428 at 11; GIFA V. THE STATE (1996) 4 N.W.L.R Part 443 at 375 and THE STATE V. AZEEZ (2008) Vol. 43 W.R.N page 1 at pages 36-37 lines 20- 20 per Mohammad J.S.C. At the trial, the Appellant denied or retracted his confessional statement i.e. Exhibit B. Retraction from a confessional state by an accused person of having made such a statement does not ipso facto render it inadmissible in evidence and in this respect a confession contained in a statement made to the Policies not to be treated differently from any other confession. See BATURE V. THE STATE (1994) 1 N.W.L.R part 320 at 267; SHITTU V. THE STATE (1990) 1 ALL N.L.R at 228; EGHOGHONOME VS THE STATE (1993) 7 N.W.L.R Part 306 at 383 and AYO V. THE STATE (2009) VOL. 8 W.R.N page 134 at pages 152-153 lines 355. To determine the truth or voluntariness of an accused person, the Court would have to consider the following: (1) Is there anything outside the confession to show that it is true? P.w1 Dr. Adeneken who performed the postmortem examination stated that he found an entry point of a gunshot on the right side of the abdomen of the deceased. When he opened up the abdomen, he recovered a few pellets and he concluded that the cause of death was as a result of gun shot wound. See page 13 lines 11-15 of the record. (2) Is it corroborated? The statement made by the deceased to her father in law (P.W2) that the Appellant had shot her which is admissible under Section 7 of the Evidence Act as to how the deceased got the injury found on her has corroborated the confessional statement i.e. Exhibit B. See page 14 lines 6-7 of the record. (3) Are the relevant statements made in it of facts true as far as they can be tested? The fact of the appellant quarrelling with the deceased in the said statement Exhibit B was also corroborated or confirmed by P.w3 in his evidence that the Appellant and the deceased were quarrelling See page 15 lines 10-12 of the record. The Police could not have manufactured the facts contained in Exhibit B. (4) Whether the Appellant had the opportunity of committing the crime. The Appellant's alibi was raised for the first time in court when he was giving evidence and P.w3 in his evidence stated at page 15 lines 14-15 thus "On that date myself, my junior brother Olaolu, the accused and late Fausat were the people at home". The statement had fixed the Appellant at the scene of crime. The Appellant said he escaped after firing in Exhibit B. See page 9 line 17. (5) Is his confession possible? It is possible for young couple to quarrel over feeding allowance of their child when faced with financial problem see Exhibit B.