Last week I told you how crazy I am about football and how freaky I love Arsenal, the 2019/2022 FA Cup winners. Arsenal was also the Community Shield winner after whipping Liverpool, the Premiership Champions in one match that truly got me screaming for more. Unfortunately, Liverpool took their pound of flesh in the 2023/2024 season.
But while I am still nostalgic about the triumph over Liverpool, having equally whipped Manchester City, Chelsea, and Man United in the 2019/2020 season, my son Jedidiah feels different. The young man just would never give my darling team any credit; neither would he cut my team some slack.
My two sons now take turns daily to throw tantrums at me wondering where my darling Arsenal are today. After a superlative performance that saw them topping the Premiership table about twice, my team has suddenly become lethargic. Their performance against the likes of Liverpool who whipped them at the Emirates during the FA Cup, was heart-breaking. The same was the case with losses to the likes of Fulham, West Ham United and Aston Villa in the Premiership.
In the euphoria of our triumphs in the UEFA Champions League and the forgiving spirit of a Gunner, I will ignore the tantrums of my loving son Jedidiah. However, I chose to heap the blame on the doorsteps of my darling wife, Ifeoma for creating continuous warmongering at home between my son Jedidiah who is a Chelsea fan, Jesse, the brother who is a Manchester United supporter and my humble self at the receiving end.
She ignorantly enlisted both at their tender ages and now I am constantly mocked by my two sons whenever Arsenal confronts Chelsea or Manchester United on the pitch. Both of them always make mockery of Arsenal winning mentality which is common with loud mouthed fans of both Chelsea and Manchester United.
While I am hopeful of a better performance this season unlike previous seasons, allow me to come back to our focus on ridding our roads of maniacs who call themselves drivers. Recently, I have been elated by some observers who have consistently expressed similar concern on the subject of road traffic crashes and KILLER DRIVERS.
Before I continue, let me first give kudos to my tutor who begged me to return to class to complete my course at least to qualify me for a certificate of participation since I have demonstrated lack of interest in the turenchi that is the parlance of legal studies.
I doff my hat for his patience but just hope that my impatience will endure the torture of another legal tutoring. In my first class after my return, I again popped another poser on how to truly nail these groups of drivers without the unnecessary hiccups that slow down the judicial process or even still- birth the process.
Like, Bukayo Ayoyinka Temidayo Saka, the Arsenal sensational youngster, he fired his first salvo by cautioning me not to lose focus of the issues identified as the pitfalls or factors that militate against effective prosecution and securing conviction against drivers that cause death by dangerous driving or other unsafe driving practices (killer drivers).
He, however, noted that it is quite the opposite that the already identified factors are pigeonholed into or within a legal context. In the case of DICKSON MOSES VS. THE STATE ( S.C.308/2002),he continued, the Appellant was convicted by the trial court, the Ogun State High Court Ijebu-Ode Division for the offence of causing death by dangerous driving, a.k.a manslaughter.
The Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division upheld the judgment of the trial Court. When the Appellant approached the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court did not disturb the concurrent findings of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal.
It is instructive to note that the prosecution called six witnesses, including the Vehicle Inspection Officer (VIO) who tested and examined the vehicles involved in the crash/ accident as it were. In his testimony, the VIO told the court that in his opinion, the crash/ accident was not caused by any mechanical defect in any of the vehicles involved in the crash.
The Investigation Police Officer (IPO) on his own part also testified and tendered the sketch map of the crash scene and the vehicles involved. The Appellant did not impeach the testimony of the VIO who testified as an expert witness.
Rather, he attacked the sketch map as tendered by the IPO. As a matter of fact, he made a severe weather of the “failure” of the IPO to indicate on the sketch map the distance between the point of impact and the final resting position of the vehicles. In all, the Supreme Court did not find merit in the appeal and so it did not allow it.
Now, the point in the above case as it touches on the issues that hamper the conviction of killer drivers in Nigeria were to a very large extent, to the exception of some, adequately guided against as outlined below. The first is on Poor crash investigation –Here, he noted that it was not possible for the “Accused”/ Appellant to evade justice because of the way the investigation of the crash was conducted-
On this note, my tutor is of the firm view that every serious crash, particularly the one resulting in the death of anybody, should be investigated thoroughly with prosecution in view. On the issue of poor prosecutorial skill, he stated that it is taken for granted that since the charge was filed at the high court, that the prosecution was conducted by a lawyer.
