How senior Nigerian lawyer bought N8 million car for judge accused of corruption – Sales Rep

Symbol of law and justice, law and justice concept, focus on the scales

A witness in the ongoing trial of a Federal High Court judge, Adeniyi Ademola, has explained how a BMW luxury car was purchased for the defendant by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Joe Agi.

The witness, Ifeoma Ofornagolu, the first of 14 witnesses to testify in the matter, said she delivered the vehicle at the residence of Mr. Ademola in Lagos after same was paid for by Mr. Agi, the third defendant in the matter.

Ms. Ofornagolu, a sales consultant with Coscharis motors, said she is responsible for facilitating such transactions between customers and her company.

Justice Adeniyi Ademola
Justice Adeniyi Ademola

According to the witness, her office confirmed the purchase by placing a call to the buyer of the vehicle. Once the necessary confirmation has been made, the name of the customer (owner of the purchased car) is noted for delivery.

“The receipt was issued in the name of Ademide Ademola; ( Mr. Ademola’s son). I accompanied the driver to deliver the vehicle to Ademide Ademola at number 16 Babatunde Ajose Avenue, Lekki, Lagos. The car was signed for by Mr. Ademide Ademola who received the vehicle,” said Ms. Ofornagolu.

Earlier, Ms. Ofornagolu said the confirmation of the purchase was made via a call between her office and Mr. Agi’s company, Joe Agi and associates.

She added that Mr. Agi also called them after the transfer of N8 million was done from his company’s bank as cost of the BMW, while an additional N400,000 was paid as VAT for the same vehicle.

“I was also called by Joe Agi. He called me to confirm if the transaction has been made,” she said.

Coscharis Motors
Coscharis Motors

The witness further said the receipt was sent to Ademide Ademola, via his email address,

After the witness had finished the first phase of her testimony, the defence counsel objected to the admissibility of the receipt on the ground that the said receipt was sent using an email through an Ipad that was not certified before the court.

The counsel to the first and second defendant, Onyeachi Ikpeazu, said although he did not object to the admissibility of the delivery note and the invoice containing the said transaction, he would contest the authenticity of the Ipad, through which the email was said to have been communicated to the defendant’s son.

The prosecution did not object to the submissions of the defence, subsequently, the documents sent using the email was withdrawn.

Mr. Ikpeazu also objected to the repetition in court of the statements made by the witness during the cause of the investigation.

Joe Agi

The witness, Ms. Ofornagolu, had been asked to recount the details mentioned in her statement, while she was being investigated.

She began to make the narration holding the said statement when she was interjected by the defence counsel, who argued that according to Section 84 of the Evidence Act, the witness should not allude to her own statement before the open court.

He said according to the law; the witness is only allowed to refer to his or her own statement, if such a statement proves inconsistent with what is testified in court by the same witness.

“A prior consistent statement is inadmissible by the same witness,” said Mr. Ikpeazu.

Counsel on both sides argued over the admissibility or otherwise of the statement.

Consequently, the trial judge, Jude Okeke, adjourned the matter till January 17.


Now available on

  Premium Times Android mobile applicationPremium Times iOS mobile applicationPremium Times blackberry mobile applicationPremium Times windows mobile application

TEXT AD: Revealed!!! The Only Way Left of Getting an Extra Large Manhood and also Last Up to 38Mins+. Get the Insider Secret Here

TEXT AD: This NAFDAC APPROVED Solution Will Make You Stay Longer Than 40Mins In Bed Tonight And Help Your Erection. Click Here To Read The Free Reports

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.

  • Dr Pat Kolawole Awosan

    Barrister Joe Agi, to bribe justice Adeniyi Ademola, as duly confirmed by a credible witness Ifeoma Ofornogolu, in the trial court of justice Adeniyi Ademola and his conspirator-wife, both who are facing bribery and corruption crimes in Lagos high court.Justice Adeniyi Ademola, and his wife must be made the scapegoats in order to serve as deterrent to any future criminals on the bench.Endemic corruption,is a serious threat to the existence of Nigeria, as a modern structured and developing political,economical/social full fledge nation.

    • Julius

      I agree and I think they will be convicted . Why their lawyers are not asking for plead bargain at this point is beyond me.

      • OJERINDE, Olatunde A.

        This is Nigeria. The legal game is a mystery and you might soon realise that ‘no evidence can nail a big man in this clime’. Let’s wait for conviction before any ululation. There is still room for appeal.

        • Julius

          True but, I think things are looking different least, I’m hoping. Judges can’t be taking bribes like they used to do. So, mi have hope.

        • blackdove

          Under Buhari there is no big man. Justice Adeniyi is going to prison – period!

  • OJERINDE, Olatunde A.

    Will there be any conviction at the end? Let’s wait and see….

    • Questo


  • Black or White

    Very shameful. A judge that earns about 2 million Naira monthly legitimately.

  • Alhajivinco

    What kind of BMW costs N8m? It must be a pretty battered one! Cheap, corrupt judge. Lol!

  • serubawon70

    Sir Ademola Adetokunbo must be turning in his grave. Who would have thought that such a mutant bad seed would be begotten from a noble lineage?

  • isioku

    I hope the prosecution does a good job and not bungle this one. Already, i am seeing signs of unpreparedness. Facing a formidable defence team, you ought to conduct trial appraisal and strategy seesions in chambers before going to court. Why would the prosecution seek to tender an uncertified electorinically generated evidence (email receipt confirming purchase) without attaching the necessary certificate of authenticity? Didnt they know they were supposed to do that? If that document had been marked “rejected” that is over for proof of purchase unless another means is found. Thankfully, it was withdrawn, giving them an opportunity to do the right thing and represent it. Again, proving purchase and delivery to the judge is one thing but the biggest hurdle lies in tying the car to “corruptive influence”. The prosecution must show that the car coloured the mind of the judge in a case(s) Mr. Agi or his associates was prosecuting before the judge. That is where i hope the Prosecution is well prepared. Because if that is not proved, Ademola would walk free. Mr. Agi may claim it was a gift ( even though judicial officers are forbidden from recieving gifts or must disclose when they so get). However, Mr. Ademola is not charged for receiving a gift but a bribe. I hope they did a thorough investigation.