…The truth has prevailed – Mr Charles Oruru, Ese’s father
By Samuel Oyadongha & Emem Idio
FIVE years after the abduction of 13 years old Ese Oruru, the youngest child of Charles Oruru and Rose Oruru, by Mr Dahiru Yunusa in Yenagoa to Kano State, the Federal High Court in Yenagoa has sentenced the abductor to 26 years in prison.
Miss Ese Oruru’s abduction occurred on 12 August 2015 at her mother’s shop in Yenagoa Local Government Area, Bayelsa State.
Yunusa was subsequently arrested was arraigned at the Federal High Court Yenagoa in charge No FHC/YNG/17c/2016 on a five-count charge of criminal abduction, illicit sex, sexual exploitation and unlawful carnal knowledge of a minor.
Delivering her judgement, Thursday, Justice Jane Inyang, sentenced Yunusa to five years in prison for count 2, seven years in prison for count 3,4 and 5 respectively, noting that the prison terms are to be served consecutively.
Yunusa, who appeared in court in handcuffs in a green and white shirt and bathroom slippers, broke down in court after the sentencing, and murmured that he was “treated this way because he is a Muslim”.
THE TRUTH HAS PREVAILED—ESE ORURU’S FATHER
Reacting to the judgement, the father of Ese Oruru, Mr. Charles Oruru, said: ” I am very happy with today’s judgement, I believe that this will serve as a deterrent to those engaged in trafficking people’s children. I thank God that the truth has prevailed and I thank God for giving the Judge the strength to deliver this judgement, all my suffering has not been in vain.”
‘A JUST JUDGEMENT’–ORURU’S COUNSEL
In her reaction, the counsel to the Oruru’s family and immediate past Vice-Chairman of International Federation of Women Lawyers, FIDA, Bayelsa State Chapter, Barr (Mrs) Deme Pamosoo, described the judgement as ” just judgement” and commended the judiciary for doing its best to give a good judgement”, adding that it will serve as a deterrent to paedophiles.
DEFENCE COUNSEL KICKS
In his reaction, counsel to Yunusa, Mr. Kayode Olaosebikan, said: “I am not comfortable with the part of the judgement that the sentence should run consecutively which invariably means he will spend 24 years in prison, that is the aspect we are not comfortable with, so if at all we want to appeal, that is the aspect but it is dependent on the client if he is ready to go all the way out.