Yinka Offehin on the hospital bed
The police have arraigned two men– Olowogbemi Solomon (24) and Olayeye Damilola (22) – for allegedly robbing a tenant, Olayinka Offehin, and cutting his scrotum.
The incident happened in the Ikotun area of Lagos.
Pyemedia through the help of report from Punchng had reported on July 31 that the men, who were children of Offehin’s landlady, attacked Offehin and his family members while they were asleep.
Our correspondent reported that the two men allegedly stole N800, 000, and cut the scrotum of the victim during the incident.
The police arraigned the duo before an Ebute Meta Magistrate’s Court on three counts of robbery and attempted murder.
The Police prosecutor ,Sergeant Cousin Adams, said the offences were punishable under sections 295, 228 and 231 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, Nigeria, 2011.
The charges read in part, “That you, Olowogbemi Solomon and Olayeye Damilola, did attempt to unlawfully kill one Olayinka Offahin by slicing his scrotum with knife….”
Adams asked the court to remand the defendants in prison for the first 30 days pending legal advice from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions.
However, the defence counsel, Ojieh Friday, said the charges preferred against the defendants were “frivolous”.
He said, “This is basically a tenancy issue; there was no robbery. At worse, this should be a case of assault occasioning harm. The charges were written in bad faith and we want the court to look into this.”
The Magistrate, F.J. Adefioye, asked the Investigating Police Officer, Sergeant Moses Godgift, of the Criminal Investigation Department, Yaba, to tell the court the outcome of police investigation.
Godgift said, “In the course of our investigation, the following facts were brought to light.
“The two defendants and the complainant were living in the same building. The defendants were the stepsons of the landlady.
“The men, in an attempt to kill the complainant, stabbed him on his scrotum. They also robbed him of his money and property. It was based on these findings that they are arraigned before your honour.”
The magistrate ruled that the two defendants should be remanded in custody.
“Having listened to the prosecutor, and conducted a preliminary investigation by hearing from the IPO, this court is convinced that there is probable cause for remand. This court therefore upholds the application of the prosecutor and rejects the request of the defence learned counsel.
“The defendants are to be remanded in prison for the first 30 days pending legal advice from the DPP,” he said.
The matter was adjourned September 17, 2014
