- Alarape V. State (2001) 5 NWLR pt 705 p 79.
In view of all the foregoing, I found the 3 Defendants guilty of the 3
offences with which they were arraigned before this court and convict
them as charged because in my humble view, the prosecution has
proved all the elements of the 3 offences against them, and it is trite
law that where the prosecution has proved all the elements of an
offence, then the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable
doubt.
- Ajayi V. State (2013) 53 SQLR pt II p 631.
- Ikaria V. State (2013) 8 NCC 248.
- Alabi V. State (1993) 7 NWLR pt 307 p 511.
Before I conclude this judgment, I found it necessary to pause here and
make same pronouncements on certain issues raised by the defence
counsel in his adopted written address.
At paragraph 4.1.2 of the defence counsel’s adopted written address,
the defence counsel submitted that the purported statement of the 1st
Defendant said to be confessional, was objected to as it was neither
signed nor thumb printed by the 1st Defendant even though later
withdrawn by the prosecution.
It is trite law that a document can be withdrawn when objection is
raised before the counsel seeking its admission in evidence make a
reply to the objection. Where however he replies to the objection on
points of law, then issues are said to have been joined and the
document can no longer be withdrawn and the court is bond to rule on
it.
- Oguntayo V. ADelaja (2009) ALL FWLR pt 495
p 1626.
Page 21 of 27