The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Tuesday, November 5,
2024, presented its third prosecution witness, PW3, Bamaiyi Mairiga, a forensic
expert in the Forensic Department of the EFCC Headquarters, Abuja, in the trial
of one Babatunde Keshinro, a former Head, Commercial Banking with one of the
new generation banks in Nigeria, for an alleged N10m fraud before Justice
I.O.Ijelu of the Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja.
The EFCC is prosecuting Keshinro on a nine-count charge bordering on forgery
and stealing to the tune of N10million.
He was initially standing trial before Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo of the Special
Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos before whom he pleaded "not
guilty" to the charges.
However, the trial could not be concluded before the retirement of the trial
judge.
The case was, thereafter, transferred to Justice Ijelu.
The defendant, again, pleaded “not guilty” to the charge.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, the witness, led in evidence by the prosecution
counsel, H.U. Kofarnaisa, narrated the role the Forensic Department played in
the investigation of the alleged offence.
Mairiga noted that he did know the defendant and only used international
standard techniques to forensically analyse the documents forwarded to the
Department from the Lagos Zonal Command of the EFCC.
"As a trained Forensic Document Examiner that has undergone foreign
training, I am skilled in forensic analysis of travel documents, analysis of
alterations and signatures, among others," he said.
According to him, the Forensic Department got the request for the analysis of
some signatures for further comparison.
"When the Department got the request, we carried out detailed forensic
examinations in line with best international practices; and after the analysis,
we made our report as a response to the request," he said.
He further shed light on the various international techniques used in analysing
the specimen signatures included in the forwarded documents as well as the
disputed ones sent for comparison.
"Both disputed documents and specimens were analysed and further
comparisons were carried out.
“The conclusion from the forensic analysis was that from pen movement and
other techniques used, the author of the specimen signature did not sign the
disputed documents," he said.
He, thereafter, identified Exhibit P9, being the request sent to the Forensic
Department and which was already before the court.
He further identified the report of the forensic analysis carried out, and
which was sent in response to the request.
When the prosecution sought to tender the said report, there was no objection
raised by the defence counsel, V. Amusan-Giwa.
The document was, thereafter, admitted in evidence as Exhibit P10.
Under cross-examination, the witness noted that there was no need to request
further documents, adding that "the author of the specimen documents did
not sign the disputed signatures and documents."
Justice Ijelu adjourned the matter till December 5, 2024 "for continuation
of trial and conclusion of the case of the prosecution.”
Comments:
Leave a Reply