Olisa Metuh tore unsigned statement during interrogation, witness tells court


A witness in the trial of Olisa Metuh, a former spokesperson of the Peoples Democratic Party, has told an Abuja High Court that Mr. Metuh’s ‘torn’ statement was not signed.

Mr. Metuh is facing a two-count charge for allegedly tearing his statement.

The EFCC alleged that Mr. Metuh tore the statement when it was brought for his endorsement.

The commission had also alleged that the PDP spokesperson attempted to chew the statement.

The trial continued on Monday, after months of adjournment following the vacation of the judiciary.

The first prosecution witness, an investigative officer with the commission, said Mr. Metuh tore the third page of his statement which was not signed, but added that the defendant had earlier signed the first two pages, which were not tampered with.

He added that Mr. Metuh did not chew the said statement.

Another witness, Ibrahim Musa, also told the court that Mr. Metuh demanded for sheets of paper to continue with the statement after tearing the third page.

The prosecution closed its case at the end of the session.

Mr. Metuh is also facing separate trial at an Abuja Federal High Court for allegedly diverting N400 million, part of funds meant for the purchase of arms from the office of the former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki.

TEXT AD: Discover!! New Solution Helps Men Get Bigger Penis To 7inch without Side Effect size and Last 25minutes+ During Sex Click Here To Read...

All rights reserved. This material and any other material on this platform may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, written or distributed in full or in part, without written permission from PREMIUM TIMES.

  • concernednigerian

    An unsigned statement is of no consequence whatsoever. It means the statement has not been submitted to the authorities because it was yet to be completed. We all have had occasions to either cancel or commit a written piece to the waste paper basket because it was not worth the paper it was written on. An over-zealous EFCC should abstain from rushing to judgement.

    • Tunji Olarewaju

      The most amazing thing is the contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses:he DID ‘chew ‘ ,he DID NOT ‘chew ‘,he DID ‘sign’,he DID NOT ‘sign’,which one to believe? Or, could it be the reporter doesn’t know his onions? If you are saying the truth there won’t be any contradictions. If all these contradictory statements were actually made by the witnesses, Metu should be discharged and acquitted IMMEDIATELY, not ASAP. Though I’m not his fan, I’m a fan of TRUTH

      • e_orpheus

        Prosecution says he attempted to chew but did not chew. They also said of the three pages he had signed the first two but not the third, which he allegedly subsequently sought to destroy.
        Where lies the contradiction to which you refer?

        • share Idea

          Pls can you recall what we were told before now that Metuh was acting like goat in EFCC detention and was chewing his statements. How Metuh could sign pages 1 & 2 but refused to sign page 3 and they brought his statement to sign.

          EFCC under APC is a great shame.

          • e_orpheus

            Sensationalism by the media and by enthusiastic and overzealous forum posters.
            The EFCC’s position has always been that he attempted to chew and destroy the last page of his statement, and that has not changed.

          • share Idea

            Please shared a link where what you just stated were stated by EFCC before today. Nigeria we hail thee

          • e_orpheus

            http://www. premiumtimesng. com/news/196667-breaking-2-1-billion-arms-scandal-angry-olisa-metuh-tears-statement-he-made-to-efcc.html

            http://www. vanguardngr. com/2016/01/breaking-efcc-docks-metuh-over-alleged-destruction-of-evidence/

            I have been generous enough to share two.