evidence, without any objection to its admissibility into evidence. Furthermore, he submitted that there are other facts ascertained from the evidence of PW1 and PW4 which are outside Exhibit P3 to corroborate the facts stated by the appellant in the said Exhibit P3, which he retracted in Exhibit P4 and in his evidence in Court. Therefore, according to him, the appellant was rightly convicted on his confessional statement in Exhibit P3. Resolution: The vexed question of retraction of confessional extra judicial statements, by accused persons, has engaged the attention of our Courts over the years. Generally, it is settled law, that there is no evidence stronger than a persons own admission or confession of his complicity in the offence for which he is arraigned in Court for trial. Therefore, the Court can convict on such a confession by an accused person. Golden Dibie & Ors. v. The State (2007) 3 SCNJ 160. And there is nothing esoteric or strange about resiling from or denying/retracting a confessional statement by an accused person. It is not unnatural that at the earliest phase of the commission of an offence, the sense or feeling of guilt weighs more on the mind of the offender, but with passage of time, his mind gets toughened again which invariably leads to an afterthought and eventual retraction of the earlier confessional statement that was made by him. Hence, soon after the offence, their consciences are more pricked and so they are goaded to be truthful in their extra-judicial statements. The important thing of consideration for the Court, is that if it is convinced that the confession of guilt was freely and voluntarily made and the Court is satisfied