‘N69.15 million fraud’: Witness insists Blessing CEO offered property she didn’t personal

A prosecution witness, Dr Onuoha Okeigwe, Monday, advised the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos, that he paid N69.15 million for a property allegedly represented to him as belonging to social media influencer, Blessing Nkiruka Okoro, popularly generally known as Blessing CEO.

Okeigwe, who testified as Prosecution Witness One (PW1), said this whereas being cross-examined by defence counsel through the continuation of Blessing CEO’s trial earlier than Justice R.A. Oshodi.

The witness, a physician of chiropractic (a healthcare observe centered on diagnosing and treating backbone, joint and muscle issues), advised the courtroom that he was not a lawyer and didn’t perceive authorized terminology, however insisted that the defendant represented herself because the proprietor of the property via WhatsApp conversations and bodily interactions.

He mentioned the representations had been made each earlier than and after he paid for the property, including that he additionally relied on Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) paperwork and different supplies offered earlier than the courtroom.

“Blessing presented herself, claiming to be the owner of the property, and falsely collected money from me. She impersonated the owner of the property,” he advised the courtroom.

Okeigwe additional said that he had instituted a civil swimsuit in opposition to the defendant to get well his cash, including that he spent over N100 million renovating the property to fulfill the usual required for the medical facility he meant to determine.

He added that whereas the prison case issues the N69.15 million allegedly paid to buy the property, the civil swimsuit sought restoration of the renovation bills and damages.

During cross-examination, the witness mentioned he despatched the lease settlement to his lawyer however added that the lawyer was not concerned within the negotiations, including that he was a physician, not a lawyer.

When requested whether or not Exhibit C was the one proof he had offered, the witness disagreed, insisting that he had submitted different proof supporting his declare.

She pleaded not responsible to the costs.

Justice Oshodi adjourned the case till January 12, 2027, for the prosecution to name additional witnesses.