Nollywood actress, Sarah Martins has continued to react to colleague Yul Edochie’s wife, May Edochie’s, N500 million lawsuit against her.
Recall that May Edochie a few days ago demanded a public apology from Sarah Martins for sharing a photoshopped picture of Yul’s second wife, Judy Austin, and Yul into a family photo of her and her four children.
The mother of four also demanded a full retraction of the defamatory comments Sarah made against her during an Instagram live session with media personality Daddy Frezze.
In the interview with Daddy Freeze, Sarah claimed that May failed in her duties to Yul as his wife, which made Yul take a second wife.
She gave Sarah 14 days to apologise or face legal action, which would require her to pay N500 million in damages.
Sarah, who at first responded with a meme, has now written a thorough piece on the lawsuit.
According to her, the defamatory comment wasn’t made by her, and she already apologised to May in that live video for sharing the photoshopped photo.
She noted that May will hear from her legal team soon as she won’t allow herself to be bullied, insulted, or harassed.
“Swipe to see the honest post made by a renowned lawyer not a fraudster posing as a lawyer! In this video I clearly apologized to your “supposed queen” if she found my photoshopped picture offensive even when she didn’t ask me for an apology!
At the end of the Live show, I wrapped it up with yet another another apology to the same “supposed queen” if I uttered any word against her knowingly or unknowingly! You can see clearly, I wasn’t the one that made the utterances she claimed I made!
One Ms or Mrs Sandra James was the one that said all your “supposed queen” claimed I said. No! I won’t keep quiet especially when I am being insulted, harassed and bullied by her so called fans over what I didn’t do. Today, I was physically harassed by her aggressive and uncultured fans and I won’t tolerate such behaviors against me again! YOU WILL HEAR FROM MY LEGAL TEAM!”. She wrote.
See the video from Daddy Freeze’s live session which Sarah posted below.
She also shared a “lawyer’s” analysis of the case. See below.
