For this, and the more detailed reasoning in the leading judgment, both Courts below were correct in finding the Appellant guilty of rape. Appeal dismissed. CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C.: My Lord, Ogunbiyi, JSC, obliged me with the draft of the leading judgment just delivered now. I agree with the reasoning and conclusion. The appellants principal plank for impugning the concurrent judgments of the two Lower Courts was that the testimony of the prosecutrix was not corroborated. This is rather curious for, quite apart from her evidence, PW2's testimony confirmed the allegation of the PW1. Indeed, the testimony of PW5, the Medical Doctor, overwhelmingly, confuted the appellants contention. Hear the role of the PW5 in the rape saga: When we examined the vagina of the girl, the main covering was found to be incompletely broken in the centre. Our conclusion is that the victim was raped. Now, prior to the amendment of Nigeria's Evidence Act in 2011, scholars and other text writers had greeted, with forceful disapprobation, the practice which required corroboration of the evidence of a rape victim, Justice Ngozi Oji, "Proof of Sexual Offences in Nigeria," in UNIZIK Law Journal, Vol 7, No 1, 2010, 302-326; Y. Osinbajo, Cases and Materials on Nigerian Law of Evidence (Lagos: Macmillan Nigeria Publishers Ltd. 1992) 326; T. A. Aguda, Criminal Law and Procedure of the Six Southern States of Nigeria, 756-757; O. S. Oyelede, ''Corroboration," in Akintola and Adedeji (eds), Nigerian Law of Evidence:A Book of Readings (Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press, 2006) 116 etc.