By: Barbara Kumah
The High Court in Amasaman has denied a bail application filed by lawyers for Patricia Asiedua Asiamah, widely known as Nana Agradaa, pending the hearing of her appeal against her 15 years imprisonment.
The Court hearing the application on Tuesday July 15, refused it, and directed the Circuit Court to furnish it with all necessary documentation relating to the appeal process.
Lawyers for incarcerated repented priestess, Patricia Aseidua aka Agraada, filed the application for bail, following
the appeal process, challenging her 15-year imprisonment by the circuit court on June 27 .
The lawyers were in court on Tuesday, hoping to secure the fetish priestess turn Pastor’s release on bail, while waiting for a decision on her appeal. However, the High Court presided over by Justice Richard Osei, refused the application.
Meanwhile, Agraada’s application for appeal filed on Monday morning July 3, argues that the judgement of the circuit court, was harsh and excessive.
She was found guilty on charges of one count of charlatanic advertisement in newspapers contrary to section 137(1) of the Criminal Offenses Act 1960 Act 29 and two counts of defrauding by false pretense contrary to Section 131(1) of the Criminal Offenses Act 1960 Act 29.
According to the appeal application, the petitioner Agraada is aggrieved by the conviction and sentence by the Circuit Court, and prays for an Order against both conviction and sentence on the grounds that the conviction and sentence should be set aside as the judgment is unreasonable and cannot be supported by the evidence on record. Secondly that the whole trial is wrong in law.
Per the Particulars of error, the trial judge denied the petitioner fair trial by calling her to prove her innocence when prosecution led no or insufficient evidence, contrary to Article 19(2)(c) of the 1992 Constitution.
Also that the trial judge demonstrated manifest bias and personal animosity towards the petitioner by persistently engaging in confrontations, harrassment, and intimidation of the accused’s lawyers in open court thereby denying her adequate and effective representation.
