Apparently the last had not been heard about the case of Dr. Olufemi Olaleye, who was recently or raping his wife’s niece
Enraged by his sentence, Olaleye who is the Medical Director of Optimal Cancer Care Foundation, has asked the Court of Appeal to set aside his conviction by the Special Offences and Domestic Violence Court in Lagos.
The doctor was sentenced to life imprisonment on two counts charge of defilement of a child and sexual assault by penetration.
During trial, Femi Olaleye’s wife told the court how gave her sleeping pills in the night to sleep with her 16-year-old niece.
In a notice of appeal filed by his lawyer, Dr Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, Olaleye stated that the Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court was wrong to have relied on the evidence presented by the prosecution against him.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that he has approached the appeal court through his lawyer, giving reasons why his appeal should be allowed.
The medical practitioner is arguing that “the lower court erred in law when, in the absence of any direct evidence, it held that the alleged victim of the crime was a child of 16 at the time of the offence.”
He said that the prosecution did not tender any documentary evidence in support of its case that the alleged victim of the crime was 16 years old.
In a bit to prove this fact, Pinheiro argued that the prosecution had the onerous duty of presenting the birth certificate of the complainant which would have served as conclusive proof of her age.
But throughout the trial, he said neither the prosecution nor the complainant put forward any documentary proof of the alleged survivor’s age, other than the oral evidence of the witnesses.
The awyer also argued that contrary to the submission that the alleged victim was consistent in her evidence that Olaleye raped her, her evidence was riddled with inconsistencies.
Pinheiro said the alleged survivor never accused the appellant of rape before the police who interviewed her when the alleged events were still very fresh in her mind.
He claimed that it was only four months after the alleged incident occurred that she turned around and alleged that the appellant raped her.
According to him, the court ought to have been suspicious of the time frame between her statements to the police and the Gender Department of the police.
He further argued that the lower court ought not to have relied on the evidence of PW5, Dr Akinbunmi Oyebimpe of MIRABEL, in convicting and sentencing the appellant.
According to him, the examination carried out on the survivor by PW5 was done months after the alleged offence was committed contrary to Oyebimpe’s finding.
