made by the defendant voluntarily, or that the defendant is not the maker of the statement. In the recent case of Aliyu V. State {2023} 18 NWLR pt 1915 p 1, Ratio 1 at pages 2-3, the Supreme Court has held that a defendant resiling from his confessional statement does not make it unreliable where the trial court ensures that some corroborative evidence outside the confession abides making the truth of the contents of the retracted confession probable. - Mohammed V.s State {2014} 12 NWLR pt 1421 p 387 - Kim V. State {1992} 4NWLR pt 233 p 17 - Yesufu V. State {1976} 6 SC 63 - Okegbu V. State {1984} 8 SCNLR 65 - State V. Yahaya {2019} 38 WRN 14 This court for the purpose of determining the admissibility of the defendant’s statement dated 9/4/2019, has gone through the evidence of PW2 and PW4 on the record, evidence of the defendant as DW1 as well as the substance of the statement sought to be tendered and of the humble view that the evidence of PW2 and PW4 coupled with evidence of the defendant as DW1, provides a corroborative evidence outside the confessional statement probable. It is trite law that a trial court has the adjudicatory powers to accept and act on a retracted confession where there is evidence outside the confession tending to establish that the defendant in fact made the statement voluntarily. - State V. Yahaya {supra} Page 8 of 18