The ongoing trial of people suspected of involvement and conspiracy in the death of Barr Godwin Ikoiwak of the Akwa Ibom State Ministry of Justice has challenged the ingenuity out of the defense team, led by a former Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in the state, Barr Ekpenyong Ntekim. The matter is before justice Nkanang of the State High Court, Uyo.The second defense witness who told court that he is an Anatomic Pathologist, Stanley Emeka Ogbata, returned to the witness box for the second time in less than four days after lead counsel withdrew his certificates.The withdrawal of the certificates cut short the evidence of the witness as Ntekim sought a short date to enable the documents to be regularized.The Director of Public Prosecution, Barr Joseph Umoren, had then told court that “the certificates were of dubious and suspicious origin” as he vehemently objected to its admissibility on grounds that the proper foundation was not laid before tendering it. Again Umoren pointed out that since the certificates are private documents, the originals ought to be brought to court for sighting and not a Certified True Copy (CTC) which the defense sought to tender. When asked about the originals, witness showed a coloured photocopy.Barr Umoren also observed that the three different certificates from three different institutions in Nigeria was signed as Certified by one person, one Chidima Agwu (Mrs), Senior Registrar.The documents were certificates of the witness from Imo state University, Post Graduate College of Nigeria, Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria, and the Lagos State University, meant to authenticate the different trainings that Mr Stanley went through to qualify as an expert in Anatomic Pathology.The presence of the signature of Chidima on all the CTC of these documents prompted Barr Umoren to emphasize, “respectfully my lord, it is not possible for Chidima Agwu to be the Registrar of Post Graduate College of Nigeria, the Registrar of Imo State University, and at the same time the Senior Registrar of the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria.” Citing Section 104(1) and 105 of the Evidence Act, he pointed out that “the institutions herein are public institutions.”Continuing, the DPP said, “my lord, there is presumption until rebutted. These documents are not in admissible form. They are of dubious and suspicious origin.”At that juncture, the defense applied and was granted leave to withdraw the documents.On resumption of evidence two days later, Stanley Emeka tendered the originals of the certificates which were admitted, and accordingly marked as Exhibits. Stanley who appeared on a subpoena (Exhibit 35) which clearly stated that “you are hereby summoned at the instance of the defense to testify and produce pesticides and associated chemicals”, however neither produced any pesticide nor allied chemicals throughout his evidence in Court.He apparently sought to repudiate the autopsy report of the University of Uyo Teaching Hospital Pathologist, Dr Emeka Nwafor, who conducted the post mortem examination. The witness said that to ascertain the cause of death, a toxicologist should analyze the sample before attaching his report which is then sent to the police.He also sought to show that the autopsy report may have ignored the allegation of Asthma as the probable cause of death, before Barr Umoren objected, drawing his attention to the strict nature of his subpoena. Court upheld the objection, urging the witness to be guided by the content of the subpoena that brought him to court, and not to give general evidence.Under cross examination, Stanley admitted that he was not present when the autopsy was conducted and does not have a counter autopsy report. He also admitted that he is not a toxicologist and that it is not possible to give a conclusive medical report of a corpse without physical examination. Surprisingly, the witness who was subpoenaed by the defense to testify at the instance of the first to third defendants, did not know the name of the second defendant when asked.