21 day-to-day activities up to t~e st~p_s taken prior to hi~ arrest. Th: contents of Exhtbit "C" point irres1st1bly to the fact that ,t was the 1 defendant that gave the information in the statement to the Police and its being voluntary was not called to question. As such , I am satisfied and find as a fact that Exhibit "C" was made voluntarily by the 1st defendant. Now considering Exhibit "C" in relation to the st applicable test there is the evidence that the 1 defen~ant was arrested with fresh machete cut wound on his head to show that the confessional .statement which is Exhibit "C" is true on crucial point. The circumstantial evidence of the P.W .1, P.W .2 and P.W .3 st support the veracity of Exhibit "C". It was proved that the 1 defendant had the opportunity of committing the offence. It is seen that in Exhibits "C" and "C 1" the 1st defendant admitted the commission of the offence of robbery. The confession is direct and positive and admits the essential elements of the offence of robbery and so amounts to admission of guilt. Confession is the best evidence of guilt against a defendant. It is stronger than the evidence of eye witness because the evidence that is to say the confession came from the said defendant. A voluntary confession of guilt is sufficient for the conviction of a defendant and does not need collaboration . In the case of NSOFOR VS . ST ATE (2004) 18 NWLR (PT. 905) 292 at page 311 , the Court held that a free and voluntary confession alone, properly taken , tendered and admitted and proved to be t~ue is sufficient to ground conviction provided it satisfies the condition for admissibility. I SEE : QUEEN VS . OBIASA (1962) 2 SCNLR 402 . ONOCHIE VS . THE REPUBLIC (1966) SCNLR 204 . . MBANG VS . STA TE (2010) 7 NWLR (PT. 1194) 431 . · The prosecution has proved the confessional statement of the 1st efendant which is Exhibit "C" and confirmed its content which st irectly linked the 1 defendant to the commission of the crime of r?b~ery. Exhibit "C" if no doubt is created will suffice to ground a finding of guilt regardless of the fact that the 1st defendant retracte? it during the trial. It should be borne in mind that the confe~s1~n of commission of an offence by a defendant or the co~m1ss1on ~f an offence as admitted by a defendant can only be evidence against him.