The Momodus Deserve To Be Condemned – Dr Ola Balogun Clarifies Comments On Davido, Momodu's Row

The first generation of Nigerian film makers in addressing Davido babymama issue condemned in totality the role played by Ovation magazine boss Dele Momodu. He also charged Sophia Momodu to get a job to support her lifestyle and not turn Davido into ATM.

The letter reads in part: “I was heartbroken to read about what young Mr. Adeleke has been going through at the hands of Mr. and Mrs. Dele Momodu and their neice (or cousin?).

If Davido’s account is true, the activities of the Momodus deserve to be roundly condemned by all right-thinking Nigerians.

Shouldn’t the baby’s interests be paramount? As for the mother of the baby, she should be thoroughly ashamed of herself for having inflicted so much pain and suffering on her child as a result of her alleged drug habits.”

Another excerpt for the letter reads: “If I understand rightly, the young lady is able-bodied. Why doesn’t she go and seek gainful employment somewhere, instead of partying all over the place and expecting the father of her child to pick up extravagant bills?

Why must she consider Davido a personal ATM that is there to cough up money on demand at each instant? It is really too bad!”

READ ALSO: Dele Momodu Is Not Being Truthful, If Anything Happens To My Daughter He Is Responsible – Davido

Read more on The Nation.

Davido and his babymama Sophia Momodu have been embroiled in a child abduction mess since December 29 which has since led to many unpleasant revelations about the relationship between the two. Also joined in the mess is Dele Momodu who is Sophia’s uncle.

The Editor.

“The Nation”

Lagos

Dear Sir,

Having read some of the reactions to my earlier comments on the Davido, Momodu saga, I feel compelled to make the following clarifications:

1. I have never met any of the Adelekes before, and it is highly unlikely that we will ever meet, since we belong to totally different social circles. However, we share in common the fact that we are Omo Oduduwa, so our destinies are linked. I therefore have a duty to come to their defence if the need arises.
2. My conclusions are based on the fact that Davido’s version of events is coherent and compelling, whereas the Momodu version makes no sense.
3. I am a father and a grandfather. If it is true that little Imade’s health problems originated primarily from her mother’s alleged drug problems, there is room for a lot of concern about allowing the child to remain in the vicinity of this kind of person.
4. Also, if it is true that the child has ALREADY in the past been taken to Dubai for emergency treatment and brought back safely to Nigeria without any input or contribution from the Momodus, there is no logical reason for the Momodus to now raise a hue and cry when the baby is about to be taken to Dubai again for further treatment by her biological father, who has all along been fully responsible for her upkeep and care.
5. It is purely sentimental and irrational balderdash to say that it should be compulsory for a mother who does not hitherto appear to have played a positive or useful role in her child’s upbringing to accompany the child for a repeat visit to a hospital in Dubai where the child has ALREADY been treated in the past in her absence by competent medical personnel, with no adverse repercussions. Why would this lady’s presence now be compulsorily required in Dubai if the child is to be taken there for further treatment by her biological father, who has already successfully done so in the past?

6. I stand to be corrected, but there is no evidence so far that Mr. and Mrs. Dele Momodu have ever contributed in any way to little Imade’s care and upbringing in the past, be it in cash or in kind. What then gives them a right to intervene in her life at this point in time?

That can only be a matter of playing to the gallery! I rest my case.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Ola Balogun