Menu Close

Cybercrime: How Artiste Naira Marley deployed e-tools to access compromised Credit Cards −EFCC

Mr. Azeez Fashola, Nigerian Artiste Popularly Known as Naira Marley

*The Prosecution revealed the defendant, had in his laptop electronic tools that are specifically used for accessing compromised credit card information as well as others used to disguise both the identity and location of anybody accessing compromised credit cards in real time on the Internet

Alexander Davis | ConsumerConnect

In the ongoing trial of Mr. Azeez Fashola, a Nigerian popularly known as Naira Marley, a third prosecution witness has told Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos how electronic tools used for accessing compromised credit cards information was found on the laptop of the defendant.

Dein Whyte, the witness who is the Chief Detective Officer and Head of the Cybercrime Section of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), continued his testimony before the court while being led in evidence by Rotimi Oyedepo, the prosecuting counsel, report said.

Whyte stated “From my findings, it was clearly established that the defendant through his phone had in his possession credit card details that did not belong to him.

“That he shared this credit card information with another person, and it was also discovered that a fraud report had been generated for the same credit card stating that it had been used fraudulently.

“Investigation also revealed that the defendant had on his laptop which is registered to him, and recovered from him, electronic tools that are specifically used for accessing compromised credit card information as well as other electronic tools that are used to disguise both the identity and location of anybody accessing compromised credit cards in real time on the internet. Those were my findings.”

Asked by Oyedepo the role played by him and his team before Exhibit E (the forensic analysis) was produced, the EFCC Chief Detective Officer and Head of the Cybercrime Section answered, and said: “As is procedural in investigation, where recovered digital evidences are of direct importance and value evidentially to a case, the procedure demands of an investigator or investigating team, where such evidences are recovered, to make a request to the Digital Forensic and Crime Laboratory Services Department to carry out forensic analysis of the content of these devices.

“In doing so, the investigator or investigating team, will include specifics to guide the forensic as to what is of utmost importance to the investigation.”

Whyte further stated “these specifics guide the Forensic examiner in narrowing down the analysis and search, extraction in these devices to areas of utmost importance as specified by the investigator or investigating team.

“On the request form, there is a section where the investigator may state these specifics.

“Examples might be SMS, mails, pictures and Web sites.”

While analysing the forensics report, also revealed that the defendant has running on his computer, a VPN called IP Varnish (a tool used to disguise identity and location of the user).

The Commission’s Chief Detective Officer stated: “In relation to the contents found on the NOTES (a software application) on the devices of the defendant, wherein counterfeit card number was found alongside the details of the cardholder and an IP address, it would suggest that the only reason the possessor of this information will need an IP address attached to it, would be to satisfy the location specifics for consumption of transaction for merchants who require cards to be used only within countries and locations recognised by them.

“If these cards were to be used on the internet from Nigeria, the browser that is stated here will attribute in real time the location of the user to the IP address.”

Whyte also testified in court: “And If Nigeria is not the compliant location of the card issuer, the transaction will be blocked.

“But if this card, when being used, passes through a VPN and assigned with the IP address to conform to the compliant location of the card issuer, the Nigerian location will be disguised and substituted to be Cardiff, thereby giving the merchant the impression that the card is being used from Cardiff or otherwise the compliant location.”

However, Olalekan Ojo, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and Counsel to the defendant, raised objections to the evidence of witness.

Ojo argued: “PW3 is attempting to give evidence on what must have operated on the mind of the user, as to why certain things were saved on the NOTE.

The basis of my humble suggestion is that this witness is not competent to give evidence of the state of mind of the user of laptop without the existence of evidence before your lordship that the particular state of mind exists.”

He also said, “I wish to rely on the Provisions of S11(2) of Evidence Act in support of my objection. “An investigating officer is not competent to ascribe a state of mind to any defendant.

“Whether the state of mind exists or not is a matter for judicial determination.”

Ojo further said “PW3, though an investigator, is not a psychologist but a forensic officer who cannot give evidence on the state of mind of a defendant.”

Responding to the objection raised by the defence, Oyedepo retorted that the objection raised by the SAN missed its target.

The Prosecution Counsel  said: “Firstly, the question being answered by the witness is to connect (if any), the relationship between Pages 8 & 27 of Exhibit E (the forensic analysis).

“The witness is not only competent to give that evidence, but in the circumstance of this case, is in the best position to bring life to it, by explaining the relevance of the report of the forensic analysis that he sought for and obtained.

“I agree that the state of mind of the defendant is for the court to determine, however it is also the power of the court to rely on the facts and evidence supplied which is what PW3 is doing.”

The also noted: “Finally, the witness has not used the word intention.

“The SAN is mainly imputing that the word ‘suggests’ as used by PW3 is him interpreting that there was an intention by the defendant.”

Oyedepo added: “He misconstrued the choice of words of the witness.

“I hereby urge the court to discountenance the submissions of the defence.”

In a short ruling, the presiding Judge overruled the objection, saying that “the witness can give evidence on the reason he believes the defendant had those documents in his possession.”

Justice Oweibo had earlier dismissed the defendant’s objections to the forensic evidence presented by the witness at a previous proceeding.

In dismissing the objection, the court held that “it is the duty of the law enforcement agencies or police charging a person to court to investigate if the defendant committed the crime or not.

“The investigator must be able to link the defendant to the commission of the crime.”

The Justice ruled: “The prosecutor must have made up his mind as to the involvement of the defendant before bringing the case to court.

“I do not agree the prosecution has declared the defendant guilty.”

Justice Oweibo has adjourned to September 26 & 30 2022 for continuation of the trial.

It is recalled the Nigerian anti-graft agency, May 20, 2019, had arraigned Artiste Naira Marley, who sang the popular song: “Am I a Yahoo Boy”, before the Federal High Court, Lagos.

A large crowd of his supporters turned up to witness his arraignment on an 11-count charge bordering on money laundering and Internet fraud.

The EFCC stated that the offences were committed on different dates between Nov. 26, 2018 and Dec.11, 2018, as well as May 10, 2019.

The Commission alleged that Naira Marley and his accomplices conspired to use different Access Bank ATM cards to defraud their victims.

The EFCC also said that the defendant possessed and used counterfeit credit cards belonging to different people, with intent to defraud others.

The alleged offences are said to contravene the provisions of Sections 1 23 (1) (b), 27 (1) and 33(9) of Cyber Crime (Prohibition) Prevention Act, 2015.

Before Justice Nicholas Oweibo, Naira Marley pleaded not guilty.

The court granted him bail in the sum of two million naira, with two sureties in like sum.

Kindly Share This Story

 

 

 

Kindly share this story