were disadvantages of movement for example, a Truck could breakdown and that would account for why they were not received on the same date. He agreed he was wrong when he had earlier stated that the Equipment arrived on the same Date and Month. He also agreed with the Prosecution that since he was not the Person who received the Equipment, he was not in a position to state the Day and Month the Equipment was received and further agreed that the Officer who received them, did not state his Name, Sign or Date it. He handed over the Delivery Note to the Direct Labour Agency, who is in Custody of them, stating further that he had never worked for this Agency, only collaborating in areas of need. If he needed both the Delivery and Hand Over Notes, he would go to the Direct Labour Agency. He was shown Page 1 of Exhibit D18, whereupon he identified it to be his Handover Note dated the 27th of April 2000, a Period of Four (4) Months from December 1999. From this Handover Note, the Name of Julius Berger was not indicated as it only stated that it was received “from supplier”. He had been instructed by the Director of Mechanical Engineering to forward the Equipment to the Direct Labour Agency, who had gotten the Directive from the Commissioner. Of the Entire Ancillary mentioned in the Delivery Note such as Tyres, Landings, Wheels, Battery and Electrolytes, the Name of Julius Berger was not mentioned except in regard to the Excavator. The Prosecution took him through the differences in the Dates of Delivery for these Items, where it showed that he released the above Items to the Direct Labour Agency on 15th of June 2000. In Page 5 he released some on the 1st of June 2000, and in Page 4 he released some on the 11th of May 2000. In trying to explain these above latent disparities, he stated the Items were Auxiliary Equipment handed over at a later date, which did not come together with the Plant. According to him, the Handover Note did not cover the Ancillary Items in Pages 3 to 6 of Exhibit D18. Under Re-Examination, Engr. Walman stated that the Ministry kept Records, and Exhibit D18 was gotten from his Records. DW5, Mr. Stephen Igmala, the Acting General Manager of the Plateau State Road Maintenance Agency, formerly known as the Direct Labour Agency, had been in the Direct Labour Agency for the past Sixteen Years. In answer to Exhibit D18 at Pages 1 to 12, the Handover Notes, addressed to the General Manager, Direct Labour Agency, he stated that he only became aware of the Handover Notes after the Transactions. In June 2000, the Ministry of Works gave them the List and the Equipment, which are still in use till date. He had no idea, when or how the State Government paid for them, and his Office, did not receive any EFCC Investigators in Jos, Plateau State, visiting to inspect their Equipment. However in March 2016, he was invited to the EFCC Headquarters in Abuja. Under Cross–Examination by the Prosecuting Senior Counsel, he stated that he became the Acting General Manager of the Plateau State Road Maintenance Agency since June 2005, a Period of approximately One Year and Three Months. He agreed that the Period of his Acting, was over the Six Months stipulated period mandated under the Civil Services Rules. He acknowledged writing his Statement when he visited the EFCC around March 2006 and reaffirmed his position of not knowing how the Equipment were procured, stating that he was not the Person who received the Equipment, but it was the Secretary of the Direct Labour Agency who did. The Equipment were fairly used, and included Tyres and Tubes. Further, he stated that since the Year 169