‘Who Killed Patrick?’ Coroner’s Verdict Links Kemepadei, NSCDC Crew And Police Officer To Fatal Chain Of Events
By Passman Akpos
YENAGOA, BAYELSA STATE — The Coroner’s Court sitting in Yenagoa has delivered a verdict into the death of 24-year-old Patrick Peresuodei, finding substantial evidence linking Bodmas Kemepadei and persons acting with him to the initial assault, while also calling for further investigation into personnel of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) and an investigating police officer, Inspector Barnabas Eyoroere.
The verdict, delivered on Friday, August 21, 2026, followed an inquest into the circumstances surrounding Patrick’s death on January 29, 2026
According to the findings presented at the inquest, the Court concluded that Patrick’s death was violent and unnatural, resulting from haemorrhagic shock caused by multiple extensive and fatal blunt-force traumatic injuries.
The Court rejected the suggestion that the 24-year-old died from a natural disease.
It further found that Patrick was taken into police custody on January 15, 2026, with injuries that predated his arrival, describing the circumstances as evidence of an initial assault.
On the alleged involvement of Kemepadei, the Court said there was substantial evidence connecting him and persons acting with him to the initial assault and injuries suffered by Patrick.
However, the Court made clear that the video in which Patrick reportedly mentioned Kemepadei’s name repeatedly did not, by itself, establish beyond reasonable doubt that Kemepadei personally inflicted the fatal injuries.
The Court nevertheless found that Kemepadei played a significant role in initiating and participating in Patrick’s arrest and transfer into police custody, saying the evidence warranted further criminal investigation into his role and that of persons acting under his authority.
NSCDC Officers Also Face Further Scrutiny
The Court also raised questions over the role of NSCDC personnel who were present during Patrick’s arrest and the events preceding his transfer to the police.
It found that the officers failed to satisfactorily explain how Patrick sustained his initial injuries and concluded that the circumstances established their participation in the assault before the deceased was handed over to the police.
However, the Court said the precise individual roles of the officers remained uncertain.
It therefore called for further investigation into the conduct of the NSCDC personnel involved in the arrest of Patrick and his brother, Destiny Peresuodei.
Inspector Barnabas Implicated In Custodial Assault
The verdict also turned attention to what happened after Patrick entered police custody.
The Court found, on the balance of probabilities, that Patrick sustained materially aggravating traumatic injuries while in police custody and that those injuries formed a major part of the chain of events leading to his death.
In particular, the Court said evidence implicated Investigating Police Officer Inspector Barnabas Eyoroere in the alleged custodial assault of Patrick.
It consequently held that the evidence disclosed a prima facie case warranting criminal investigation and prosecutorial consideration of Inspector Barnabas’ alleged role.
Medical Delay Raises Another Accountability Question
The Court also criticized the handling of Patrick’s medical condition while he was in custody.
It found an inadequate and unjustifiable delay in efforts to obtain appropriate medical treatment for him during the early period of his detention.
The Court consequently called for a review of procedures governing the treatment of injured detainees and urged authorities to ensure that persons brought into custody with injuries receive prompt medical attention.
‘Why Set Up The Court If It Cannot Do The Very Thing?’
The verdict has nevertheless triggered criticism from individuals following the case, with questions being raised over whether the inquest went far enough in identifying those responsible.
Reacting to the findings, Prince Nimisongo ThankGod Anabs questioned the practical impact of the proceedings.
«“At a point while reading through the report, I couldn’t help but ask why the need to set up this court if it cannot do the very thing it’s meant to.”»
The criticism reflects a broader concern over the apparent gap between the Court’s findings of substantial evidence and its inability, within the limits of an inquest, to determine criminal guilt.
The Coroner expressly emphasized that its verdict was not a criminal conviction and that questions of criminal liability remained for the appropriate prosecuting authorities and competent criminal courts.
Coroner Calls For Prosecution Review
The Court consequently directed that, after relevant investigations are completed, the case file should be forwarded to the appropriate prosecuting authority for an independent legal assessment on whether criminal charges should be instituted.
It also recommended further forensic investigation, preservation of electronic evidence, police custody records and relevant medical records.
The Court called for an independent investigation into custodial practices in Bayelsa State, including the conditions under which Patrick was detained, the use of restraints and allegations of assault against detainees.
The Nigeria Police Force was also urged to review its procedures for handling injured suspects, including prompt and independent medical assessments regardless of a detainee’s reluctance to receive treatment.
The Court further recommended that, where appropriate, injured suspects should be promptly released on bail to enable them obtain necessary medical attention.
It also urged relevant authorities to consider whether administrative or disciplinary proceedings were warranted against officers found to have breached applicable police or custodial procedures.
Finally, the Court ordered that the complete record of the inquest, exhibits and medical evidence be transmitted to the relevant investigative and prosecutorial authorities for further action in accordance with the law.
The Questions That Remain
While the verdict has established that Patrick suffered violent and unnatural death and identified several stages in the chain of events preceding his death, questions remain over who bears individual criminal responsibility for each injury.
The Court’s findings concerning Kemepadei, the NSCDC personnel and Inspector Barnabas are therefore likely to place renewed pressure on investigative and prosecutorial authorities to determine whether the available evidence supports criminal charges.
For Patrick Peresuodei’s family and those demanding justice, the next stage may ultimately be more consequential than the inquest itself: whether the authorities act on the evidence identified by the Coroner or allow the recommendations to remain on paper.
Tarakiri Voice Newspaper will continue to monitor developments surrounding the case and the implementation of the Coroner’s recommendations.
This report distinguishes between findings made on the balance of probabilities at the inquest and criminal liability, which the Coroner expressly left to investigators and competent criminal courts.
