"".'she made this complaint because she though I was just making excuses but whereas I am really sick and still recovering and that's why I have not been able to give the reconciliation of account,,. As can clearly be seen, there was no mention of the Defendant stating that she prepared an audit reconciliation which was rejected by pw1. so, this court is satisfied that there was no audit reconciliation made by the Defendant before this case was reported to the police by PW1. Furthermore, the request which DW2, the father of DW1 said he made for an external auditor was rejected according to DW2 by PW1 also falls flat on the face. lt should be recognized that DW2 did not make a statement to the police. And, from his evidence, he knows absolutely nothing about the working relationship between PW1 and DW1, the Defendant. so, this court shall not accept that testimony from DW2 on that score. Also, the Defendant claimed that she was ill, hence, she could not do the said reconciliation. She also mentioned that in her statement. However, there has been no documentary evidence or a medical report proffered before this Court to convince or persuade this court that, indeed, that was the case. It is the failure of the Defendant at that material part in time to render that audit reconciliation which necessitated the report to the police by pW1, and, which triggered this matter. Then, flowing from the evidence, unchallenged, is the fact that pW1 stated that she gave all her record books to the Defendant to enable her carry same home, and, at her own convenience, carry out her own personal reconciliation of accounts which she, the Defendant never did, despite, being given time" That fact has not been controverted by the Learned Counsel to the Defendant. Also, unchallenged is the fact that PW1 stated that she itemized the missing phones and accessories valued at N2,560,000=, and, on the card section discovered the sum of N1,575,645 missing in her statement. Now, more importantly from the evidence before this Court, still unchallenged in the fact that there was a second reconciliation. PW1 stated that her reconciliation is that there was a second reconciliation. This second reconciliation comes, flowing from the evidence or PW1 which she mentioned. PW1's reconciliation of over four million plus has been alluded to, and, referred to the learned counsel in this Court. lt is this second reconciliation that is now being attacked, for which the Defendant paid the sum of N400,000= pursuant to. From the evidence, it is agreed that Exhibit B is the reconciliation Account book' The defendant, DW1, stated that she was compelled to write same, simply 15