Court Sentences Paedophile to Life Imprisonment for Defiling Neighbors Daughter
A Lagos Sexual and Domestic Violence Court has sentenced a Paedophile, Rasheed Wasiu, to life imprisonment for having sexual intercourse with his neighbour’s eleven-year-old daughter (name withheld).
The judge decided to convict Wasiu of the charge of defilement as slammed against him by the Lagos State Government.
In handing down his judgment, Justice Rahman Oshodi, who held that the offence of defilement is grave and attracts a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment, insisted that the convicted Wasiu lied during his evidence before the court.
According to the judge, “Notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence against you, you continued to deny your offence. At sentencing, you showed no remorse.
“The evidence shows that you had sexual intercourse with an eleven-year-old girl.
“She was your neighbour’s daughter. She was, to your knowledge, a child. You grabbed her in the toilet, pushed her to the wall and had sexual intercourse with her in a beastly manner.
“This is unacceptable. You must be ashamed and punished according to the mandatory sentence.
“Therefore, the sentence I pass upon you is one of life imprisonment.
“You shall be registered as a sex offender in the Lagos State Sexual Offenders Register.”
In the charge designated LD/8444C/2018, dated December 7, 2018, the LASG had accused the convicted Wasiu of defiling the survivor on or about March 9, 2018, at about 8:00 pm at No. 18, Mustapha Street, Olodi-Apapa, Lagos.
The prosecution had also told the court that the offence contravened Section 137 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
But Wasiu had pleaded not guilty to the charge when he was arraigned before Justice Oshodi on December 10, 2021.
The convict had earlier pleaded not guilty at his initial arraignment before Justice S. O. Nwaka (now Justice of the Court of Appeal) on June 13, 2019, and in his defence, claimed that he was elsewhere at the time of the incident.
While the trial lasted, the state government called four witnesses to establish its case against the convict, while the defence called three witnesses in a bid to deny the allegation.
The prosecution had tendered three documents as exhibits, namely; the extra-judicial statement of the survivor who testified as Prosecution Witness Three (PW3), the extra-judicial statement of the survivor’s father, Prosecution Witness Four (PW4), and the defendant’s extra-judicial statement who had testified as Defence Witness One (DW1).
The counsel for the convict, Yusuf Oyebanji, had in his argument before Justice Oshodi urged the court to discharge and acquit Wasiu on the reason that the prosecution was unable to establish the guilt of his client beyond a reasonable doubt and that the defence of alibi deflates the defilement allegation.
But the LASG through its lawyer, B. T. Boye insisted that it produced direct eyewitness and circumstantial evidence to justify the defendant’s conviction for defilement.
Taking a position, Justice Oshodi who held that in criminal law, the prosecution must establish a crime against the defendant, referred to Section 135 (1) of the Evidence Act 2011, to state that the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt.
In his words: “Each element of this crime must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Any doubt must be resolved in favour of the defendant.
“The charge of defilement occurs when a person has sexual intercourse with a child. A child cannot consent to sexual activities.
“In law, where a witness testifies on a material fact in controversy, in this case, whether the prosecutrix was a child, and the defence does not cross-examine the witnesses on this point, I can consider the silence as acceptance that the defendant does not dispute the fact.
“There is consistent evidence that the prosecutrix (PW3) was eleven as of March 2018, when the events that led to this prosecution occurred. I have accepted this as accurate.
“Accordingly, I judge that the prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix (PW3) was a child as of March 2018.
“It is undisputed that the prosecutrix (PW3) and the defendant lived in the same house in Apapa, Lagos.
“The crime scene is the general toilet in the house. It is in the backyard. The IPO (PW2) described it to the court’s satisfaction. He said he visited it.
“He stated that the bathroom was beside the toilet, and they were both dark because there was no lighting in the backyard.
“The prosecutrix (PW3) explained that she went to the toilet because she was pressed.”
Justice Oshodi rejected the defence of alibi and declared that the prosecution had proved the charge of defilement against the defendant beyond reasonable doubt.
