HomeNewsSocial Media Influencer Justice Crack Faces Cybercrime Trial Over Video Exposing Inhuman...

Social Media Influencer Justice Crack Faces Cybercrime Trial Over Video Exposing Inhuman Welfare Conditions Of Soldiers

Social Media Influencer Justice Crack Faces Cybercrime Trial Over Video Exposing Inhuman Welfare Conditions Of Soldiers

The Federal Government on Monday opened its case against a social media influencer, Justice Chidiebere, popularly known as Justice Crack, over alleged cybercrime and felony charges before a Federal High Court in Abuja.

Justice Crack” (whose real name is Justice Mark Chidiebere) is a Nigerian social media influencer who was arrested and is currently on trial following viral videos he posted discussing the poor welfare, feeding conditions, and treatment of Nigerian soldiers in conflict zones.

The Nigerian Army said that Chidiebere used his platform to incite troops, misinform the public, and breach armed forces’ social media policies.

He was initially detained by the military and later transferred to the Department of State Services (DSS).Arraignment and Charges.

Chidiebere was arraigned before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik on an amended three-count charge bordering on alleged cyber-related offences.

The defendant pleaded not guilty to all the charges preferred against him.

Following his plea, the prosecution opened its case and called its first witness, Oronto Douglas, who continued his evidence-in-chief before the court.

The witness told the court that audio and video recordings of the defendant’s interview were downloaded into a flash drive as part of the investigation process.

Douglas further informed the court that he signed a certificate of compliance in respect of the electronic evidence presented before the court.

Counsel to the defendant subsequently urged the court to allow the bail conditions earlier granted to his client to continue pending the determination of the case.

The prosecution did not oppose the application.

Justice Abdulmalik thereafter granted the request and adjourned the matter until September 28 for continuation of hearing.

The court also noted that the prosecution counsel, who had earlier applied to the Deputy Chief Registrar, would further apply to the Head of the court’s Information Technology Department for the viewing of forensic evidence in the matter.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Must Read