Prominent media personality, Bridget Otoo, has reacted to reports of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the defunct Menzgold Company Limited, Nana Appiah Mensah, popularly known as NAM1 suing her for defamation.
The media personality accused NAM1 of selling quack gold used by criminals to Ghanaians and taking their funds illegally yet he has the guts to sue her for defamation because he refers to him as a ‘scammer.’
Bridget Otoo intimated that she is not intimidated by NAM1’s diversionary tactics and she is ever to face him in court when called upon.
“You [NAM1] sold Aurum Utalium (fake gold used criminals) to decent working Ghanaians took their money and you are suing me for calling you a scammer. @Nam 1 we can’t wait to retell the Menzgold story cos it was dying out in the media. I am in the office, come and serve me,” she wrote on her X handle.
Background
Nana Appiah Mensah sued Bridget Otoo at an Accra High Court and demanded among others, GH¢1 million in damages and other reliefs.
According to a writ of summons dated November 7, 2023, and sighted by GhanaWeb, he accused Bridget Otoo of posting defamatory comments on her X handle in relation to his pending criminal case.
“In which country will a fraudster like @Nam_the_patriot be allowed to do this? This is a form of bribe for the police who are to arrest him to distribute money on his behalf! Smh F NAM1 is a scammer #Jail him #OccupyJulorbiHouse,” the October 21, 2023 tweet by Otoo read.
NAM1 noted that the views expressed by Bridget labels him a criminal, “who makes money through deceit by scamming, the Plaintiff is a fraudster, the Plaintiff is a scammer dishonest person and deceiver of the public to make money.”
In his view, to the extent that the determination of his status as a criminal or fraudster is before the courts, “he has suffered great damage to his character and reputation by being portrayed as a fraudster and scammer in the eyes of right-thinking members of society and his business partners worldwide.”
Aside from the 1 million Ghana cedis in damages, he was also seeking a perpetual injunction restraining Bridget Otoo from publishing any further defamatory material against him.
Other reliefs he sought include an order directed at the defendant to retract and render an unqualified apology to him on the same platform, and an order to pull down any defamatory statement made against him from her social media handles.