In the Appellant's brief settled by John Oguejiofor Esq, six issues were identified for determination as follows: 1. Whether exhibit B was forged for the purpose of this case, and if affirmatively so, whether this Court has power to expunge it from the evidence in this case. 2. Whether exhibits C, J and H have valid probative value which the trial Court could rely on without more to corroborate exhibit B 3. Whether the entire additional evidence filed on 3/11/2009 by the Respondent comprising exhibits A, D and E were not forged to bolster the case of the Respondent against the Appellant. 4. Whether by the circumstance of this case, there was the need for an identification parade to have been conducted by police. 5. Whether there were any material contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution 6. Whether the trial Court properly evaluated the evidence before it. In the Respondent's brief settled by P.N. Ofomo Esq, the six issues identified by Appellant's counsel were adopted with modifications as issues for determination thus: 51. Whether exhibit B was forged for the purpose of this case. 2. Whether exhibits C, J and H do not have the probative value which the trial Court accorded to them. 3. Whether the entire additional evidence filed on 3/11/2009 by the respondent comprising exhibits A, D, E were forged to bolster the case of the Respondent against the Appellant. 4. Whether by the circumstances of this case there was a need for identification parade to have been conducted by the police. 5. Whether there were material contradictions in the evidence of prosecuting witnesses. 6. Whether the trial Court failed to properly evaluate the evidence before it which made the prosecution fall to prove her case beyond reasonable doubt. After careful perusal of the issues proffered by both parties, I will crystallise the issues as follows: 1. Whether Exh B, Exh C, Exh J, Exh H were admissible and credible in view of material contradictions in the case of the prosecution witnesses.