FASHION FROM ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE... HOTNESS OR HOTMESS?

What do you think about this bae?
Is this hotness or hotmess?

MAY BE ITS RIHANNA

Could it be that Rihanna is joining the ranks of other celebrities who's claim to fame is a little more adult in nature? Rumor has it the pop singer has joined the ranks of Kardashian and Hilton as some say she's been filmed getting down and dirty.  Hustler magazine, a rather well known mature magazine have made claims that they have a copy of a video of the singer Rihanna having a bit of fun with rapper J-Cole. Both Rihanna and her alleged counterpart have openly denied the existence of such a tape, but some are not so sure that they are telling the whole truth. In fact, J-Cole reportedly posted to Twitter that he had lost his phone not long before Hustler suggested they had the tape.A spokesperson for Hustler magazine outright said that they had seen the sex tape, and that they were unsure of what to do with it. Their hesitation could be evidence in Rihanna's favor, as there's a chance that they were lying. Of course, that's not to say the two didn't have a chance to film a moment of passion. J-Cole opened for Rihanna in her 2011 tour 'Loud', and Rihanna has since made cameos in his music video 'Can't Get Enough'. Is she telling him something, or is this all a nasty rumour?Alas, as of yet we are yet to see evidence of such a tape existing or otherwise. Hustler refuses to reveal any more information about the tape, and people close to Rihanna have sided with her, saying the whole situation is ridiculous. But many are still wondering, why would Hustler outright lie about having a sex tape, if they had nothing at all to back it up? It's likely Hustler are trying a PR stunt, that has the media interested. So my advice, if you want to see Rihanna's dirty side, stick to listening to her sing about Whips and Chains, that's probably as close as you're going to get,  though we found sex videos of possibly Rihanna but we yet to conclude so we have removed all associated videos...

COURT DECLINES TO QUASH CHARGES AGAINS KALU AND OTHERS

 
Allows FG to shield identity of witnesses As DSS alleges plot to abduct defenders By Ikechukwu Nnochiri ABUJA—The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, yesterday, declined to quash the six-count treason charge the federal government entered against the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu. In a ruling yesterday, trial Justice John Tsoho equally permitted the prosecution to shield the identity of eight witnesses that are scheduled to testify against Kanu and two other pro-Biafra supporters, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi. The court refused to discharge and acquit the trio as it was prayed to do by the defence lawyer, Chief Chuks Muoma, SAN. Plot to invade court The ruling came on a day the Department of State Service, DSS, told the court that it “uncovered plot by some pro-Biafra agitators to invade the court and forcefully free the defendants.” The Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, Mr. Mohammed Diri, told trial Justice Tsoho that the DSS has already commenced investigation on the planned invasion. Even though the allegation forced the court to stand-down the matter for three hours, Justice Tsoho subsequently waved it off, even as he resumed sitting on the case around 12pm yesterday. The DPP had tendered a paper that was signed by the DSS, alleging subterranean plot to free the defendants. The court upheld objection that was raised by the defence lawyer, noting that the allegation could not be traced to the DSS since it was contained in a piece of paper without the letter head of the security agency. Meanwhile, following the inability of the Federal Government to produce any of the witnesses in court yesterday as it was earlier directed, Chief Muoma, SAN, applied for his clients to be discharged and acquitted of the charge against them. He predicated the application on the provision of section 351(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.“The DPP  had informed the court that the witnesses said they would not appear to testify against the defendants unless they are allowed to wear masks or their identities shielded from both lawyers and people observing the proceeding. “My lord this is because they are already receiving threats from associates of the defendants that they will be dealt with. The witnesses said they love their lives and requested that their identities be shielded from people who are coming to witness the proceeding,” Diri said. He said DSS operatives also billed to testify in the matter, made similar request on the basis that they are investigating terrorism cases and would not want their identities exposed. Justice Tsoho had on February 19, refused an application by the Federal Government which sought leave to mask the witnesses.“The application was vehemently opposed by counsel to the defendants who urged the court not to allow “masquerades” to testify before it.” Witnesses to testify behind a screen Meantime, owing to the fresh application by the Federal Government, trial Justice Tsoho, yesterday, permitted the witnesses to testify behind a screen. The judge maintained that the decision did not amount to a variation of the previous ruling that prohibited the witnesses from appearing in mask.