BabaRamota1980:


All those classifications of witness are valid, and you can see where you prefix each one to clarify it. Far different from your initial submission.

Don't get it twisted..
The question is; are they not all witnesses?
Forget the classification.
Seems you just inherited this argument.
The person I mentioned was trying to spread the misinformation that the testimonies of the witnesses that LP called won't hold water since they were not eye-witnesses to the primary source (polling units) or evidence, and I said it doesn't work the way he thinks.

Zxcvbnmghtr:


*THE LP/OBI DRAMA*
Out of a total of 176,000 polling units, you provided only 46,000 polling agents. (This means you were not present, and have no evidence in 130,000 Polling Units nationwide, and you imagine that 46,000 is greater than and will upturn 130,000)

You listed a 50 man witnesses. You presented only 5 (with one week to go).

The 5 presented are:
1. An International Data Analyst
2. A Channels TV Staff
3. A Professor in Mathematics
4. An Arise Tv Staff
5. An AIT Staff

There is not a single person (amongst LP witnesses who is directly) connected to the election you are contesting its result.

All are busy body third party hearsay witnesses (none is an eye witness with primary source or evidence).

What do you think these witnesses will amount to?

People testifying as witnesses to an election (in which they were not present but) they participated in only on TV set are all you have and rely on.

Ok naaa.

Why re you making a fool of yoursel na?
All LP needs is just to prove glaringly that INEC distorted actual results in favor of Tinubu. Okpari.
Although some of una sef, even if them catch Tinubu live under CCtv camera as e dey steal fish for Hilda Baci pot, una go still defend am say na 'doctored' live video.
That's the level of insanity we're facing here.

respect80:

Don't get it twisted..
The question is; are they not all witnesses?
Forget the classification.
Seems you just inherited this argument.
The person I mentioned was trying to spread the misinformation that the testimonies of the witnesses that LP called won't hold water since they were not eye-witnesses to the primary source (polling units) or evidence, and I said it doesn't work the way he thinks.

I think you are confused. Are you drunk?
You started with eye witness. Then you clarified them into various groups, and now you returned to calling them eye witness.

Come back when you are sober and back to where you recognise their various positions.