outside the confession in further proof of the offence; the absence of such additional evidence would not necessarily prevent a court from convicting on the confessional statement alone provided the statement satisfies the test of being positive, direct and unequivocal”. Apart from the confessional statement, there are overwhelming oral evidence from PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW5, the evidence of PW1 sustained and established Count No. Six. The evidence of PW2 Chimezie Nwachukwu sustained and established Count Five, the evidence of PW2 Nicolas Maduka sustained and established Count No. 2, while the evidence of PW5 Tony Uche sustained and established Count No. Three, the evidence of PW4 is that of the I.P.O. who obtained the statement of the accused person. The undertakings made in writing to pay the money back to the victims including the receipts issued by the accused were equally overwhelming evidence against the accused person; although the accused denied ever making such undertaken nor issue any receipt, that would not preclude this court from admitting same in evidence. See F.B.N. PLC v TSOKWA (2004) 5 NWLR Pt 866 Pg 27 at 310 where the court held as follows: “I think the issue of admissibility of document largely relates to the relevance of such document in the matter. Admittedly, the respondent denied that it was his signature that was on the withdrawal form. 13 The mere fact that