Oyinloa’s Expert Witness – “I Accept My Error”
Mar 18th, 2010 | By Bankole Alao David | Category: NEWS
This is Professor Adeleke’s cross-examination by Mr. Deji Sasegbon (SAN)
The cross-examination of Professor Adeleke by Mr. Deji Sasegbon (SAN) during the afternoon session went thus:
Q: The basis of the Table 1 drawn by you on Exhibit R 27 is that it is not possible to have the same ballot paper in two or more units?
A: Yes.
Q: If it is shown to you that on INEC form and your Table 1, one Ballot Paper appeared in more than one unit, what will you say?
A: There were ballot papers appearing in more than one unit in the report of Tunde Yadeka. Table 1 contradicts Yadeka’s report.
Q: If it is shown to you that Table 2A of your report, a ballot paper appeared in more than one unit which makes your report as false?
A: Which Table?
Q: Look at Table 2A, here a ballot paper appeared in more than one unit. Will you agree that that the basis of your Table is wrong?
A: No because the material used in Table 1 and 2A are independent. Table 1 was developed from Tunde Yadeka’s listing of serial numbers of ballot papers whereas Table 2A was developed using Exhibit 186 recorded on INEC Form EC25A so there cannot be any basis to say that Table 1 was wrong because of what you observed on Table 2A.
Q: Now, look at Table 2A. Read out the first serial number 4 column ballot code?
A: 51560301
Q: Look at serial number 8 from R27(17). Read out ballot code form?
A: 51560301
Q: You will agree with me that the serial number you have read is the same with the one read on serial number 4?
A: I am accepting the typographical error. There is no way a single ballot paper can appear in more than one unit. A serial number is a unique identification for number for a given ballot paper. Hence, the repetition observed in column 5, row 4 and column 5 row 8, it is as a result of typographical error. In reality, it is not possible to have a single ballot paper in more than one unit.
Q: Which one of them is typographical error?
A: I can only answer that question when I have documents from which I extracted the data.
Q: Even in your own extraction, you didn’t notice that you put the same serial number in your Table 2a despite the fact that you are an expert and a statistician?
A: It is a human error. That was inadvertently made made. What 2A is all about is that distribution of ballot papers to polling units is not done sequentially by INEC.
Q: You made extraction for only 11 units. Table 2A, Exhibit R 27 (17) and it was full of errors?
A: Let me have Exhibit 186.
Q: Your lawyer will give it to you. From 11 Units for which you have used the extraction for, how do we believe the whole of your report?
A: My report is never in doubt but the issue at stake there is that we extracted serial numbers of ballot papers from Exhibit 186. That was made available to me in photocopy type. We therefore extracted the serial number of ballot appers as much as we decipher from Form EC25A.
Q: Look at Exhibit R 27 (1&), Table 2a, Column (Ballot CodeForm). I will be correct to say that this is the range of ballot papers given to the unit?
A: Yes.
Q: I will be correct to say that the quantity of ballot papers in the ranger is got by subtracting….
A: No because the range mentioned by you is the global range I earlier mentioned or stated. By mere subtraction of the smaller from the higher serial numbers was the computation done in error by Yadeka. The correct subtraction was to be done by using sub-ranges of numbers so as to arrive at reasonable number of ballot papers distributed to Saint Nicholas Primary School.
Q: First and foremost, if you go to Exhibit R 27(18), Table 2B, the number of allocalted ballot papers is 7,500 for Ilare 1 is a subtraction?
A: No, sir. G50902001 was subtracted from G51292701 as done by Yadeka. He has failed where we have specified two sub-ranges of numbers and therefore, we have two values.
Q: If you go down to 16, there are two set of numbers there. How did you come about the allocated ballot papers you subtracted the range which gave you 2,800?
A: The difference there is supposed to be 2,800 but what we are trying to do is using global range.
Q: You have made errors.
A: I am saying we have a single range in error because serial number one to 18, we can see we have two or more range.
Q: Let me show you Exhibit R 28 (17) that is EC25A where you extracted those numbers form. Read out the number (range) from your comments slowly and deliberately?
A: G 51147102
Q: Read your own report Exhibit R27 (18), Item 16?
A: G511451102
Q:What you have in your Table 2B is G51141102?
A: That was what I extracted. The only difference is that I wrote 1 instead of 7. It was an error. Hence, if the error of 1 for 7 is corrected, the result still remains 2,800.
Q: What is in your report, Exhibit R27 (17) and Exhibit R28 is 6,000?
A: I accept the error.
Q: I said the difference is 6,000?
A: I extracted it from Exhibit 186.
Q: What you have in R 27 (18), Table 2B is G51141102. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: In Exhibit R 28 (17), the number you are supposed to extract is G51147102?
A: It is correct.
Q: The difference between the two figures is 6,000?
A: Yes because of the wrong way it was extracted.
The Tribunal then adjourned at 5.30 pm till Friday.
Don McCoy (414)
Babamatto (264)
YUSUFF MUTIU (231)
Adegboyega (160)
omolebi (157)
Babarabb (153)![Comrade Adebisi Nurain [Abuja]](http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=e1d831724404437cf86ab886c5e66034&size=10&default= "Comrade Adebisi Nurain [Abuja]"){kind=avatar}
Comrade Adebisi N... (106)
kabir (100)
Moshood Oni (78)
Tejumola Lateef A... (76)
OYELEYE E.A (WA... (57)
Sanalika Hileleri (53)
Ayobami Ogunleye (50)
laolu (45)
weightloss pills (33)
AremuKabir (30)
com. kupoluyi ola... (29)
Abiona (27)
Saheed Adeboyega (22)
Badeola (21)
Can you imagine a professor of Statistics (an expert and a statistician) admitting errors in just 11 wards he examined! How can we trust him and his report? I have said earlier that Prof Adeleke would fall as he has come to deceive the tribunal. Now it has happened. Kudos to the brilliant and petitioner’s lawyers who refused to be intimidated. They have done a very very god job. What a shame! Professor Adeleke is a black sheep of his family. How much have they (PDP) offered him that made him to come to give false testimony? Were you not alive when the evils were perpetrated in the state three years ago? Dr Chief Engineer Barrister Brigadier General Olagunsoye Oyinlola knows within him that he committed the crimes and he will pay heavily for it in the end. You that are working for him will share from his woes. Go and ask from Mallam Yussuf Ali (SAN). He knows very clearly that PDP will loose this legal battle unless another ‘in’justice Thomas Naron hijacked the case. Like Dr Ekong like Prof Adeleke.
Its sad how individuals who have attained supposedly high position would throw away what they have built over the years just for crumbs. This is the story of Adeleke who went cap in hand begging Oyinlola for a favor and one of Oyinlola’s lawyer met him there and brainwashed him to come and give evidence based on his profession. All his demands were met and he got extra in his pocket but his family has since disowned him for selling his conscience to the devil for a pot of porridge. By the time the Petitioners lawyers are through with him, he would have lost all credibility he ever have coupled with the angry family he despise. Aja to ba maa sonu, ko ni gbo fere ode.
i am not surprise at all, have you forgotten agagu forensic expert in ondo who doesn’t how to operate computer
The truth can not be covered, if one try to cover the truth the person will end up telling series of false,that is what is happening to PEOPLE DISTUCTION PARTY( PDP)
@Babamatto. Dokita,Oloye,Alagbede,Agbejoro,Tabontabon,Omo’n oba n’okuku Olagunsiya Igbonileoyin,Gomina wa atata;
Up Gominaaaaaaa!!! ! I cann’t stop laughin’.
What oyinlola is, trying may be, he can achieve is rerun.
Thru this he can intimidate people again and go away with thier votes
where on earth was this professsor gotten from?handling just 11 wards with massive errors.sorry for this man .they are only trying to buy time
what i believe in my life is that if someone one intimidate me i will try as to stand,i salute the courage of all Aregbes lawyer for stand by truth and i also commend the jugde for giving the lawyers to let world undrstand the evils that the Oyinlola has perpetrated in 2007.BI IRO BALO LOGUN ODUN OJO KAN NI OTOO YION BA.
Gob Bless All.
Just that people failed to realized that a single lie may be told in different ways,the truth is that no matter how evasive and outspoken you might be,it is still lie! But these people fail to know as well that someday Oyinlola might change and joined the progressive but he himself knows they are packs of liars and he might not need being sure that they are doomed men who care not about their hard-earned repute and status at the exchange of money! May God save us!Just disappointing!
Be prayerful@all A.C MEMBERS