The counsel for second defendant in the trial of four dismissed officers facing charges of alleged murder and brutality has closed his cross-examination of second prosecution witness.
E.G. Eke who represents Eke Chibuzor, one of the dismissed officers, closed his cross-examination on Friday of the second prosecution witness Ifeanyi Osuji.
The second prosecution witness had been cross-examined on evidence given before the court.
On Friday the defence counsel told the court they had reviewed evidence given by the witness and believed they had done enough and would want to end cross-examination so that other counsels would cross-examine the witness.
The matter was for continuation of cross-examination of the second prosecution witness before the court presided by Honourable Justice Florence Fiberesima.
The prosecuting counsel, Chidi Ekeh, said it was OK the counsel announced closure for cross-examination but expressed regret that counsel for third defendant, Barrister Kingston Nwinee, was not in court to commence the cross-examination of second prosecution witness.
The defendants were at the dock throughout the trial.
In her ruling, the presiding judge of the Port-Harcourt High Court Justice Fiberesima directed the prosecution to inform counsel for third defendant to be in court for cross-examination of witness at next hearing.
She went on and adjourned the case to 14 and 15 October for continuation of hearing.
The four dismissed officers Ayogu Fidelis, Eke Chibuzor, Egbunali Felix and Rose Georgewill face five-count charge having to do with alleged murder and act with intent to maim.
They are accused of allegedly torturing five Ikokwu mechanics leading to death of one.
The mechanics were arrested in December 2019 for allegedly driving against traffic, and were taken to Mile One Police Station.
They were arrested by officers of disbanded Eagle Crack team of Rivers State Police Command and were first arraigned by the police before the case was taken over by state government.
Their trial sparked social media outcry as people called for justice for victims of the alleged brutality.
The case which first came up before a state magistrate court was moved to High Court when it was taken over by the government.
The prosecution had previously told reporters it was the duty of government to prosecute crime saying at the time crimes were committed against the state and not against individuals.
In an earlier trial the judge said that the prosecution should make available to the defence all materials relied on for the case and one defence counsel also said defendants had right to fair hearing.
