Quick update to remind you that the court will hear SCOAN’s latest application to shut down the criminal proceedings against them tomorrow. We hope and pray that once these applications have been rejected the path will be clear for the full case to be heard and justice to be done. With the Lekki gardens controversy in very recent memory, people will be watching the outcome with interest.
Last week a building collapsed in an upmarket area in Lagos, killing 31 people. Within two days, the managing director of the residential estate and his contractor were arrested and brought before a magistrate (source). Furthermore, Governor Ambode had ordered all Directors of Lekki Worldwide Estate Limited to submit themselves to the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Mr. Fatai Owoseni, within the next twenty four hours or face immediate arrest (source).
This, of course is in stark contrast to the way Lagos State Government have dealt with the far deadlier collapse at SCOAN. Neither the contractor or the managing director general overseer have been arrested, despite constantly ignoring court demands.
This blatant injustice has not gone unnoticed, hundreds of Nigerians have been expressing their displeasure and taking to social media to call for TB Joshua’s arrest. Broadcaster “Daddy Freeze” has been leading the campaign, he wrote the following:
I have no qualms seeing a young man who committed a crime pay for that crime. Life is sad, before Richard came along, you could not dream of buying a house in LEKKI for 20million naira, his dream was to make choice housing affordable and available. Somewhere down the line mistakes were made and lives were lost! And yes I agree…… Someone must pay!
Now my questions;
Why is he in handcuffs and remanded in prison when that ‘prophet’ whose building collapsed and killed more people than Ebola, Lassa fever and this alleged ‘LEKKI gardens’ put together is walking free??? Why is that prophet not in handcuffs too??? It was even alleged, that he didn’t show up in court the last time the courts sat. Is this true??? If it is true, then why is Richard ‘remanded’ in prison while Mr prophet ‘comes from home’???
Is there a special court for ‘prophets’ or do we have special ‘laws’ for them???
Is our government afraid of prophets???
Are the people who lost their lives in the Church less valuable than the people who lost their lives in the LEKKI Gardens saga?
My humble advice: Richard should be released to go home and attend hearings from home like the ‘prophet’. Or the ‘prophet’ should be picked up, handcuffed and locked in the same cell with Richard while he attends trial!
Or does the change we voted for include turning Nigeria into the African version of George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’, where “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others?”
I might not know law and justice, but I definitely know injustice!
I appeal to everyone to lend their voice to this and ensure we have ‘JUSTICE FOR ALL’
Please retweet this hashtag untill we are heard! #Justice4All“
This could be a turning point in the whole legal process, what a shame it took the unnecessary deaths of more people before any fuss was made.
To follow up on our last post, it turns out we were right to be suspicious. The post we referred to was nothing but more lies propagated by SCOAN (how can they live with themselves?). The real news is that SCOAN’s umpteenth application to halt proceedings has been rejected and the court will reconvene on the 22nd March. But yes, you guessed it – they have another application to challenge the competence of the charges filed, so the whole unbearable cycle starts again. Currently it seems like SCOAN are just playing with the courts like a kitten with a ball of wool. How much longer will this be allowed to continue?
- All the articles can be traced back to one published late last night authored by Ihechukwu Njoku. Njoku is well known to be a SCOAN PR “journalist”, he writes almost exclusively on TB Joshua, and has authored several posts on pro TB Joshua Blogs such as Watched TB Joshua.
- The source of the information in this article is said to be a “report leaked onto the internet”, but no link is given and no leaked report can be found.
- The entire article is commentary, without any direct quotes from this mysterious report.
- No major news organisations have published anything about the case today. Other trial days have been covered by publications such as the BBC and Newsweek. If this report were true, it would be the biggest news related to the case since the coroner’s report was released.
You have probably seen the widely reported story about two children suing TB Joshua for the death of their father. This is the civil case we’ve been reporting on since August last year. The press have focused (perhaps for sensationalism) on the two children suing, but in fact the mother is the first plaintiff and her children have joined the mother as second and third plaintiffs. It may however prove to be fortuitous that the press have focused on the children because it will most likely win more public sympathy, and any move SCOAN makes against the case will be viewed as a move against two children who have lost their father. Continue reading
Regardless of your position on TB Joshua and SCOAN, you probably agree with us that the families who lost loved ones in the building collapse deserve the truth about what happened. The coroner has ruled that the building collapsed due to inadequate foundations, SCOAN strongly dispute this and have offered up evidence they believe points to sabotage, or some kind of terrorist attack – some serious claims! They have offered three lines of evidence (primarily though social media):
- Footage of a plane “hovering”, almost an hour before the building came down.
- CCTV footage that appeared to show the building come down symmetrically “like a controlled explosion”.
- The testimony of “experts” claiming that the foundations and supporting columns were sound.
Although it seems to only be SCOAN supporters who take these theories seriously, SCOAN has a lot of supporters, and they’re rather vocal. In this article we look at the three lines of evidence and ask some probing questions that we believe SCOAN should answer if it expects the general public to take them seriously.
Questions about the plane
The plane is the weakest piece of evidence. SCOAN seem to be suggesting that a plane seen on their CCTV system could have caused the collapse through some unspecified chemical or sonic attack. Here are some questions we would like to hear answers to:
- How did a sonic or chemical attack from an aircraft only demolish one building and leave the adjacent ones intact? Surely any technology if this nature wouldn’t be this directional when deployed from the air?
- If the building was attacked from the air, how does that explain it appearing to come down symmetrically?
- If it was chemical, what chemical was used? What traces were found of it on the site? How could the chemical be potent enough to destroy a building, but without causing any loss of life outside of the building?
- What does the airplane have to do with controlled demolition? These appear to be mutually exclusive theories.
Unless SCOAN can answer some of these questions and give some more details to explain why the appearance of a plane an hour before the collapse had anything to do with it, we think it is a complete red herring that can be rejected out of hand. So we will put aside this line of evidence and move on to the next.
Questions about the controlled demolition
By “controlled demolition”, what SCOAN are referring to is known as a “building implosion”, you can read more about this highly complex and technical demolition technique here. Normally a building implosion requires perfectly timed charges to be detonated in strategic locations across multiple floors. At the very least, to execute this kind of plan successfully, the perpetrators would need to have structural knowledge of the building to know where the key load bearing columns were. Then they would need access to the building to drill into these columns and plant the charges. If SCOAN want this line of evidence to be taken seriously, here are some questions they need to answer:
- How did terrorists gain access to structural data on the building in order to plan a controlled demolition?
- How did they get large quantities of explosives and other paraphernalia onto the site without being stopped by the armed security guards or caught on CCTV?
- How did they manage to drill into multiple points on the building to rig the explosives without being noticed or caught on CCTV?
- If the collapse was caused by explosives, why were there no reports of loud bangs? Why were all the injuries consistent with crushing, not burns and explosions?
- Were any traces of explosives or associated paraphernalia found on the site? Please give details.
- Who do you think was responsible for the attack? Why has nobody claimed responsibility? Why would a terror group go to the bother of executing a highly sophisticated attack, but neglect to claim responsibility?
- If you really do believe that your site was compromised to the extent that terrorists were able to prepare and execute this controlled demolition, what measures have you taken to ensure it won’t happen again? Have you had bomb disposal experts check the whole site? Why were you allowing large public gatherings to take place just days later? Either this was highly irresponsible, or you don’t believe your own stories.
Ironically, if we are to take the controlled demolition theory seriously (which we don’t) it actually ends up implicating SCOAN far more than the structural failure option. Executing a plan like this would have required such high level access for lengthy periods of time, doing indiscreet things like drilling into columns and laying wires that it is inconceivable that the building could have been demolished this way without it being an inside job. If SCOAN want this line of evidence to be pursued, they should be ready for all SCOAN staff and contractors to be treated as suspects. Structural failure would be criminal negligence, controlled demolition would be mass murder.
Questions about the “expert” testimony
The “expert” testimony SCOAN have presented is a 13 minute video with 4 supposed “experts” standing over a small, exposed section of foundation. Not only is this video a completely inadequate way to address a hugely complex topic, the experts they have chosen are neither experts nor impartial. For example, the most lengthy “expert” testimony was Dr Stephen Asheri Ntoga, resplendent in an Emmanuel TV t-shirt (there goes any hope of impartiality). He claims to be the “Dean of the Faculty of Engineering in Tanzania”, but no University is mentioned! This title is completely meaningless if it’s not attached to a University. Furthermore, this Doctor has absolutely no online presence apart from this video, or references to the video. No published articles or papers, no news articles, no LinkedIn profile, no faculty staff page, nothing! The three other “experts” fair no better, none have any expertise that can be verified. Here are some questions SCOAN should answer:
- Why did the video only concentrate on a very small exposed part of the foundation? How do we know you weren’t just showing the part that was intact?
- If you are convinced that your structure was sound, why didn’t you pay for a nationally recognised impartial expert to produce a full, comprehensive report and make it public? If this report countered the findings of the coroner’s witnesses, you might have a point – but a few quotes on video from 4 “experts” with questionable credentials looking at a tiny exposed part of the foundations tells us nothing.
To conclude, the plane theory is nothing short of crazy, the controlled demolition theory is far fetched (but if it’s to be believed actually implicates SCOAN) and the expert testimonies are woefully inadequate, little more than soundbites from people on the street.
If there was any credibility at all to these claims, surely TB Joshua would have turned up in court to present the evidence? Since he refused (4 times) to do this, SCOAN should do the victims families a favour and either shut up about their so called evidence, or do it properly and provide something substantial and believable.
Thursday 18th February will see the start of the trial of the SCOAN trustees and the engineers responsible for the deadly building collapse. In our last post we wondered why SCOAN were so desperate to halt the case when it would appear they had a convenient (and maybe even legitimate) scapegoat. However, Vooke, who has managed commercial construction projects in Kenya and is familiar with construction regulations in the region explained to us how intertwined the relationship between the contractor and the building owner is. Over to Vooke: Continue reading