From Femi Folaranmi, Yenagoa
The prosecution of teenager, Charlotte Delhi standing trial for cyberstalking with the intention to blackmail suffered a setback as the court on Tuesday declined to admit a computer printout of WhatsApp communication presented as exhibit by the prosecution.
Dehli was on October 18 arraigned by the Department of State Security for her alleged involvement in the sharing of the nude video of a former permanent secretary, Dr Walton Liverpool.
Justice Isa Hamma Adama Dashen had on October 22 adjourned the trial to November 9 to rule on admissibility of the WhatsApp printout as exhibit following the objection raised by the defence counsel, Arthur Andrew that the exhibit violates section 84 subsection 2 and 3 of the Evidence Act.
At the resumed trial on Tuesday, Justice Dashen while admitting that the evidence although relevant to the case, said it could not be admitted because of disparity in the models of mobile phone used.
According to him while Dr Liverpool in his oral evidence said that his mobile phone is a Samsung Galaxy A5, the certificate of compliance accompanying the print-out read Samsung Galaxy A7.
Justice Dashen therefore ruled that the evidence did not meet the criteria for admissibility for computer generated electronic evidence as stipulated in section 48 of the Evidence Act.
Thereafter the prosecution counsel, Mr Victor Uchendu, led Dr Liverpool to conclude his evidence before the court.
Dr Liverpool being led in evidence tendered the nude video of himself sent to him by yet to be identified blackmailers in a Compact Disc before the court.
There was however mild drama between the prosecution and defence counsels over procedure and legality in the presentation of the nude video.
This prompted the prosecution counsel, Mr Uchedu to with draw the application and re-introduced it which was granted by the court.
The replay of the nude video left lawyers and others in the courtroom spellbound as they watched Liverpool and Delhi in the video.
The defence counsel raised a point of notice to the court on the use of Nero video application in the downloading of the nude video from phone to laptop but he was cautioned by Justice Dashen who told him to reserve his objections to the final address.
Arthur further informed the court on two applications he intends to bring to the notice of the presiding Judge before the adjourned date. The applications are notice of a ruling by the Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt on the competence of the DSS counsel to prosecute the case and the competence of the DSS to investigate and prosecute the case.
The judge adjourned the case until Dec. 16 for continuation of trial.