6 VICTOR VS. STATE (2013) 12 NWLR (PT. 1369) 465. The P.W.1 in his evidence testified that when they were fighting, two gun shots were released very close to their room. And it was then that one person from outside entered his wife's room and the two of them entered into his own room . The P.W.1 did not testify that the persons that entered his wife's room from outside /were bearing a gun ·or weapon of any kind . On the other hand ,' the P.W.2 who tried to corroborate the evidence of the P.W.1 stated that when they fired two gunshots outside they became afraid and they came into their room and started scattering their properties. As they were leaving and about to jump the fence, her husband drew the last person back and used cutlass to cut him at the back of his head . It is seen that from the evidence of the P.W.2, it was not only one person that joined the person already in their room when they allegedly heard two gun shots. The P.W.2 who saw the people as they enter their room did not testify that the people who entered their room were holding a gun or any weapon at all . The evidence that two gun shots were released during the robbery operation is meant to insinuate that the robbers were armed . In the same vein , the evidence that axe and two bullets belonging to the robbers were recovered at the robbery scene was meant to suggest that the robbers were armed. But if the robbers came with a gun or any weapon at all, naturally they will enter the room where they were to rob with the gun or weapon . Apart from this , the evidence that the robbers fired two gun shots while they were outside but eventually did not enter the room where they were to rob with the gun does not accord with common sense. By the evidence of the witnesses three robbers stormed their house. And as demonstrated by the P.W.2, the three robbers eventually entered their room . It is not logical and believable that the robbers after releasing two gun shots will drop their gun and weapon outside and enter the room where they were to rob empty handed . I must say that in the circumstances of this case, the evidence ,--....._______ adduced by the P.W.1 and P.W.2 suggest that the robbers were -- -~ · ------not armed . ~ lJ ~ i j: ~ ~ gain , the evidence of the P.W.1 and P.W.2 are that the P.W.1 l/'j ~ r" - ent after the robbers with machete. As a matter of fact, the P.W.2 i::__ J testified that as t~e robbers were leaving and about to jump the "- ,., fence her husband drew the last person back and used cutlass to ca ~ cut hi~ at the back of his head . If the P.W.1 and P.W.2 truly heard ?f -