Daniel Korang, an creator and spouse at Adom Legal Consult, has defended the Amasaman High Court’s determination to cut back the 15-year prison time period of Evangelist Patricia Asiedua, popularly referred to as Nana Agradaa, pronouncing the ruling used to be guided through legislation and judicial process.

“Sentencing at every stage of a criminal trial is a judicial exercise that is regulated by law. It is never a function of the lottery,” Korang mentioned on The Law on Joy News, including that judges will have to weigh each mitigating and worsening components sooner than figuring out punishment.

He defined that during Agradaa’s case, mitigating components—similar to being a first-time wrongdoer and the slightly small amount of cash concerned—most likely influenced the courtroom’s determination. “In this situation, I do know that Agradaa used to be a primary wrongdoer, and the volume concerned within the fraud used to be slightly small in comparison to different circumstances.

These are necessary issues that most likely influenced the courtroom,” he famous.

The Amasaman High Court, on February 5, 2026, lowered Agradaa’s sentence from 15 years to twelve months, backdated to her conviction date of July 3, 2025, leaving her with simplest 5 months to serve.

Agradaa is these days serving her sentence at Nsawam Female Prison after being convicted through the Accra Circuit Court for charlatanic business environment and defrauding through false pretences.

She used to be accused of accumulating cash from church attendees thru guarantees of money-doubling powers all over all-night products and services promoted on Today’s TV and social media platforms.

Prosecutors mentioned over 1,000 folks attended the provider, delivering important sums, however the promised monetary positive factors didn’t materialise.

Agradaa appealed the sentence, arguing that the trial used to be unfair, the proof inadequate, and that the 15-year time period used to be over the top. She first seemed sooner than the Amasaman High Court on December 4, 2025.

Korang additionally cautioned that viral social media consideration can complicate public belief of justice, however judges will have to stay guided through legislation.

“When a case like this is flying on social media, it is very difficult to maintain a candid position on the law. Not everybody will agree with the legal position, but the court’s responsibility is to apply the law fairly,” he mentioned.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made through Readers and Contributors in this platform don’t essentially constitute the perspectives or coverage of Multimedia Group Limited.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made through Readers and Contributors in this platform don’t essentially constitute the perspectives or coverage of Multimedia Group Limited.