that he understood the meaning of giving evidence on oath stated that the Appellant and his wife i.e. the deceased were quarrelling on 29/9/99. Suddenly he heard Fausat (the deceased) shouted for help. He saw Fausat soaked in her blood before he went to call P.W2 who was away in the farm so that he could come and take Fausat to the hospital. The statement of the Appellant exhibit B though a photocopy which is confessional showed that the Appellant was the one who shot his wife. These are the evidence on record to link the Appellant with the offence. From the evidence on record, the evidence of Dr. Adenekan P.W1 was that he found an entry point of a gun shot injury on the right side of the abdomen of the deceased. He opened up the abdomen and found that the liver was ruptured and he recovered a few pellets. There was internal bleedings. In his opinion, the cause of death was due to ruptured liver as a result of gunshot wound. Coupled with the statement made by the deceased to her father in law (P.W2) that the Appellant had shot her is admissible under Section 7 of the Evidence Act. The statement formed part of the relevant fact which throws light into how the deceased got her injury. It forms part of the res gestae of the fact in issue as it explained the injury which P.W2 and P.W3 found on the deceased. The said statement was contemporaneous enough with the act of shooting and the wounds found on the deceased by the P.W2 & P.W3. The statement is admissible in proof of what happened to the deceased and even proved the caused of death. See the case of AKPAN V. THE STATE (1994) 8 N.W.L.R page 226 at 246. From the evidence of P.W1, P.W2 and P.W3 it is clearly established that the gunshot wound inflicted on Fausat by the Appellant caused her death and I so hold. Whether the death was brought about by the intentional act of the Appellant which to his knowledge would reasonably cause the death of the deceased is what I shall now examine anon. Exhibit B is the photocopy of the statement made by the Appellant to the Police during investigation. In the statement, Appellant narrated how he had a misunderstanding with his wife about money for food for their child and how the deceased slapped him, hit him with a plate and he took a gun of a relation on the corridor and fired the deceased who was facing him. Exhibit B is confessional and corroborates the statement made by the deceased to P.W2 and showed how the deceased got the injury that eventually killed her. Let me however quickly say that in our jurisprudence, a man is taken to have intended the natural consequences of his act. I will also add that the Appellant shooting the deceased with a gun knew to his knowledge that it would cause death and it is heavier in retaliation for slapping and hitting one with a plate. I hold that the act of the Appellant which caused the death of the deceased was intentional with the full knowledge that death or grievous bodily harm was its probable consequences. See the cases of OMINI V. THE STATE (1999) 12 N.W.L.R Part 630 at 168; NWAEZE V. THE STATE (1996) 2 N.W.L.R part