From the facts and sorrounding circumstances and the evidence adduced in this case can one reach the conclusion that the factors stated in the above decision of the Supreme Court apply to the defendant in this case? The answer to this poser is in the negative. This is because from exhibits A and A1 which is the extra- judicial statement of the defendant, it is clear that the defendant knew what he was doing at the time he took the victim in this case inside his room and had sexual intercourse with her. If indeed he don’t know what he was doing he would have requested the victim to lie down in the open and has sexual intercourse with her in the open but because he knew what he was doing he took her into his room in order to hide and commit the act. It is also clear from his statement to the police that the fact that he stated that when the victim informed her mother about what happened people came looking for him with sticks and he had to run to Gagi bush to hide. All these are not the behaviours of a person who does not know what he was doing. In the case of EDOHO v STATE (2010) LPELR 10151/SC, the Supreme Court held as follows: “In the case of Ghobadia v STATE (2004)6 NWLR pt 869 P.360 this court is of the view that any 32