knowledge that the likely consequence of his act, was the death of the deceased. In consideration of all the foregoing, it is the humble view of this court that the prosecution has also proved the 3rd element. - Pius V. State (2019) 22 WRN 105. - Akpan V. State (2001) 53 WRN 1. - Jula V. State (2010) 43 WRN 1. On the whole, it is the humble view of this court that the prosecution has proved all the elements of the offence of Culpable Homicide against the defendant, and having proved all the elements of the offence, it follows that the prosecution has also proved its case against the defendant beyond reasonable doubt. - Ajayi V. State (2013) 53 NSCQR 632. - Ikaria V. State (2013) 8 NCC 248. - Alabi V. State (1993) 7 NWLR pt 307 p 511. However, by paragraph 5.9 of the defence counsel’s written address which was adopted, the defence counsel submitted that the prosecuting counsel did not lead evidence before this court to show that the defendant exceeded the powers given to him by while exercising in good faith, his right of private defence. The defendant in his statement admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibit B and B1 appeared to have Page 24 of 34