''It (the Robbery and Firearms Tribunal) was also of the view that catalogue of .lies presented by the accusf1d coupled with his betrayed demeanour point to only one conclusion - guilt. But having regard to the circumstance of this case, these conflict~ discrepancies I in the appellants evidence by themselves are not r -. enough in my vie~ to establish his guilt with reasonable degree of certainty. As was conceded by the Tribunal a person may lie though innocent such lies may be as a result of fear or stupidity or indeed anxiety on the part of the accused to save himself. The fact that an accused lied has never been accepted as proof of his guilt'~ See further the decisions · in DURUWODE V. STATE (2000) NWLR (pt 645) 392 and OGIDI V. STATE (2005) 5 NWLR (pt 918) 286 SC. Based on the totality ·of the fi nd ings made above it is the considered view of this honourable court that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendants infact committed the offence of armed robbery. One may think that since the defendants admitted that they stole · fire wood on the 10/2/2015 in their statements to the police at Awada Police Station which they both admitted making that this court is well ,J placed to convict both defendants with the lesser offence of stealing . Considered as it may seem being that the lesser offence of stealing of fire wood on 10/2/2015 is not part of the offence of armed robbery and conspiracy to commit armed robbery on 8/2/2015 for which the defendants are charged before this court, I find it wrong to convict the 17