By Jude-Ken Ojinnaka
A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos on Tuesday adjourned till November 24, for review of facts and sentencing of three men who pleaded guilty to the charge preferred against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over Cybercrime offences.
The three defendants, Emmanuel Ikechukwu, Oyaliwola Nurudeen Junior and Sampuya David Vinnie who were arraigned before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke had two-counts charge preferred against each of them on separate charges.
According to the separate charges filed by prosecution counsel for EFCC, Z.B . Atiku A.S.Wara, Emmanuel Ikechukwu was said to have sometime in September 2023, in Lagos with intent to gain advantage for himself, fraudulently impersonated one ‘DOUGLAS BRADLEY ‘, a white man from Texas, United States of America, and one ‘ALICE BLENDECK ‘, a female by holding himself out as such on his Instagram App. and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 22(2) (b) of the Cybercrimes ( Prohibition, Prevention, etc,) Act 2015.
Oyaliwola Nurudeen Junior was said to have sometime in September, 2023,in Lagos, with intent to gain advantage for himself, fraudulently impersonated one ‘CYNTHIA JOSEPH ‘ by holding himself out as such on his Gmail Account and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 22 (2)(b) of the Cybercrimes, (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act 2015.
READ ALSO
Irish chef, Alan Fisher, displaces Hilda Baci as GWR new record holder
Oyaliwola was also said to have same date and place, disguised the true nature of the aggregate sum of $20,000 USD which sum he knew to be proceeds of criminal conduct and he thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 18(1)(d) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, (Establishment) Act, 2004.
Sampuya David Vinnie was also said to have committed same offence by impersonating one ‘VINCHY HART’, by holding himself out as such in his Google Account and he thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 22 (2) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act,2015.
He also disguised the true nature of the aggregate sum of $15,000 USD, which sum he knew to be proceeds of Criminal conduct and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 18 (1) (d) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment etc) Act, 2004.
After hearing the separate charges preferred against them, each of them pleaded guilty.
Consequently, the judge adjourned the three cases to November 24 for review and facts and sentencing.