Embattled 2023 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME) candidate Mmesoma Ejikeme, has shed light on how she came about her results from the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB).
Her purported score of 362 out of 400 has been discounted by JAMB as “patently fake”.
The 19-year-old, who made a guest appearance on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily via telephone, insisted that she visited the JAMB portal after the examinations earlier this year.
“You have to register on the JAMB portal with your email address and number; I went to [the] JAMB portal. On that JAMB portal, I tried to get my result; they redirected me to another server,” she said.
“That’s where I entered my reg number, and when I checked the result, that was what I got there and downloaded it. I didn’t go to any computer centre.”
Asked if she was the only one who printed the same outdated version of result sheet, she said, “I’ve not seen anyone with this kind of copy.”
Providing clarification on whether she printed the results at home, the candidate explained, “You know phones now, if you want to check, you have the reg number. That’s the main thing you use in downloading your [results]. It’s not the hard copy that I’m talking of.”
Her father, Romanus, who also spoke on the programme, denied going to a business cafe with his daughter to print out the results.
He said, “I didn’t go with her. I didn’t go there with her,” he said.
Banned Three Years
Mmesoma Ejikeme is at the centre of a UTME results forgery allegation.
While the 19-year-old claims her “results notification” slip for the Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination showing a score of 362 out of 400 was printed from the JAMB results portal, the board argues she is parading a forged result on a template it discontinued in 2021.
Her official score is 249.
On Tuesday, JAMB insisted that her result is “patently fake”, saying it had withdrawn her result and consequently barred her from writing the examination for the next three years.
Mmesoma, believes she should not be blamed for the controversy, describing the sanction as “not fair”.