Akuapem Poloo
Lawyer for convicted actress and social media personality, Rosemond Alade Brown aka Akuapem Poloo has filed an appeal against her 90 days jail term by an Accra Circuit Court for publishing a nude picture of herself taken with her 7-year-old son who was in his underwear.
The notice of appeal filed before an Accra High Court indicates that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice when the trial judge gave her a custodial sentencing instead of a fine.
Her lawyer, Andrew Vortia has also filed an application for bail pending the determination of the appeal.
The application indicates that “the ninety (90) days sentence is so short that if the applicant [Akuapem Poloo] is not admitted to bail immediately by the time the appeal is heard, she would have finished serving the sentence.
It states that the grant of bail to a convicted person is not automatic but discretionary but added that there are exceptional circumstances necessitating the grant of bail to the convict.
The application avers that Poloo is “a single parent and a young offender and as such, her first brawl with the law, ought not to have been met with a custodial sentence as the first option in the circumstances of the case.”
“That the child whose right the Appellant is said to have violated, which the law is seeking to protect should not become the victim of circumstances by reason of the hash custodial sentence imposed on the mother by the trial court”, it added.
Sentencing
Akuapem Poloo was facing three charges of publication of obscene materials, engaging in domestic violence, a conduct that in anyway undermines another person’s privacy or integrity and engaging in domestic violence namely conduct that in any way detracts or is likely to detract from another person’s dignity and worth as a human being.
She was dragged to court after she had displayed her naked picture with her son on social media on June 30, 2020 to celebrate the boy’s birthday.
She initially pleaded not guilty to the charges and was granted bail in the sum of GH¢100,000 with four sureties, two of who must be justified.
She was convicted after she changed her plea from not guilty at the commencement of the case, to guilty midway into the trial.
The court presided over by Christiana Cann in sentencing her took into consideration the aggravating facts, intrinsic seriousness of the offence, gravity, prevalence and premeditation with which she committed the offence as pushed by the prosecution.
The court also took into consideration the mitigating factors which included pleading guilty simplicita, being a single parent and the convict’s show of remorse.
The presiding judge, however, went on to express concern about the sudden increase in the abuse of children in the country.
The court in giving its reasons to buttress the sentence held the view that the action of the accused did not only infringe on the rights of the child but morally corrupted those who saw the post.
By Gibril Abdul Razak