This was shared by human rights lawyer Emeka Ugwuonye.Below is what he wrote......
'UPDATE ON THE CASE OF IVIE EDOBOR: THE NEED TO KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE BALL
As the Americans would say: "Always keep your eyes on the ball". The best way for the opponent to defeat you in any conflict is to force you to take your eyes away from the ball. That is is practically the move that Mr. John Edobor has made against Ivie Edobor, once he realized the gathering dangers
When DPA first got involved in this case, I realized that the case possessed every element that is needed for mud slings - sex, scandal, betrayal, power, litigation, violence, pain and suffering. I pitied Ivie because she was clearly at a disadvantage. First, she is dealing in an environment where it is so easy to blame the woman. Second, she faced physical incapacitation with the attendant economic hardship that would prevent her from fighting a good fight. Her enemy took her out in the first round of the fight.
John remained a manager in Zenith Bank throughout the period. For five months, he used his presence and continued employment in Zenith to prepare to battle his estranged wife. It was only a matter of time before John would brandish his weapons of mud and sleaze. He only waited this long because he thought he was in control of the dynamics of this conflict. But he was wrong. The tide turned last week after DPA entered into the picture. (By the way, I use this opportunity to assuage some DPA members who felt that the role of DPA in this case has not been adequately acknowledged. We need not ask for any acknowledgment. Our work speaks for itself). But make no mistake: DPA pushed for the upgrading of the charge from assault to attempted murder. That was the sole reason I went to court last week. (I didn't go to court just to show solidarity) Also, DPA has clarified the narrative and focused attention on the unfortunate and highly questionable position of Zenith Bank.
Keeping our eyes on the ball requires us to stay focused on the issues that matter, regardless of attempt to alter the narrative through manipulated and selective evidence peddled on the personal walls of the accused man. One thing is this: John is defending a case that could send him to jail for the rest of his life. The incentive is too high that he would do anything to escape. Lying is the least thing he would worry about. Once John lost his job and now faces homicide-related criminal charges, you must prepare to expect the worst he is capable of.
Since last week, Ivie has feared many dangers from John. John who had been threatening her since the past 5 months, suddenly began to plead for reconciliation. Ivie was so worried that John was getting to the verge of mental crack up and his stability was much in doubt. She feared for her safety and safety of her children. John was clearly becoming suicidal. I advised her on how to stay calm and on how to be cautions. I must say that if all that John ended up doing was to lie against Ivie with doctored chats logs, then we are relieved that he did much less than we had feared.
Keeping our eyes on the ball demands that we remember the following:
(1) Ivie and John were separated since the past two years without any intention to continue the marriage.
(2) Prior to the separation, John committed domestic violence on Ivie multiple times.
(3) During the time of separation, John has been with multiple women in sexual relationships, as shown by the picture attached in which John and a woman (not Ivie) were in bed.
(4) On that faithful night in June, John came to Ivie's house at night and attacked Ivie with weapons and clearly with intent to kill her.
The above facts are indisputable.
Now let's us consider the fabled evidence that John has conjured up in his defense. John says:
1) That he and his wife agreed to separate in order to evade creditors. (You know that is a lie. John is a banker. He knows that such is not a way to evade creditors when your children remain in the same school for a whole year after separation. Indeed, the reason the children remained in Ajah school, while Ivie was shuttling them from Badagry (where her father lived) to Ajah each day for school was because Ivie did not have money to register them in another school near her father's house).
2) John claims that Ivie got pregnant and aborted it. (Again, you know that is likely a blackmail. John who could not feed three children he already had would not spend nights and days crying that his estranged wife aborted pregnancy with twins. Besides, if that was the case and John felt so bad about that, why would he go to fight Ivie in her house? He should have been eager to divorce her).
3) John claimed that Ivie had relationship with another man during the time they were separated. He uses manipulated social media chat logs to buttress such contrivance. (But, really, even if were true, which I have refused to enter into, it is most unreasonable to expect that after 2 years of separation, your spouse would remain sexually loyal to you, especially when you had started living with another woman).
Now, go over all the excuses and reasons that John has given. The only reason missing is the reason why he attacked Ivie Edobor so viciously? John will never find one reason to justify the attack on Ivie. That is the ball that we must keep our eyes on. What is the justification for his action?
You must know that John was arrested at the scene. He alone was arrested. So, nobody else committed a crime that night. Nobody else attacked anybody other than John. Also, note that after arrest, John made statements and other witnesses made statements. At the end of it, the police decided to arraign him for assault. Note also that even after the case had commenced in court, the government felt that assault was not strong enough. They found that John had an intention to kill Ivie. That was why they changed the charge to attempted murder. It all means that nobody who has examined the evidence from a professional standpoint so far could buy the nonsensical stories John is now peddling. And I urge DPA members to disregards such nonsense. We shall keep our eyes on the ball and we are interested only in one thing - John's excuse for attempting to kill Ivie.
NOTE: You will see among what John attached a letter that Ivie purportedly wrote to Zenith apologizing for allegedly dragging Zenith's name to the mud. You are smart. You would wonder what kind of Bank would go to the extent of forcing a victim who was still in the hospital to write such a letter. That letter is actually a smoking gun against Zenith. In fact, with that letter, we can upgrade out accusations of Zenith Bank from breach of its social responsibility to active persecution and harassment and obstruction of justice. They forced Ivie to call the incident a family dispute that should be resolved within the family, even while the state is prosecuting it as a crime against the Nigerian public. The reason they forced her to describe the incident as such was actually to influence John's indictment and make it appear that it was indeed a family matter. That is called obstruction of justice.
This case is just setting. I think that John has grossly miscalculated what is at stake here. The stories he peddles on his Facebook wall do not cut it at all, and DPA members and the general public will keep their eyes on the ball.
Written By Emeka Ugwuonye, Esquire'