22 In OSENI VS THE STATE (2012) LPELR 7833 (SC); I.T. Muhammad JSC held inter alia: ???It is regrettable that Appellant???s Counsel at the trial stage did not object to the admissibility of this confessional statement, yet he went on to blame the trial Court in not treating Appellant???s statement with utmost caution. It will appear too late in the day to seek to supply a remedy to a dented or a crucified matter which can hardly be revived???.??? For the foregoing reasons, I agree with the learned Respondent???s Counsel that the Appellant cannot seek to attack the reliance placed on Exhibit A on the ground of its non-signing by the Appellant. On the Appellant???s submission that Exhibit A cannot corroborate the evidence of PW1, the law is settled that a retracted confessional statement of an accused is not only sufficient to corroborate evidence that requires corroboration, but is in itself sufficient to sustain the conviction of an accused so long as it is direct, positive, and unequivocally and clearly suggestive of the guilt of the accused person. The retraction does not render the confession 23 inadmissible nor deter the Court from acting thereon. See GALADIMA VS THE STATE (2012) 18 NWLR (PT. 1333) 610; SOLOLA & ANOR VS THE STATE (2005) 11 NWLR (PT. 937) 460 and OGUDO VS THE STATE (Supra). In OSENI VS THE STATE (Supra) the Supreme Court in considering the question whether the trial Court can convict on an uncorroborated confessional statement, held that even without corroboration, a confessional statement is sufficient to support a conviction so long as the Court is satisfied of its truth. This is premised on the established principle that a confessional statement which is free, direct, positive