This is supported by the case of R V FRANCIS KUFI 1960 WNLR 1 wherein the accused was charged with indecent assault on a girl of ten years of age. The accused having admitted to the father of the girl just as the case herein, it was held that the admission of the offence by the accused to the father of the girl was sufficient corroboration. This case was referred to in IKO V STATE PER IGUH JSC (2003) 3 ACLR 76. See also R v Rice (1963) 1 QB 857 quoted in Iko v State (supra) per Katsina-Alu JSC. Similarly, in the case of THE QUEEN V. OBLASA (1962) 1 All N. L. R. 651, it was held that if a person makes a free and voluntary confession which is direct and positive and is properly proved, he may be convicted on the confession alone without any further evidence. I find as a fact and hold that the accused person’s confession is direct and positive and property proved. In the case of JAMES OBI ACHABUA V THE STATE (1976) 12 S. C. 63 the Supreme Court held that confession alone even without corroboration can support a conviction so long as the court is satisfied of the truth. In the light of the above and further to Section 180 (1) and (2), I find as a fact that the evidence of PW 1 has been sufficiently corroborated by the witnesses and I so hold. The case of AREBAMEN V. THE STATE (1972) 4 SC 35 supports my view which I have also relied upon provides:“Corroboration evidence is evidence of some material particular implicating an accused person in the commission of the offences alleged.” 21