“Whether from the totality of the evidence adduced before the court, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.” For the purpose of this Judgment, this court has decided to adopt the sole issue as formulated by the prosecuting counsel because the issue is comprehensive enough to take care of the issue formulated by the defence counsel. That is:“Whether from the totality of the evidence adduced before the court, the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.” In his submission, defence counsel argued that the prosecution has not lead any evidence which shows that the Defendants inserted their penis into the anus or mouth or any other opening in the body of PW2 who is the victim of the crime. According to him, the evidence of PW2 only centred around the fact that each of the Defendants climbed his back and also saw white fluid on his body. He further stressed that the failure of the prosecution to establish that the Defendants penetrated the anus when they climbed his back is fatal to the prosecution’s case since penetration is the hallmark of the offence of Sodary or Unnatural Offence. - Magaji V. Nigerian Army (2004) 16 NWLR pt 899 p 222. By paragraph 3.9 of their adopted written address, defence counsel submitted that from the contents of the statements of the Defendants which were admitted as Exhibits ‘A’, ‘A1’, ‘B’ and ‘B1’ respectively, there is no clear and positive confession of guilt of the Defendants and cannot therefore be taken as confession as the Defendants resiled. Page 4 of 19