"The most crucial issue in this appeal is the question of corroboration of the
evidence of the victim of the rape. This type of corroboration is certainly, not the
ordinary corroboration, it goes further than that. It demands such corroboration
to clearly implicate the accused here appellant. See S. 183(3) of the Evidence Act
Cap 112 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990. "A person shall not be liable to
be convicted of the offence unless the testimony admitted by virtue of this
section and given on behalf of the prosecution is corroborated by some other
material evidence in support thereof implicating the accused." Per MUNTAKACOOMASSIE, J.C.A (Pp. 14-15, paras. F-B) (...read in context)
4. EVIDENCE - CORROBORATION: Condition that must be established before a
piece of evidence can qualify as corroborative evidence
"The law is firmly established that the evidence which is offered as corroboration
must tend to show: (a) that the offence was committed and (b) that the accused
is implicated in it. These two conditions must co-exist before a piece of evidence
can qualify as corroborative evidence: See Thomas Idemo v. Inspector General of
Police (1957) SCNLR 326; (1957) 2 FSC 26 As was stated in the case of Mbele v.
State (1990) 4 NWLR (Pt. 145) 84 at 500, corroborative evidence must be
evidence which confirms in some material particular not only that the crime has
been committed but also that it was the appellant who committed it: See R. v.
Baskerville (1916) 2 KBD. 658 at 667; Ogugu v. State (1994) 9 NWLR (Pt.366) 1 at
p. 35, Omisade and Ors v. The Queen (1964) NSCC 170, (1964) 1 All NLR 233;
(1964) 1 NMLR 67." Per EDOZIE, J.C.A. (Pp. 21-22, paras. G-D) (...read in context)