THE Lagos division of the Court of Appeal has upheld the judgment of a Lagos State High Court, which sentenced Nollywood actor, Olanrewaju James (popularly known as Baba Ijesha) to five years imprisonment for sexually assaulting a minor.
The appellate court in the unanimous judgment by Justice Folashade Ojo upheld the verdict of the lower court which found the appellant (Baba Ijesha) guilty on counts 4 and 5, where he was accused of indecently touching the 14-year-old girl and sexually assaulting her.
Other members of the panel, Justice Abdullahi Bayero and Justice Paul Bassi agreed with Justice Folashade Ojo.
The Lagos State government had prosecuted Baba Ijesha on a six-count charge of indecent treatment of a child, sexual assault, attempted sexual assault by penetration and sexual assault by penetration.
In her judgment, the trial judge, Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo (now retired) of the Lagos Domestic Violence and Sexual Offences Court, on 14 July 2022, sentenced Baba Ijesha to five years imprisonment over the sexual assault of the minor.
The court found Baba Ijesha guilty of indecent treatment of a child and sexual assault of a minor between 2013 and 2014, which is contrary to Section 135 of Lagos State Criminal Code Law 2015.
Dissatisfied with the verdict, Baba Ijesha, through his counsel Mr. Kayode Olabiran, appealed the lower court decision, praying the appellate court to allow the appeal and set aside his conviction and sentence.
The appellant argued that the prosecution failed to prove that Baba Ijesha sexually assaulted the victim, contending that the appellant merely acted a script that he was invited to act.
Delivering judgment on the appeal, Justice Ojo set aside the appellant’s conviction on indecent treatment of a child and sexual assault of a minor which allegedly occurred between 2013 and 2014, describing the testimony of PW1 (Damilola Adekoya) as hearsay.
Justice Ojo, however, held that on the event that occurred on 19 April 2021, the evidence of PW1 (Damilola Adekoya) was an eyewitness account, adding that an eyewitness account remains credible and one of the most effective ways to establish commission of an offence.
The court held that the appellant’s voluntarily confessed to the crime of 19 April 2021, and did not challenge the statement of (PW1), Damilola Adekoya throughout the proceedings.
Justice Ojo noted that the appellant made an extra-judicial statement at Sabo Police Station, Lagos State on 19 April 2021, and another statement at the State Criminal Investigation Department, Panti on 28 April 2021, which were tendered in evidence.
Justice Ojo held, “The law is certain that there is no other evidence other than admission in the commission of an offence.
“From the totality of the evidence of PW2, it can be safely inferred that as at the date of the victim’s testimony, she was at best 15 years old and a child by virtue of Section 261 of the Child’s Rights Law of Lagos State, 2015.
“It is significant to note that the appellant did not challenge PW2’s on the evidence she gave. It is in view of all these that I hold that the prosecution established that PW2, the victim of the offence was a child at the time of the alleged offences in 2021.
“I have carefully looked at the record and unable to agree with the appellant, that he was merely acting a script. The interaction between PW2 and the appellant on the 19th of April, 2021was not a theatrical performance of make-believe but a personal encounter between the two of them.
“Moreover, PW2’s (victim) body language supported by her oral testimony and documentary evidence clearly shows that she attempted to distance herself from the appellant.
The most inference to draw from from appellant’s action in searching the entire house immediately after PW1 left with her visitors and sexually assaulting PW2 is that he intended to commit the offence, and did commit the offence.
“It’s trite that factual findings of the trial court involving the credibility of witnesses are accorded utmost respect. Trial courts have the advantage of first-time observation, which allows them to assess witnesses’ demeanour and manner of testifying during the trial.
“On the event of 19 April 2021, it is my firm belief that the evidence of PW1 does not amount to hearsay, she was an eye witness. My conclusion is that the evidence presented by the prosecution before the trial court on the offence of indecent treatment of a child, and sexual assault committed by the appellant on the 19th of April 2021 is compelling and sufficient to justify the appellant’s conviction.
“In conclusion, I have no hesitation in affirming the appellant’s conviction for the indecent treatment of a child, and sexual assault. The appellant indecently touched PW2’s body in a sexual manner, in violation of Section 135 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State 2015. His actions constitute sexual assault against PW2.
“I am of the view that the respondent discharges the burden proving its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant on the allegations of 19 April 2021, and I so hold. I have no reason to interfere with the findings of the trial court on the event of 19 April 2021.
“In all, I hold that this appeal succeeds in part and is accordingly allowed in part.
The court ordered as follows “The appellant’s conviction and sentence to five years imprisonment for the offence of indecently touching a child contrary to Section 135 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State 2011 (count 2 of the charge) is set aside.
“The appellant’s conviction of three years imprisonment for the offence of sexual assault of a child contrary to Section 261 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State 2011 (count 3 of the charge) is set aside.
“I affirm the conviction and sentence of the appellant to five years imprisonment for the offence of indecent treatment of a child contrary to Section 135 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State 2015 (count 4 of the charge)
“The appellant’s conviction and sentence to 3 years imprisonment for sexual assault contrary to Section 263 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State 2011 (count 5 of the information) is also affirmed.
“The sentences for counts 4 and 5 are to run concurrently”.
Eighteen-Eleven Media