accomplice that the accused committed, but that it was committed by the accused.  It is trite law that any evidence that will serve as corroboration must not be flawed, doubtful or discredited per Onu JSC in Sambo v. State (1993) 7 (Pt.1) SCNJ 128/130 and 139.(1993) 6 NWLR (Pt.300) 399. It is clear therefore that the evidence of the victim (PW3) is in dire need of corroboration and the unsworn testimony of her senior brother (PW2) cannot corroborate her testimony. It was stated in Halsbury's Law of England 4th Edition p.286 at paras 474-480 that there is an absolute prohibition to a conviction by virtue of the unsworn evidence of a person of tender age unless the evidence be corroborated. See also R. v. Jones (1939) 27 Criminal Appeal Reports p.33 at 34. It is also the law that in criminal cases corroboration must come from the prosecution and never from the defence. Therefore even if the appellant lied in his defence of alibi which was never proved that without more cannot supply the required corroboration. See the case of Okafor v. Police (1964) 1 All NLR 302. That being the case the prosecution in this appeal must supply the required corroboration before conviction can stand. In the case of: Olaleye v. The State (1970) 1 All NLR 300; (1969-1970) Vol. 6 NSCC p.250 it was held that both under S.182(3) and s.178(5) of the Evidence Law, the unsworn evidence of the complaintant must be corroborated. Assuming without conceding that in this appeal the medical report amounts to corroboration of the act of the rape as narrated by the victim the same report does not in any way corroborate her story that it was the appellant who had raped her. It was not a situation where evidence shows that both the victim and rapist have general infection. Olaleye v. The State supra once there was no independent corroborative evidence coming from the prosecution medical report