George

The pressure of water at Mgbagbu Owa Enugu can supply the whole South East, including high rise buildings without any pressure pump The problem is not water, what they fail to provide and maintain is proper plumbing systems for water distribution which is still the Job of the government And yes, Enugu deserves an intentional leader

DAY 19 END POLICE BRUTALITY SND EXTORTION IN NIGERIA This is a junior officer disobeying a direct command from his superior just to extort an innocent Nigerian. ⚠️PLEASE MAKE SURE UOU WATCH THE SECOND VIDEO, LET THE POLICE SEE YHEIR USELESS OFFICERS

FORMAL REBUTTAL STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE FAMILY OF ABDULSAMAD JAMIU (DECEASED) In Response to the HQ Nigerian Army Official Account of Events of 25th April 2026 Incident Location: Dei-Dei Shagari Quarters, Abuja, Federal Capital Territory Victim: Abdulsamad Jamiu, Male, 24 Years of Age Date of Statement: 26th April 2026 PRELIMINARY NOTE This statement is issued on behalf of the immediate family of the late Abdulsamad Jamiu, who was killed in the early hours of Saturday, 25th April 2026, at his residence in Dei-Dei Shagari Quarters, Abuja. It is issued in direct and formal response to the account of events published by the Nigerian Military, which the family, supported by physical evidence, witness testimony, and the military’s own partial admissions, categorically rejects as false, misleading, and an affront to the memory of an innocent young man. The family is not issuing this statement in anger alone. They are issuing it in the interest of truth, accountability, and the rule of law — values which the Nigerian Military, as an institution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, is constitutionally obligated to uphold. SECTION I: ESTABLISHED FACTS The following facts are not in dispute and form the foundation of this rebuttal: 1. At approximately 2:00 a.m. on Saturday, 25th April 2026, personnel of the Nigerian Military entered the residential premises of the Jamiu family at Dei-Dei Shagari Quarters, Abuja. 2. At the time of the incident, Abdulsamad Jamiu, aged 24 years, was present inside his room within the family residence. His sister was also present in the house. Their parents were absent, having travelled to Okene to attend a burial ceremony. 3. Nigerian Military personnel discharged a firearm at close range through the door of Abdulsamad’s room. The shot struck Abdulsamad Jamiu in the head, killing him instantly. 4. The trajectory of the bullet — confirmed by physical examination of the bullet hole, which runs from the room door to the wall of the room — conclusively establishes that the shot was fired from outside the room, through the closed door, into the room where Abdulsamad Jamiu was situated. 5. On hearing the gunshot, Abdulsamad’s sister rushed downstairs, whereupon she was instructed by the soldiers present to go outside and “calm down.” 6. Neighbours who heard the gunshot contacted the community vigilante group. Upon their arrival, vigilante members were instructed by the military personnel to mop up the blood and flush it — a directive which, in itself, raises grave questions about the military’s intent to preserve an evidence-intact crime scene. 7. The body of Abdulsamad Jamiu was subsequently conveyed to Kubwa General Hospital by the police, who had arrived at the scene. The family was compelled to endure hours of statements and administrative paperwork before being granted access to retrieve their son’s remains for burial. 8. The military personnel present at the scene, when confronted by the family regarding the killing of their son, acknowledged that the shooting of Abdulsamad Jamiu was a mistake and that they had killed an innocent person. This acknowledgement was made in the presence of the Divisional Police Officer (DPO) and was recorded in a written statement. SECTION II: THE MILITARY’S ACCOUNT AND ITS SPECIFIC CONTRADICTIONS The Nigerian Military has publicly claimed that its personnel were engaged in active pursuit of armed robbers and that the fatal shooting of Abdulsamad Jamiu occurred in the course of an exchange of gunfire. The family rejects this account in its entirety and presents the following point-by-point rebuttal, each supported by verifiable evidence or the absence of evidence where the military bears the burden of proof: Ground 1: The Physical Evidence Disproves an “Exchange of Gunfire” The military’s claim of an exchange of gunfire is irreconcilable with the physical evidence present at the scene.