Fresh documents relating to the investigation of the Ajiran double murder case have reportedly contradicted allegations of corruption and abuse of office levelled against the Assistant Inspector-General of Police (AIG) in charge of Zone 2, Moshood Jimoh, while indicating that the investigation followed official police procedures.
The documents, reviewed by advocacy group The National Patriots, suggest that the probe into the killings of Prince Ademola Akinloye and Sheriff Ishola Salami began after a formal petition submitted to the Inspector-General of Police by Chief Rotimi Williams’ Chambers on behalf of the Ojomu Chieftaincy Family of Ajiran.
According to the records, the Office of the Inspector-General of Police, on January 8, 2026, directed the then Commissioner of Police in Lagos, Jimoh, to investigate the allegations. The documents indicate that Jimoh acted on directives from Police Headquarters rather than on personal initiative.
The revelations come amid allegations by social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan, who accused the senior police officer of corruption, bias and abuse of office, challenging him to file a defamation suit if the allegations were untrue.
However, the documents reportedly present a different account of events.
Investigation records indicate that detectives obtained statements from several witnesses, including the widow of one of the deceased victims, who allegedly recounted how her husband was chased, shot and attacked with machetes during the incident.
The case file also contains confessional statements allegedly made by two suspects, Shafi Fatai, popularly known as “Fabo,” and Yusuf Ismaila, alias “Bariga.” The suspects reportedly implicated businessman Hammed Tajudeen Akanbi as the person who financed and orchestrated the killings, claiming that millions of naira were paid for the operation.
While the admissibility and evidential value of the confessions remain for the courts to determine, the records suggest investigators relied on multiple pieces of evidence in identifying Akanbi as a suspect.
Additional witness statements allegedly claimed that Akanbi attempted to secure the release of arrested suspects and withdraw the murder cases in exchange for resolving a disputed community land issue. Investigators also referenced a recorded telephone conversation said to support the allegation.
The National Patriots further stated that the Lagos State Directorate of Public Prosecutions is in possession of the complete investigation file, including witness statements, suspect confessions and documentary exhibits currently forming part of the prosecution’s case before the court.
Court records attached to the file also reportedly show that Magistrate Court No. 3 in Ogba, Ikeja, granted police permission on February 16, 2026, to arrest and remand Akanbi for 14 days while investigations continued.
Although that order was later set aside on procedural grounds, the documents indicate that the Federal High Court in Lagos subsequently issued another warrant on April 10, 2026, authorising law enforcement agencies to arrest Akanbi over alleged conspiracy and murder.
The records also dispute claims that Jimoh personally interacted with the suspect after his arrest.
According to the documents, Akanbi was arrested by INTERPOL authorities in the Republic of Benin before being handed over to INTERPOL Nigeria and detained at the State Criminal Investigation Department, Panti. Jimoh’s involvement, the records state, was limited to coordinating with INTERPOL offices to facilitate the suspect’s lawful transfer for investigation.
The National Patriots argued that the controversy highlights the need to assess criminal investigations based on documentary evidence and judicial proceedings rather than public campaigns or social media narratives.
The organisation also noted that the Centre for Human and Socio-Economic Rights commended Jimoh’s handling of the investigation, describing it as professional while urging officers involved in the prosecution to maintain neutrality and adhere strictly to due process.
The group maintained that the Ajiran murder case remains before the courts and that all defendants, as well as public officials accused of wrongdoing, are entitled to the constitutional presumption of innocence until credible evidence proves otherwise.
It added that the ongoing judicial proceedings, rather than public opinion, will ultimately determine the guilt or innocence of those standing trial.
