Managing Director of Optimal Cancer Care Foundation, Femi Olaleye, has approached the appeal court over the judgement convicting him of rape.
Gatekeepers News reports that Olaleye in October was sentenced to life imprisonment for raping his wife’s niece.
The Judge at the Special Offences and Domestic Violence Court in Lagos, Rahman Oshodi convicted Olaleye on a two-count charge of defilement of a child and sexual assault by penetration.
Oshodi ruled that the defendant should serve life imprisonment for count one and the same for count two.
The judge said the sentencing should run concurrently.
The medical doctor through his lawyer, Kemi Pinheiro in the appeal filed on November 24 at the appellate court in Lagos, highlighted 35 grounds of appeal against the judgment of the lower court.
The appellant argued that the lower court erred in its conclusion that the alleged survivor was a child of 16 at the time of the incident, adding that the prosecution did not provide documentary evidence to support the age of the alleged survivor.
He stated that the prosecution team should have provided the birth certificate of the alleged survivor to prove the age.
According the appellant, the testimony of the alleged survivor was riddled with inconsistencies, contrary to the submission of the lower court.
He said the alleged survivor did not make a rape accusation before the police, who interviewed her when the alleged events were still very fresh in her memory.
According to him, it was four months after the alleged event that she made the rape accusation.
The appellant argued that the lower court should not have relied on the evidence of the medical expert from Mirabel centre, Oyebimpe Akinbunmi, adding that the examination of the alleged survivor was carried out four months after the alleged rape incident.
The appellant was quoted as saying by NAN, “Even though the offences were alleged to have occurred between 2020 and 2021, the medical certificate issued by PW5 clearly showed that the alleged survivor was being examined in respect of a sexual assault that occurred in March 2022.
“In the face of this material contradiction, it was wrong of the court to have held that the evidence of PW5 corroborated that of the alleged survivor.
“Since the outcome of PW5’s examination did not indict the appellant, the finding of the court is erroneous and ought not to be sustained.”
The appellant asked the court to set aside the conviction and quash the sentencing.