Female Lawyer Accused Of Killing Husband Hides True Identity Under ‘Veil’ – Family of deceased

0
109

yewan

There seems to be confusion over the true identity of Yewande Oyediran, the 28-year-old Ibadan-based female lawyer accused of killing her husband, Lowo Oyediran.

Family of the deceased disclosed this on Wednesday during her court trial where she was seen in veil. read more after the cut…

Yewande who is a member of staff of the Ministry of Justice in the state, is facing trial at the Chief Magistrate’s Court in Iyaganku, Ibadan, Oyo state capital for allegedly stabbing her France-based husband to death at Akobo area of Ibadan on February 2.

The accused has since been remanded at Agodi Prison custody by the Chief Magistrate, Mrs Kehinde Durosaro-Tijani, pending the advice of the Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, in the state. The prosecuting and defense lawyers, however, had been engaged in a war of words after Yewande appeared in court wearing a veil.

The development followed a motion moved by counsel for the family of the deceased, who read a note purportedly written by a member of the family doubting the true identity of the suspect. According to the family, her identity is in doubt.

But Chief Aliyu, counsel to the complainant, presented the deceased’s family demands, which sought for the removal of the cloth (veil), being used by the suspect to cover her face during trial ‘to ascertain her identity.’

However, at the hearing on Wednesday, the Chief Magistrate, Mrs. Kehinde Durosaro-Tijani, agreed to let the accused person to appear in court wearing a veil.

The court agreed on Yewande’s mode of appearance during proceedings, saying it would give the suspect the freedom to show her face to only counsel and the trial judge.

In his reaction, the Oyo State Director of Public Prosecutions, who is also the state counsel, Mr. Tajudeen Abdulganiy, disagreed with the lawyer for the family, Chief Aliyu, to disapprove of the suspect’s appearance in court.

According to Abdulganiy, the suspect ‘is only responsible to the court and not the people at the gallery.’