Fresh twists emerged on Monday in the ongoing rape trial involving Samuel Obinna Ojogbo, as defense counsel, Bidemi Ademola-Bello (SAN), pointed out what he described as major inconsistencies in the testimony of the complainant, Finyinfoluwa Owonifari, before the Lagos State High Court.
During a tense cross-examination session, the senior advocate questioned several aspects of the complainant’s account, arguing that gaps and contradictions in her statements raised doubts about the credibility of the allegations against his client.
One of the major issues highlighted by the defense was the complainant’s inability to identify a photograph allegedly linked to the office where the incident was said to have occurred. The witness had earlier testified that the office had no window, but during proceedings, she stated that she could not recognize the photograph presented before the court.
The defense also focused on multiple statements made by the complainant to the police. Owonifari confirmed that she made statements at the Gender Unit of the Lagos State Police Command on September 2, 2025, as well as two separate statements at the Bariga Police Station on August 28, 2025. The statements were subsequently tendered and admitted as exhibits without objection from the prosecution.
Another issue raised during cross-examination involved the clothing allegedly worn by the complainant on the day of the incident. Ademola-Bello referred to an earlier police statement in which she reportedly said she wore black trousers and a short-sleeved multicolored shirt on August 28, seeking clarification over possible discrepancies in her account.
Questions were also raised about the handling of medical evidence. The complainant testified that when she visited a medical center on August 22, 2025, the attending doctor only carried out a swab test and prescribed medication without conducting further medical examination.
The defense further scrutinized her communication with a lecturer identified as Dr. Abu, whom she claimed she contacted after the alleged incident because he was a lecturer in her department. Although she denied having any personal relationship with him, the defense drew attention to phone call records allegedly showing prior conversations with Dr. Abu earlier on the same day.
This appeared to contradict her earlier testimony that she contacted him for the first time only after the alleged incident. When asked how she obtained his number, the complainant explained that the contact had previously been shared with students during class sessions.
Ademola-Bello argued before the court that the inconsistencies and contradictions in the complainant’s testimony suggested attempts to falsely implicate his client and damage his reputation.
Presiding judge, Justice Ogala, adjourned further hearing in the matter until May 25.
