Richard Jakpa, the third accused, has alleged that the Attorney General (A-G) exerted undue pressure on him to adopt a specific narrative to strengthen the prosecution’s case.
Jakpa claimed that the AG was resolute in framing the case in a way that supported their theory rather than presenting an unbiased perspective.
According to Jakpa, this theory was not merely suggested but strongly impressed upon him, creating a coercive environment that he believes compromised the integrity of the investigation.
“I felt coerced into aligning my testimony with the A-G’s perspective, which I believe undermined the impartiality of the investigation,” Jakpa stated. This assertion has added a new dimension to the trial, raising serious questions about the fairness and objectivity of the prosecution’s approach.
The court was presented with a tape recording of Jakpa’s conversation with the AG, which revealed the extent of the pressure exerted on him. In the recording, the AG can be heard urging Jakpa to adopt a particular stance, which the accused now claims was intended to manipulate the trial’s outcome.
Jakpa’s insistence on the AG’s undue influence has prompted calls for a thorough review of the prosecution’s methods. Legal analysts and observers are now questioning whether the AG’s actions have compromised the trial’s integrity and whether Jakpa’s claims warrant further investigation.