“Even the disbursement of N250M to Pinnacle was purely on executive discretion, since funds earlier meant for the TV refurbishing has been for Ecological areas. This is management by exception. As long as the ends justifies the means, it is still within the Chief Executive to exercise this function for the overall good of the State.”(Sic) Chief Joshua Dariye, appears to imply that the Budgeted Funds for the Refurbishing of the TV Stations had been utilized for Ecological Purposes and so, when the Funds for the Ecological Purposes arrived, he employed “Management by Exception Strategy”, (whatever that means), to allocate the Ecological Funds for the Use of the TV Station. The First thing that comes to mind, is that he was referring to the Question of Virement, in which case, there has to be Documentary Evidence to back this up. There was none adduced by the Defence through all the Documentary Exhibits they tendered before the Court. Now, from the Documentary Evidence tendered from Exhibits D22 to D33, Eleven Documents, NONE had anything to do with this Management by Exception. More importantly, the Dates and Sequence of Events and their Narrations, just did not tally. It raised the Presumption that there was hidden somewhere another Contract for the Supply of TV and Radio. It also appears that the Only Letter of Award furnished in Exhibit D26A was signed on the 5th of June 2001, which presupposes that the Contract Document had not been prepared as at June 2001. As at August 2001, the Tender Fee and the Registration had not yet been paid, which again presupposes that the Contract had still not yet been entered into. It is clear that Mr. Israel Dabel, collected this Award Letter in Exhibit D26B on behalf of Pinnacle Communications. The Conclusive Sentence in Exhibit D26A required Pinnacle Communications to call at the Ministry of Information, Jos, to SIGN the Contract Agreement. The Date on Exhibit P7, particularly the Cheque Issued out to Pinnacle Communications for the Sum of Two Hundred and Fifty Million Naira (N250, 000, 000) was issued on the 20th of July 2001. That means, the Money was allocated to Pinnacle Communications before it paid the Tender Fee, before it paid the Registration Fee both in the Sum of Forty-Five Thousand Naira (N45, 000) and before this Company signed the Contract Agreement. As at 6th of August 2001, there was NO Contract signed between Plateau State Government and Pinnacle Communications Limited, to warrant any payment for the Contract. The Defendant had also confirmed that he paid the Sum of Two Hundred and Fifty Million Naira (N250, 000, 000) to Pinnacle Communications for the Supply of Equipment to PRTV on the 20th of July 2001. Therefore, by the Logical Sequence of Dates and Events, the Payment he authorized cannot be for this Contract. The Relevant Commissioner of Finance, Dr. Patrick Dakum, who testified as DW13, as well as the Accountant General of the State, did not testify about this Payment to Pinnacle Communications andought to have known about it. There is also the fact that by Exhibit D30 dated the 5th of March 2002, Pinnacle Communications wrote to the Government demanding for the Payment of 80% of the Entire Contract Sum as agreed by the Parties. It is clear that there was a Further Formal Contract where it was agreed that the Contractor be paid 80% of the Entire Contract Sum as Initial Payment. This 80% was calculated by the Contractor to be Seven Hundred and Eighty Three Million, Forty-Five Thousand, Six Hundred Naira (N783, 045, 600). The Letter acknowledged on the 5th of March 2002, claimed that only the Sum of Three Hundred and Fifty Million Naira (N350, 000, 000) had been paid to the Contractor, as approved by the Government of Plateau State. Further, the Letter did not refer to any Payment of Two Hundred 153