In Edwin Ezigbo v. The State (2012) LPELR-7855 (SC). This Court per Onnoghen JSC (as he then was now CJN) held as follows: "Corroboration in respect of the offence of rape is evidence which tends to show that the story of the prosecutrix that the accused committed the crime is true." In the instant case the concurrent findings of the two Courts below that the evidence of PW2 and PW3 and more particularly exhibit A, the extra judicial confessional statement of the appellant, exhibits B and C the hospital registration card and medical report of PW1, the prosecutrix, constitute such corroboration cannot be faulted. I equally agree with learned respondent's counsel that neither the testimonies of the witnesses nor the documentary evidence are inconsistent in themselves or contradictory to any evidence outside their respective beings. Appellant's further claim that the two Courts are wrong in their findings on the alibi the appellant raised, given exhibit A, his confession that situated him at the scene and time of the offence for which he is convicted, equally crumbles. That apart, as rightly found by the two Courts, the appellant neither raised the defence timeously nor furnished the particulars of those he said he was with at the farm at the time relevant to the rape he committed. In any event, the defence of alibi crumbles in the face of stronger evidence which, in the case at hand, PW1's testimony and exhibit A, appellant confessional statement are. SeeObiode V, The State (1970) 1 ALL NLR 35, Chukwu V. State (1996) 7 NWLR (Pt 463) 686, Ani V. State (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt 1168) 443 and Alhaji Musa Sani V. The State (2015) LPELR-24818 (SC).