‘Davido lost his son Ifeanyi in his house due to questionable circumstances so the proper upbringing of our daughter Imade cannot be guaranteed” -Sophia Momodu Tells Court as she gives the reason why she’s fighting Davido Over the Joint Custody of their Daughter. She said Davido is Married to another woman (Chioma) and has a very Controversial lifestyle that will expose Imade to Trauma at a tender age
“He is married to another woman, and they live together; the proper upbringing of our daughter cannot be guaranteed” — Sophia Momodu Responds To Davido’s Suit
.
.
Sophia Momodu has filed a response to the Originating Motions by Davido seeking custody of their daughter, Imade
.
.
In a 100-paragraph counter-affidavit to the Applicant’s (Davido) Originating Motion, Sophia stated that
Their daughter “is a minor (9 years old) and as her mother, she has stayed with me all her life and I have been responsible for her welfare, upkeep, and well-being.”
2.She prayed the court that custody of their daughter should not be granted to the Applicant citing his controversial lifestyle which according to her “will expose our daughter to more negative trauma at her tender age”.
Sophia stated “that the Applicant in his role as an artiste always travels and allows many unsavoury male adults around him and his house, who will not be a good influence on an impressionable young female child, like our daughter.
She stated that “The Applicant is married to another woman, and they live together. The proper upbringing of our daughter by another cannot be guaranteed.”
“The fact that the Applicant lost his son in his house in rather unfortunate and questionable circumstances shows that our daughter cannot be placed in the custody of the Applicant.”
She stated “That the Applicant (Davido) apart from his cravings for a $€x slave, only comes around to spend time with our daughter when he wants to use our daughter for his media stunts or promotions.”
She claims that she informed Davido that unless he undertakes to change his “Inappropriate behaviors and overtures” towards her, “any visitation and or access to our daughter should be done elsewhere other than my residence and in the company of our daughter’s nanny whom she is familiar with and has grown quite fond of.”
Sophia stated that contrary to paragraph 6 of the Applicant’s (Davido) affidavit, “I have been the one paying the rent of the house where I live with our daughter…”
