Defendant guilty as charged and convict and sentence him accordingly. It is the submission that once this Honourable Court upon admitting the confessional statements of the Defendant satisfied itself that it is positive, direct and voluntary, the court has a duty to consider the admitted confessional statement. See NWACHUKWU v STATE (2007) 17 NWLR (Pt 1062) SC 31 at 65 – 16 Paras H – A); 70 Paras F – G; ADEBAYO v A.G. OGUN STATE (2000) 7 NWLR (Pt 1085) 201 at 221 Paras F – G. Court is urged to convict the Defendant based on his confessional statements. See UBIERHO v STATE (2005) 5 NWLR (Pt 919) 644 at 655; ALO v STATE (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt 1464) 238 at 270 – 271 Paras F – A. It is submitted that the facts stated in the Defendant’s statements are true; that the assertion by the Defendant that he bought and paid for the 3 vehicles relying on Exhibits Y6, Y7, Y8 and Y9, Y10, Y11, Y12, Y13 and Y14 and claimed that he could not state these facts during the investigation because the issues never came should be rejected by this court as an after-thought and therefore unreliable. Court is urged to accord full probative weight and value to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses 28