elements of the offence as required by law and their evidence is not hearsay as their evidence constitute part of the admissions made to them by the defendant. - Section of the Evidence Act, 2011 She further submitted further that the failure of the prosecution to tender in evidence the AK47 riffle and the 9 rounds of live ammunition, is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. - Sani V. State {2012} LPELR 22368 - Umaru V. State {2020} LPELR 50005 As to the offence of armed robbery, prosecuting counsel submitted that by the evidence adduced by the prosecution before this court, it is crystal clear that there was robbery incident on the 2nd day of April 2019 during which the defendant armed himself with AK47 riffle, attacked and disposed 2 Custom officers ASCII Ahmad Madawaki Ishaku and Abiodun F.A. of their mobile phones which was established by the evidence of PWS 1-4. As to the offence of illegal possession of firearms, prosecution submitted that the evidence PWS 1 and 2 is very clear on the issue as their evidence shows how the AK47 riffle with the live ammunitions were recovered from the defendant. On the offence of attempt to escape from lawful Custody, prosecuting counsel submitted that the evidence of PW2 shows how the defendant on the 14/4/2019 attempted to escape from lawful custody at the State CID prosecuting counsel finally urge the court to hold that the Page 6 of 18