from the Two Committees; the Security and Logistics Committees, said to have been in charge of the arrangements. If Mr. Dennis Nev said there were no Committees, but the Defendant maintained that he actually saw the List of the Members of both Committees, the confirmation of Cash Payments could only have come from he who saw the List. The Mystery here, is that Nev said “there were no Committees but the Monies were disbursed directly to Rev. Jolly Nyame”, but Rev. Jolly Nyame said “there were no disbursements to me, but I saw the list of the two Committees Members coordinated by Nev, who gave the Monies to the Security and Logistics Committee Members. It is clear that he, who ascertains a certain state of affairs, has the evidential burden to prove it. Therefore, the Defendant who claimed he saw a List of Committee Members who carried out Security and Logistic Activities, and who was paid, had to establish these assertions on a preponderance of evidence. The next Issue for determination has to be Practicability of the Execution of Projects and Activities described in the Three Memos dated the 11th of April 2007. According to the Defendant, the information that the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was coming to Taraba State on the 12th of April 2007, was communicated to him via Telephone late on the 10th of April 2007 by the then Chief of Staff of the President. He therefore could not react until the next day. From this fact, it meant that by the time the Defendant received the Information of the Visit, he had only One Day to prepare for the Visit. The question to be asked here is, what Practical Preparations could possibly be made for a State Visit with One Day Notice, if he only got the Information on the 10th of April 2007, and what end could have been achieved by the Short Notice? He had only One Day!!! 188