The Defence counsel filed 18-page final written address dated 18/9/15 wherein counsel formulated the following issues for determination: 1. Whether there is any credible evidence of corroboration linking the accused person to the alleged offence. 2. Whether from the circumstances of this case, the prosecution has proved his case beyond reasonable doubts. On Issue 1, it is the submission that where rape is denied by the accused, there should be credible evidence of corroboration supporting the commission of the offence. See PESU v STATE (2011) 3 NWLR 9Pt 1234) 399 at 417 Paras F – H. Looking at the evidence of the prosecution in the case at hand, there is no credible, cogent and unequivocal evidence corroborating the testimonies of PW3 the alleged victim, or to show without more that the accused committed the offence as charged. It is submitted that the evidence of PW1 does not in any way corroborate the testimony of PW3 (Emmanuella Bam Eko) that her father had sexual intercourse with her on the 9/5/14. It is the contention that PW2 is not a witness of truth and his evidence cannot be relied upon. PW2 at the earliest opportunity made a statement to the police dated 12/5/14 wherein he stated that when he came back from work on 9/5/14 his wife informed him that the accused person was caught having sexual intercourse with his daughter. The statement under reference was part of the summary of evidence filed by the prosecution on the 21/8/14 and even though the 15