girl/child and therefore behaved relecklessly and wickedly. The result is that, the learned trial Judge found his believe to be unreasonable. I also hold that the Appellant failed to adduce credible evidence in support of his defence under Section 32(4) of the Child Rights Law of Ogun State. The prosecution only had the burden of adducing evidence to show that the prosecutrix was below the age of eighteen and that the Appellant had sexual intercourse with her. The burden would then shift to the Appellant to prove that he had reason to believe that she was eighteen (18) years or above. The Appellant failed to discharge that burden. See Phillips v. Eba Odan Commercial & Industrial Co. Ltd (2013) 1 NWLR (pt.1336) 618 and Okubuke v. Oyagbola (1990) 4 NWLR (pt.147) 723. For the above reasons and the other reasons admirably and lucidly laid out in the lead judgment, I have no doubt in my mind that this appeal is without merit. It is accordingly dismissed. I abide by the consequential orders made by my learned brother. NONYEREM OKORONKWO, J.C.A.:It is an established fact of nature that some people may by reason of their stature or physical conditions or economic or social circumstances, look older or younger than their registry age. It is particularly, so when such people engage in physical or mental activities that give one the impression that they are of 'age'. The evidence in this case of the prosecutrix fits into this category and the question is whether appellant has reason, having regards to his antecedents with the prosecutrix to believe that she is of age - more particularly that she is above 18 years.