Aluu 4 : Policeman Claims Dog Was Used To Torture Victims
I must confess that I already gave up hope on the ALUU 4 Case since we have heard nothing about it. Now, something has come up on the issue now and we can be assured once again that the matter is not dead and buried.
If you can still recall the ALUU 4 Killing where four University of Port Harcourt, UNIPORT students (pictured below) were lynched by a mob under controversial circumstances. Some claimed they are armed robbers while others still defend their innocence. I don’t care which one it is, nobody deserves to be treated like that. The act was barbaric. Even if they were armed robbers, they deserved a fair trial in a court of law, not jungle justice by an irate mob.
The latest we have on the ALUU 4 Killings is written below as reported by VanguardNGR:
A police officer, Mr. Raphael Ezechi, told a Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, at the resumed hearing in the killings of four University of Port Harcourt, UNIPORT, students in October 2012 in Omuokiri, Aluu community, that a dog was used to torture the students before they were set on fire.
Mr. Ezechi of the State Criminal Investigative Department and a Deputy Superintendent of Police, led in evidence by the Solicitor-General of Rivers, Mr. Rufus Godwins, narrated that “a team of policemen from Isiokpo Division was dispatched to the scene of the incident to rescue the students but due to the distance, the students were set ablaze before the arrival of the police.”
The witness, said he took photographs of the deceased and a dog, said to have been used to torture the students, adding that information was also gathered from the Internet which were recorded.
The defence counsel, however, objected to the prosecution’s move to tender the photo evidence as exhibits, contending that the police officer was not the maker of the said documents.
The defence argued that no proper foundation had been laid for the admissibility of the photographs, urging the court to reject same.
Responding, Mr. Godwins, the prosecution counsel said that the foundation was laid from records of proceedings by the court and urged the dismissal of the objection, which he described as misconceived by the defence.
