Submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not have any direct link which supports the testimony of PW3 with the commission of the offence by the accused person. The bits and pieces of evidence on record failed to meet the requirement of corroborative evidence. See OKOH v NIG. ARMY (2013) 1 NWLR (Pt 1334) 16 at 37 – 38 Paras G – F. Court is urged to resolve Issue 1 in favour of the accused person. On Issue 2, it is the submission that the degree of proof is beyond reasonable doubt and nothing less. In the charge preferred against the accused person, the prosecution must prove that the accused and only the accused raped PW3 and no one else. It is submitted that the witnesses of the defence clearly show that the prosecution’s evidence are highly controverted, based on hearsay and suspicion and they cannot be related to the facts set out in the charge to ground a conviction. It is submitted that from the surrounding circumstances of this case, it is on record that the prosecution failed to show or lead PW3 to say whether her father was the one who disvirgined her, or the first time she had sex or whether she has had sexual intercourse with any man other than her father before the alleged sexual intercourse with her father took place; this piece of evidence would have been so vital, considering other allegation made by PW3 that the accused has had series of sexual intercourse with her in their living room in the night and in the bush. Clearly the story as narrated by the prosecution witnesses is unbelievable and leaves room for unresolved doubts. 17