she failed jamb and her mother threatened to deal with her mercilessly and so she ran away from home. DW3 at page 77 testified as follows: I asked her to go back to her Mummys house, she refused. I knelt down and begged her to go back home, she refused. These pieces of evidence clearly show that the Appellant was out for unlawful intercourse with child. He knew she had parents under whose custody she was. That the victim sleeping under the same roof with the Appellant suggest that the duo were having sex bearing in mind that the brother living with the Appellant was chased away. The evidence of DW1 at Pg. 60 of the record as follows in support of the above presumption of having unlawful sexual intercourse with the victim. DW1 at pg. 60 testified as follows: The moment Jadesola came to my house, she asked me to tell him i.e. my brother to go and live with Aloma Adisa (my friend) since he was staying with me from morning till evening and after eating he will watch film with us and go and sleep with Aloma who was staying in the same building with me. The assertion of the Appellant that girls of nowadays are bigger and grow older than their age as a justification for having unlawful sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix is a mere excuse since it cannot be supported by any fact or evidence.