for her and housed her for the night, and took her (prosecutrix) to her mother the following morning; who observed injuries and blood clots in the vaginal track of the prosecutrix. The Appellant in his extra-judicial statement confessed to the crime but resiled therefrom during trial. In her judgment, the Court below found the appellant guilty of the offence charged against him and sentenced him to ten (10) years imprisonment. The appellants appeal is predicated on eight (8) grounds of appeal. They are at pages 81 86 of the record of appeal to wit: GROUND ONE The learned trial Judge erred in law and in facts when he held that:The evidence of the victim (PW1) and the medical doctor (PW4) together with the medical report, Exhibit P5 established the fact of sexual intercourse. PARTICULARS OF ERROR:1. Exhibit P5, the medical report, is tainted with reasonable doubt as the medical examination was carried out long after the alleged rape of the PW1. 2. There was a conspicuous lapse of time between 20/2/2015 when the alleged offence of rape took place and 6/3/2015 when the medical examination was conducted on the PW1 which renders the said medical report unsupportive evidence of sexual intercourse of 20/2/2015. 3. There is no evidence by the prosecution that PW1 never had sexual intercourse with another man prior to 6/3/2015 when the medical examination was conducted on the PW1. GROUND TWO