With respect to the third ingredient of the offence alleged against the appellant, that is, that he was the man who raped Ezinne Ukpai PW1, on 20th February, 2015, I am satisfied that the appellant was rightly convicted for the said offence, premised on his confessional statement in Exhibit P3. I do not need to whip a dead horse on that point again. I am satisfied that the two issues discussed in this appeal are not available in favour of the appellant. In the end, the appeal to my mind, is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed. In effect, the judgment of Destina O. Oko, J., in re-charge No. HAB/16FC/2015, delivered on 23rd September, 2016 is affirmed. The appellant, being a paedophile, needed to be kept out of circulation for a while, as rightly decreed by the learned trial judge, so that his paedophilia instincts may cool off. His randiness, marked him out, as being of a dangerous specie and of low moral pedigree. The conduct of the appellant herein can be likened to that of the appellant in Adonike v. The State (2015) 7 NWLR (pt. 1458) 237; (2015) LPELR 24281 (SC) at pages 59 60 by his Lordship, Munkata- Coomassie, JSC when he stated that: The conduct of the appellant herein is as bad as that of the appellant in Akindine v. The State (2012) 16 NWLR (pt. 1326) 318, so I need re-echo what his Lordship, Muhammad J. S. C. said at page 331 of the report, to wit: The facts revealed in this appeal are sordid and can lead to a conclusion that a man can turn into a barbaric animal. When the appellant was alleged to have committed the offence of rape, he was 32 years. His two young victims: Ogechi Kelechi, 8 years old and Chioma Kelechi, 6 years old were, by all standards, under-