In the instant case, I have carefully considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution on the crucial points. I must say that I believe the P.W.1 that in the afternoon of the 5th day of March, 2013 there was a robbery at Oluchukwu Micro Finance Bank, Holy Cross branch, Nkpor and a total sum of N728, 530.00 from the bank's money in her possession was stolen . Exhibit "8 wh ich is the bond with which the money recovered from the perpet rators of the offence was . released to the bank supports this finding . The P.W.3 in one breadth stated that he hid beside a vehicle when one of the robbers pointed a gun at him and he ran away. In another breadth he admitted that when the robbers came , he hid inside a vehicle. The witness contradicted himself in his testimony before the Court on the crucial point. If the robbers came with A.K.4 7 rifle as claimed by the P.W.3 naturally they will enter the bank where they are to steal the money with the gun. The evidence that the robbers·came with a gun but did not enter the bank where they are to steal the mon~y with the gun does not accord with common sense. I don't believe the P.W.3 who was hiding inside a vehicle when the robbers came that one of the robbers pointed a gun at him. It is therefore clear to' me that the evidence of the P.W.3 that one of the robbers was carrying A.K.47 rifle and pointed it at him before he ran away because he had no gun when he admitted that when the robber$ came he hid inside the vehicle was merely meant to impress. I don't believe the P.W.3 that the robbers were carrying A.K.47 rifle. The implication of my doubting this evidence of the P.W.3 and not believing him on this crucial point is that the prosecution has, not been able to prove that the robbery at the bank was an armed robbery. It follows that the prosecution has successfully proved beyond reasonable doubt if un-contradicted that there was a: robbery in the afternoon of the 5th day of March, 2013 at Oluchukwu Micro Finance Bank, Holy Cross Parish, Nkpor but failed to establish that the robbery was an armed robbery. 11 1 This will now take me to the extra judicial statement of the defendant tendefed by the P.W.2 and admitted as Exhibit "C". Is Exhibit "C" really confessional statement? When then is a statement confessional. By the provisions of section 28 of the Evidence Act, 2011 "a confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged with a crime, stating or suggesting the inference that he · committed that crime ." For a statement to constitute a confes$ion, the maker must admit or acknowledge that he committed the offence for which he is arrested . The admission must be clear, precise and unequivocal. In other words, a II