Nigeria Matters

Adrian Forty As A Forensic Undertaker?

Even as Governor Olusegun Agagu’s legal team prepares to unravel the packs of lies of the Labour Party and its governorship candidate before the honourable justices of the appellate court, it is imperative to explain some points that would unmask the real devious intentions of these selfish people whose only concern is how to appropriate for themselves the resources meant for the entire people of the state.

This, they intend to achieve by ambushing the wish of the people and supplant it with a cabal whose strings would be pulled from Lagos and Abuja. One of the many lies concocted by the Labour Party elements to confuse and deceive the people was the much-talked about prevalence of multiple thumb-printing of ballot papers in some local government areas during the April 14, 2007 governorship election in the state. To prove its case, LP invited a British forensic expert, Adrian Forty. Even before the arrival of Mr. Forty, the LP propaganda machine had gone to town, flaunting what it termed the mother of all revelations from the Briton.

Their expectations soon fell flat on their face by the time Mr. Forty took the witness box as his highly flaunted revelations amounted to nothing. It would be recalled that the floodgate of negative propaganda and outright falsehood were opened by the LP leadership before and after the election, which was followed by unprecedented violence that was unleashed on the peace-loving people of the state by these desperate politicians whose only wish is to loot the treasury.

However, for the benefit of the people of the state, and to prove that the multiple thumb-printing claim by the LP, as in most of its allegations, are mere mischief designed to ambush the wish of the people, it would be necessary to explain in detail the Forty testimony at the tribunal. The expert admitted in his report that the scanning of the ballot papers was singularly carried out by the representatives of the LP. This clearly breached the Helsinki 1978 Declaration that stipulates that where information involving two or more parties is concerned, the syntactic and semantic rules communicating the information have to be jointly determined by the parties. Otherwise the integrity of the exercise and attendant result is questionable.

Equally of note was the absence of neutral bodies like the Police and other security agencies at the data gathering, scanning, cropping and analysis of the ballot papers as the LP ought to have done in line with standard practice all over the world. If the LP and Mimiko were not out to deceive the people, why did they fail to do all these seemingly simple, just and moral standards? It is also laughable that, at no time did the expert sight or inspect the ballot papers which constitute the primary materials for scanning and forensic analysis.

A sincere and unbiased professional forensic scientist would have made proper observation of the physical state of the ballot papers and the environment under which they were stored in order to ascertain if he could make any reliable inferences from the materials that would constitute the source of the input. The physical observation of the ballot papers would have determined the suitability of the materials for scanning and forensic analysis.

The Briton also admitted that cropped images of the alleged thumbprints were batched to him at different times. This means that they were sent to him in bits or piece-meal. It was also noted that the batching was electronically driven, which meant that the original image were still in the custody of the sender. A discerning mind would ask: Are these mischievous people not able to electronically repeat the same batch at different occasions?

Curiously enough, the forms on which this “expert” was to report the results of his forensic analysis were generated and designed by LP in Nigeria and sent to him in London. The simple implication of this is that the report sheets were designed to suit the interest and purpose of the LP, Mimiko and their kingpins in Abuja and Lagos. At this juncture, one should ask Mr. Forty if he is indeed an expert as he claimed, why did he not have his standard form for reporting the findings of his examination and analysis?

Forty also admitted before the open court that there were large numbers of poorly scanned images. This admission by the expert, surely cast a doubt on the competence of the expert and the reliability of the results of the scanning process. He equally failed to show the percentage of images cropped when ballot papers were mistakenly scanned. During cross examination, the expert admitted that: “Very large numbers of cropped areas that did not disclose impressions. The quality of the impressions varied from very good to extremely poor with the details smudged or faint and indistinct”. This is a monumental flaw in the procedure adopted by him. It is an established norm in data processing that incomplete data should be filtered from complete data for separate processing with different methods.

In his breakdown of scanned ballot papers, Adrian Forty revealed that:

* Scanned ballot papers with no images including poorly scanned ballot papers were -37,053; scanned ballot papers with either insufficient details or others that disclose details that could not be matched as legitimate votes-61,352 Total-98,405. This figure represents 53.71 percent of the 183,219 total numbers of ballot papers scanned. This high rate of error would have rendered the whole exercise a failure with a nobler scientist.
In his submission, Forty asserted that the ballot papers were examined by him in their original booklet order. Certain questions beg for answers here: Can ballot papers be in their original booklet order after voting?

* Votes cast at an election can never be in their original booklet order since sorting into parties and counting would have altered the booklets arrangement. Where did Mr. Forty get his original booklet order from?

*It is a known fact that the election organising body, in this case INEC, is the custodian of election materials. Where did Forty and his masters get the original booklet order from?

*Ordinarily, ballot papers, in the process of voting, transportation, collation and storage would have been mixed up one way or the other. How was it possible for the expert to work on the original booklet order in their serial numbers? This is not possible, except if the order and original forms of the ballot papers had been electronically altered before it was transmitted to the expert.

Answers to these questions would throw more light on the mode of operations of this cabal, whose only reason for wanting a change in the leadership of the state is because Governor Olusegun Agagu, against their expectations, has refused to make affairs of governance in the state an all-comers affair by opening up the treasury for them to loot like they did under previous governments. As the legal battle shifts to the appellate court, one sure thing like the northern pole is that, other lies of the Labour Party and its elements would be exposed before the whole world, and the real reasons these selfish people want power for themselves would be revealed.

7 Comments

  1. Mr. Adewale Ologbon, it is good to know the people among us who have sold their birth rights including their senses to the poverty tool called rigging.

    I am more surprised to read your questions:

    1. ‘how were you able to verify who these persons are? … whose fingerprint you identified as multiple?’

    This is one question that shows your ignorance for what we call fingerprint examination. Let me explain to you and more Nigerians. We have what we call Electoral Forms (Electoral card) with which i register my intention and qualification to vote at an upcoming election. On it,

    are my names, address, my fingerprint and a few more details.

    Another instrument, called ballot papers are used to thumbprint when voting. These 2 instruments must marry for one to say that i have cast my vote. That is, it is easy, with forensic examination to know WHO cast the vote on a ballot paper. It may take a little time but we can also know if Mr. Ologbon cast more than one vote, which he is entitled to. Infact, with this exercise, we can determine the full address of a multi-voter and the Polling boots where he cast these votes.

    2. ‘how do you verify these ballot papers originality or could they have been photocopies from an original?’

    I will simply answer this by asking if you were in the Court at any of these times in Ondo? We were asked to compare the scanned materials with the originals randomly, they ALL tallied.

    Finally, this is not about a party or another, let it be about our Nation, Nigeria and our posterity. Let Democracy by deeply rooted in Nigeria. Let one man be entitled only to his right(s) and not mine along.

    I thought i should reply you even though it’s all been settled, so that you can shut your traps in this Nation for a long time.

    Bode Olugbore- Protocol & Security Expert. Lagos, Nigeria.

    Reply
  2. Mr Ologbon, I have been able to do some research and realise you worked for the PDP infact you are their fan. Lets say the truth, everybody wants daily livelihood, there is a family in my street the father is PDP while the first born is LP, they do their things like that, but what we are saying is the truth must be said, AGAGU RIGGED THE ELECTION TO BE DECLARED GOVERNOR, even though I dont know what he gives you, but please and please and pleaseeeeeeeeeeee, STOP USING PEOPLE OF ONDO STATE, We are not saying he did not try, he tried he is good BUT WE VOTED FOR A CHANGE, THE CHANGE US PEOPLE VOTE FOR AND HAPPEN WHY NOT NIGERIA.

    Reply
  3. Taiwo, the moment you don’t want to comment on an issue but rather on the commentators makes me demote your morale and lack of understanding and I keep wondering how you learn. Call me whatever name but I am happy fighting the good fight for my people in Ondo State. I was able to silence you guys on the net on what you’ve started about four years ago. I will be suprised if you don’t attack my articles and posts on the net.I will as I’ve promised get in touch with you as soon as the Appellate Court declear the truth on this State. But my advice to you is simple ‘Get matured’

    Reply
  4. Thanks John for your educative comment on this issue. Now in the findings of yourself and Mr Forty, how were you able to verify who these persons are? I mean the people whose fingerprint you identified as multiple? Can you throw away the fact that certain individuals representing any party could have done this multiple fingerprinting while collating before the ballot papers were sent over to you in the UK. Secoundly, how do you verify these ballot papers originality or could they have been photocopies from an original? My take is that forensic authenticity is when you the expert were the ones that collated the informations and data for yourselves without any form of tampering from outside individuals. This to me is stagemanagement. Thanks.

    Reply
  5. Thank you so much John for the reply. Adewale Ologbon, the author is a one the mouthpieces of the PDP machinery in Ondo State. As an indigene of the state, it has become an embarrassment reading his online essays scattered on web. A blind and dumb man knows what happened in Ondo State.

    Reply
  6. I have been reading with avid interest in your articles relating to the “forensic evidence” given by Adrian Forty in the recent Nigerian Election Tribunals and the smokescreen of legal arguments implemented to discredit or destroy the evidence.

    As one of the main protagonists of the UK fingerprint experts team (I travelled with Mr. Forty and attended court with him), I feel that an opinion derived from my experience as a “hands on” fingerprint operator involved in all the Nigerian states Mr Forty was tasked to investigate is adamantly required.

    At this juncture it is worthy to note the evidence given by Mr Forty should be entitled “fingerprint comparison” as the word “forensic” encompasses a multitude of scientific disciplines. We were not looking for specs of dust, blood stains, fibres etc; only the occurrence of duplicate fingerprints, of which, there were many.

    The following observation(s) are statements of fact and cannot be disputed as I am not at the mercy of legal banter or in the pocket of persons who want me to observe a different opinion.

    I toiled for many hours using my “naked eye” (this is the only “conventional method” I am aware of) comparing fingerprint images which were taken from scanned ballot papers. Your article states these images were “prone to manipulation”; the only manipulation used by me was the application of different shades of light to make the image more accessible in the confirmation of identity (duplicate fingerprint).

    Only after a few hours work, it became pertinently obvious the occurrence of duplicate fingerprints was overwhelming, in some cases, whole ballot books had the same finger/thumb print. It was almost as if a group of persons had run amok with their thumbs and were trying to injure themselves by dipping them in black ink. These occurrences were confirmed by the comparing of the characteristics contained within the images and it is without doubt that when these characteristics concur, identity is established, not even with reasonable doubt.

    This process and the succinct findings of identity continued in all the states that Mr Forty dealt with, the percentages of this “running amok” were recorded by Mr. Forty and presented to the courts.

    These essential and rock solid facts were the backbone of Mr. Forty’s evidence and taken in the context of undisputed “fingerprint identity sought and confirmed” and not being affected by legal idiosyncrasies will not “throw up dust to make it extremely difficult for the AC to make meaningful progress……..”.

    To end, there is an abundance of fingerprint evidence available to support the fact the elections were unjust and did not represent the wishes of the Nigerian electorate and it is a shame the evidence will not demonstrated because of legal dictate.

    Of course it could be beneficial to the Nigerian people if the evidence was presented to a listening audience such as the group of personnel who are currently outraged at the electoral irregularities of Zimbabwe.

    John Gendle (Fingerprint Expert)

    Reply

Post Comment