It is not in my witness statement - Mr. Johnson Asiedu Nketia's argument double standard

Mr. Johnson Asiedu Nketia who stands in the witness box as 1st witness to petitioner Mr. John Dramani Mahama argues against being questioned from outside issues stated therein his witness statement.

Questioned by Counsel for 2nd Respondent Lawyer Akoto Ampaw if he (Mr. Asiedu Nketiah) recalls series of press conferences held with presidential results declarations made by his political party the NDC in favour of petitioner prior to the declaration by the EC (1st Respondent), he agrees to such press conferences yet decline that those could be sufficient for his cross-examination or accurately relevant in the case pending before the Court.

He argues strongly that nowhere in his witness statement filed to the Court makes mention of such press conferences. Thus, anything outside his duly signed and filed witness statement should be of no relevance to the Court and its associated cross-examination.

Sadly, this same 1st witness Mr. Johnson Asiedu Nketia declined to Counsel (Lawyer Justin Amenuvor) for 1st Respondent's suggestion that the figures so petitioned by the petitioner to have been padded by the EC (1st Respondent) in favour of the 2nd Respondent (Mr. Akufo-Addo) cannot be all conclusive. He argues that the figure totalling about 4,639 is but a sample filed to the court awaiting other padded figures they'll be speaking to, having subsequently brought same before the Court.

At one breadth, Mr. Johnson Asiedu Nketia declines to be cross-examined on things not stated in his witness statement or the petitioner’s petition. At another, he wants the Court to agree with him that figures not found in the petitioner's petition should be used other than what they have submitted in their petition and witness statements. Outrightly double standard isn't it?