Connect with us

news

Raped Chrisland schoolchild recounts ‘bad things’ done to her

Published

on

 

Chrisland

Child X, the pupil allegedly defiled by Adegboyega Adenekan, a 47-year-old Chrisland School supervisor, on Thursday testified at an Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence court in Lagos and confirmed that she was abused.

Child X, who is now four-years-old, was two years and 11-months at the time the alleged defilement occurred serially in 2016 at the Victoria Garden City (VGC) branch of the school.

The trial which was slated to begin at 2pm, due to other matters, did not start until 3.26pm. It ended at 5.53pm.

Before Child X’s testimony, Justice Sybil Nwaka, had ordered that members of the public vacate the public gallery of the courtroom. However, she allowed journalists and lawyers to witness the testimony.

When Child X was brought into the courtroom, the judge rose from her bench to sit by a desk opposite Child X.

Justice Nwaka engaging Child X in small talk said: “I love your shoes, we are all your uncle and aunties here. Do you like the building? Do you know why you are here?”

Child X said: “I’m here to talk about the bad things Mr Adenekan did to me.”

Justice Nwaka responding said: “You know you are here to tell the truth, Jesus loves children and what do your Sunday School teachers tell you?”

Child X: “Always tell the truth.”

Before Child X took oath as a witness, Justice Nwaka repeated to her not to be afraid to tell the truth and that the people in the courtroom are all her friends.

The judge warned journalists against taking photographs, making recordings or revealing the identity of Child X.

The prosecution led by Mr Jide Boye, the Chief State Counsel led the child in evidence by asking a series of questions and getting the following responses from her.

Prosecution: “How old are you?”

Child X: “Four”

Prosecution: “How many schools have you attended?”

Child X: “Two”

Prosecution:” What are the names of the schools?”

Child X: “Chrisland, Grange School”

Prosecution pointing across the room to Adenekan: “Do you know him?”

Child X: “No”

Prosecution: “Who is Mr Adenekan?”

Child X: “When I go to class after recess, I see Mr Adenekan after recess”

Prosecution: “What did Mr Adenekan do to you?”

Child X: “He put his mouth in my wee-wee, the first time he did that, he took me out of the class. The second time, I ran. I tried to report to my teacher but my teacher did not believe me, so I reported to my mummy.

“First time he did it was inside his office which was the toilet, the second time he did it was in the hall which was outside.

“I did not like what he did, he put his hand in my wee-wee, he put his wee-wee in my wee-wee and he put his mouth in my wee-wee.”

The prosecution at this point proceeded to show Child X three photographs, one of which was Adenekan’s.

Child X identified Adenekan’s photograph.

Child X said: “This is Mr Adenekan, I remember how he used to greet me but I don’t know where he is.”

Prosecution: “How did you feel when he was doing it to you?”

Child X: “I felt I should tell my mummy, I felt pain.”

Prosecution: “When he did it, what were you wearing?”

Child X: “My Chrisland School uniform.”

Prosecution: “Can you describe how he did it to you?”

Child X: “He put his hand under my uniform, he put his hand in my wee-wee, pull my uniform down and it was really really paining me.

“When it was really really paining me, I screamed and he covered my mouth like this (demonstrated with hand over her mouth).

“I couldn’t do anything because he covered my mouth. When I was trying to remove it (his hand) he tightened my mouth.”

Prosecution: “Describe his office”

Child X: “I cannot remember.”

The defence counsel, Mr Olatunde Adejuyigbe (SAN) opposed the tendering as evidence, the three photographs shown to Child X during proceedings. According to him, the prosecution did not comply with Section 86 of the Evidence Act.

In his submission Boye told the court that in accordance with Section 84 of the Evidence Act, photographs are no longer secondary evidence but primary evidence and as a result, the photographs should be admitted as evidence.

In a short ruling Justice Nwaka said: “I cannot agree more with the prosecution. These photographs do not have a certificate. I mark them tendered but rejected.”

While cross-examining Child X, Adejuyigbe asked her the following questions.

Defence: “Do you like to draw?”

Child X: ” I don’t know how to draw yet but I like to draw”

Defence: “You said something really really pained you, when you got home did you tell your mummy about it?”

Child X: “Yes”

Child X responding to Adejuyigbe’s questions, recalled some of her pre-school teachers at Chrisland School.

Defence: “Did anyone tell you before that he will kill you?”

Child X: “I don’t know what that means”

Defence: “Did you see Mr Adenekan today,?”

Child X: “I only saw him in the picture.”

Defence: “Do you know there are three tables in Mr Adenekan’s office? ”

Child X: “No”

Defence: “His office is not near your class, do you remember?”

Child X: “No”

Defence: “Have you entered Mr Adenekan’s office before?”

Child X: “Only when he did the bad things to me”

Defence: “Did he take anyone else with you?”

Child X: “No”

Defence: “Did you take your mummy to any corner?”

Child X: “No when I told her what happened to me, she changed my school.”

Defence: “Does your aunty (name withheld) bath for you?”

Child X: “Sometimes her but everytime my mummy.”

Defence: “Have you seen the police before?”

Child X: “I have seen them guarding the door at the gate before I enter my school gate.”

Defence: “Is there a doctor’s office at your school? ”

Child X: “Yes”

Defence: “Do you go to the toilet alone in school? ”

Child X: “When I want to go by myself they (teachers) still follow me”

Defence: “Did anyone tell you what to say when you get here?”

Child X: “No”

Earlier during the cross-examination of Child X’s mother, the video in which Child X was portraying her alleged defilement at a clinical psychologist’s office was replayed in court by the defence.

The mother (name withheld) admitted to the defence that some parts of the sessions of Child X’s interview with the clinical psychologist were not recorded.

“At the time she started drawing the private part, I can confirm to you that I was in the corner of the room and I only asked my child questions regarding the defendant’s name,” she said.

The mother also told the court that she reported to the police that the defendant took her child to a corner in the school where he allegedly defiled her.

“I mentioned the corner to the police and it is in my statement. Like I said before, I initially wanted to cover it up.

“I mentioned it to the school authorities but I later told them to forget it that it never happened.

“I was afraid of people like you (pointing at the SAN), it is a shameful act,” she tearfully said.

Justice Sybil Nwaka adjourned the case until May 21 for continuation of trial at 11am.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

news

JUST IN : N2.2bn Fraud, Court Upholds Ngige’s EFCC Bail, Insists on Senior Civil Servant as Surety

Published

on

The Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Gwarinpa, Abuja, on Thursday, granted a former Minister of Labour and Employment, Chris Ngige, to continue to enjoy the administrative bail earlier granted him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.

The trial judge, Justice Maryam Hassan, made the order while delivering a ruling in the bail application filed and argued on behalf of the former minister by his lead counsel, Patrick Ikwueto (SAN).

Justice Hassan in the ruling directed Ngige to produce a surety who must be a director in the employment of the Federal Government and own a landed property.

Justice Hassan ruled that the surety is to deposit the title documents of the landed property, as well as his travel documents, with the court pending the time Ngige completes the retrieval of his own international passport.

The EFCC had previously granted Ngige bail on self-recognition and directed him to submit his travel documents to the commission, in addition to providing one surety.

 

 

Continue Reading

news

Breaking : Tinubu Removes NMDPRA Chiefs Farouk, Komolafe Over Sabotage, Corruption Allegations; Names Replacement

Published

on

 

The Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, Farouk Ahmed, has resigned.

Similarly, his counterpart at the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, Gbenga Komolafe, has stepped down.

Based on the development, President Bola Tinubu has asked the Senate to confirm new chief executives for the two agencies.

The President’s request was contained in separate letters to the Senate on Wednesday.

This was announced in a statement issued by the President’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga.

Both officials were appointed in 2021 by former President Muhammadu Buhari after the enactment of the Petroleum Industry Act.

According to the statement, Tinubu “has written to the Senate, requesting expedited confirmation of Oritsemeyiwa Amanorisewo Eyesan as CEO of NUPRC and Engineer Saidu Aliyu Mohammed as CEO of NMDPRA.”

The statement noted that Eyesan, an economist and oil industry veteran, spent nearly 33 years at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and its subsidiaries.

She retired in 2024 as Executive Vice President, Upstream, and previously served as Group General Manager, Corporate Planning and Strategy.

Mohammed, a chemical engineer and former Managing Director of the Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company and the Nigerian Gas Company, has also served on several energy sector boards.

He recently emerged as an independent non-executive director at Seplat Energy.

“The two nominees are seasoned professionals in the oil and gas industry,” the statement noted.

Ahmed’s resignation comes amid a high-profile conflict with Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote, which drew national attention in December 2025.

The dispute arose from Dangote’s allegations that Ahmed and his family were living beyond their legitimate means, citing millions of dollars allegedly spent on overseas schooling for his four children.

Dangote petitioned the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to investigate and prosecute Ahmed for abuse of office and corrupt enrichment, sparking a nationwide debate over regulatory oversight in Nigeria’s petroleum sector.

The NMDPRA chief dismissed Dangote’s claims as “wild and spurious,” insisting that he would rather defend himself before a formal investigative body than engage in public arguments.

The conflict, which traces its roots to 2024 when Ahmed criticised domestic refinery output—including Dangote’s refinery—prompted intervention by the House of Representatives, which summoned both parties to avoid destabilising the sector.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Wednesday evening met with the embattled Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Farouk Ahmed, at the State House, Abuja.

The meeting came amid allegations of financial impropriety made by industrialist and President of the Dangote Group, Alhaji Aliko Dangote, against the NMDPRA boss.

Dangote and Ahmed have been at odds for a while now over downstream petroleum regulation and the future of domestic refining in Nigeria.

At a press conference on Sunday at the Dangote Petroleum Refinery, Dangote accused the NMDPRA, under Mr Ahmed’s leadership, of economic sabotage, alleging that regulatory actions were undermining local refining capacity.

He claimed that the continued issuance of import licences for petroleum products was frustrating domestic refiners and deepening Nigeria’s reliance on fuel imports.

The billionaire industrialist further alleged that the regulator was colluding with international traders and petroleum importers to the detriment of local operators, accusations to which the NMDPRA has yet to publicly respond.

Mr Dangote also made personal allegations against the NMDPRA chief, claiming that Mr Ahmed was living beyond his legitimate means.

He alleged that four of Mr Ahmed’s children attend secondary schools in Switzerland at costs running into several millions of dollars, arguing that such expenditure raised concerns about conflicts of interest and the integrity of regulatory oversight in the downstream petroleum sector.

On Monday, Mr Dangote escalated the claims, accusing Mr Ahmed of corruption and misappropriation of public funds.

He alleged that about $5 million was spent on the secondary education and upkeep of the children over six years, with an additional $2 million on tertiary education, including an alleged $210,000 for a 2025 Harvard MBA programme for one of them.

The controversy deepened on Tuesday when Mr Dangote, through his lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), petitioned the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), calling for Mr Ahmed’s arrest, investigation, and prosecution.

In the petition addressed to ICPC Chairman Musa Aliyu, Mr Dangote alleged that the NMDPRA chief “spent without evidence of lawful means of income amounting to over $7 million for the education of his four children” in Switzerland.

The petition reportedly included the names of the children, the schools attended, and detailed figures for verification.

Mr Ahmed arrived at the Presidential Villa at about 5:30 p.m. and left the President’s office after less than 30 minutes.

He declined to speak with journalists as he exited the State House and offered no comment on the allegations or the outcome of his meeting with President Tinubu.

Continue Reading

news

BREAKING: Ex-NIWA Boss Oyebamiji Clinches Osun APC Governorship Ticket

Published

on

The immediate past Managing Director of the National Inland Waterways Authority, Bola Oyebamiji, on Saturday emerged as the consensus candidate of the All Progressives Congress for the forthcoming Osun State governorship election.

Oyebamiji’s emergence followed a motion moved by two governorship aspirants, Kunle Adegoke (SAN) and Senator Babajide Omoworare, at the primary election venue located within the premises of Ebunoluwa Group of Schools, Osogbo.

The Chairman of the APC governorship primary committee and Governor of Edo State, Monday Okpebholo, thereafter subjected the motion to a voice vote, which received overwhelming support from party members present at the primary.

Okpebholo subsequently declared, “By the power conferred on me, I present to you Bola Oyebamiji, as the governorship candidate of our party.”

Newsthumb earlier reported that the APC governorship primary in Osun State commenced in Osogbo, the state capital, with the arrival of the committee chairman, Monday Okpebholo, who noted that the candidate will emerge by affirmation.

APC’s gov candidate Oyebamiji pledges to reposition Osun
He arrived at the venue alongside the co-chairman of the committee, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa of Ondo State, and other members of the governorship primary committee, including Governor Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa State, Dr Obafemi Hamzat, who represented the Lagos State Governor, and former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello.

Earlier on Tuesday, 1660 delegates that would elect the APC candidate in the December 13 governorship primary of the party emerged.

There were also clear indications that the seven APC governorship aspirants in the state had stepped down to back a consensus flagbearer after a late-night meeting with President Bola Tinubu at the State House, Abuja, on Wednesday.

A former APC National Secretary, Senator Iyiola Omisore, on Wednesday, speaking on a TVC News programme, Politics Tonight, declared his support for the party’s arrangement to choose a consensus candidate for the 2026 Osun State governorship election.

Omisore, who was among seven aspirants disqualified by the APC Screening Committee for alleged violations of party guidelines and electoral provisions, said he accepted the decision following guidance from President Bola Tinubu.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Newsthumb Magazine | All rights reserved