhibit, confessed to visiting her friend in a bar at Idakeyop Aka where she gave the 7th accused, Unyime Edem Etukakpan money to buy medicine for his ill health. Etukakpan, however, was freed.
Though Akpakwa denied knowledge of the plot to kidnap her friend and neighbour, no fewer than three other members of the gang told court that they did not know her name at the time she visited the final meeting at Aka.
They insisted that she was the one who identified her friend and gave direction to her house in Obio Etoi village, Uyo.
It was learnt that the victim was dragged out of the Toyota Sienna car driven by the husband, in front of the family house at about 6.30 p.m. and whisked into a Volvo Wagon Car to Afaha Udoeyop in Ibesikpo Asutan local government area where she was kept, under armed guards, in an isolated building pending agreement and payment of ransom.
The anti-kidnapping unit of the state CID swung into action as telephone negotiations between the kidnappers and the victim’s husband brought down the initial demand from more than N20 million to about N1.8 million to be paid on two instalments.
Plain-clothed operatives of the State CID were shocked to discover that the first two persons who approached the Afaha Ibesikpo Market square, venue for the ransom delivery were their colleagues at the state CID.
Shortly after the encounter, the change in venue for delivery of the ransom was relayed to the husband of the victim by phone.
Police investigation report, it was gathered, indicated that after thrice changing venue, the first instalment of N800,000 was delivered at Itam in another local government area.
The 8th and only accused who escaped the capital punishment, Mrs. Itohowo Akpakwa- a staff of the University of Uyo, was earlier granted bail. Samuel Ikpo Esq counsel to Mrs. Akpakwa had insisted that there was no reason his client should languish in prison when there was no direct evidence linking her to the commission of the alleged crime.
Her bail was secured when Ikpo successfully argued that in the absence of a prima facie evidence against his client, it was baseless and punitive to curtail her freedom. In spite of persistent argument to the contrary by Eyo Asuquo Esq for state, insisting that Mrs. Akpakwa was the ‘woman’ mentioned by other suspects, the court was not persuaded, and therefore had no grounds to deny her bail.
Reviewing arguments on both side, Justice (Mrs) Joy Unwana noted that evidence of most suspects was that the woman who attended their meeting at Aka before the kidnap operation was the one who identified the victim, and also supplied information about her residence and movement. It noted that two state witnesses (policemen) also confirmed to court that they heard from suspects that the 8th accused supplied information and also identified the victim.
In her judgment, she further echoed the position of Samuel Ikpo, who pointed out that hearsay evidence by state witnesses must not only be discountenance, but that of other suspects who did not mention the name of his client.
Furthermore, the court held that it was convinced by Ikpo’s position that in the failure of police to conduct Identification Parade to give other suspects the opportunity to identify the ‘woman’ they allegedly saw, his client cannot be declared as the ‘woman’ in question.
The court held that there was no ground to convict Mrs. Akpakwa, and accordingly discharged and acquitted her.
On the other hand, convinced that the state had successfully proven beyond reasonable doubt, the case against the seven others, they were subsequently convicted.
