Baba Ijesha inserted car key in my private part, asked me not to tell anyone – Minor tells court

A child forensic expert, Mrs Anike Ajayi-Kayode, who is the Executive Director of the Cece Yara Foundation, informed the court that the case of Omiyinka was referred to her by the Special Criminal Investigation Department (SCID) of the Lagos State Command, Nigerian Police Force forensic Investigation.

Ajayi-Kayode who was led in evidence by the Director of Public Prosecution DPP, Mrs Olayinka Adeyemi, said the outcome of her forensic Investigation revealed that “the perpetrator engaged the child ìn s*xual activities twice when she was seven years old.”

The witness who is a certified child forensic interview specialist told the court that she had participated in over 25 child forensic interviews.

She said that the survivor was relaxed, cooperative and was able to recall events that happened ìn the past.

The witness also said that the perpetrator reminded his victim that he touched her some years back and that she has grown up and developed.

She said he asked her: “Do you have a boyfriend? We have unfinished business.

Ajayi-Kayode said that the child told her that on the first occasion, her aggressor told her to “remove her pant, sit her on his lap and rub his manhood on her body” and instructed her not to tell anybody.

She said the child told her that on the second occasion which was on April 19, the perpetrator “inserted his car keys into her Virginia” and also told her not to tell anybody.

The child expert told the court that the attributes exhibited by the defendant were the dynamics of child sexual abusers and the modus operandi of perpetrators which involves”secrecy, intimidation, threat or coercion”.

She said the defendant’s attributes were also “similar to that exhibited by child abusers all over the world” due to the vulnerability of their victims.

The child expert said after interviewing the child, she conducted a forensic investigation on her and wrote a report on her findings adding that this has been compressed into a flash drive.

Thereafter, the prosecution sought the court’s permission to tender the flash drive and the report before the court.

The defence did not object to the request.

The court admitted in evidence the flash drive and Child forensic interview report prepared by the witness and the items were marked exhibit H and H1.

Also marked exhibit G was the clinical presentation on the interview conducted with the survivor.