(SC); STATE V GWONTO (1983) LPELR -3220 (SC) to the effect that omission of the lower court caused miscarriage of justice. On issue 2, Appellant said the case of OSENI V STATE LPELR-7833 (SC) (2012) was misapplied, and that position of the law on admissibility of retracted confessional statement has radically changed after the introduction of Sec 15(4) of delta state ACJAL; which requires statements be taken in presence of a person of the defendant's choice or the making and taking of such confessional statements must be recorded in a video and failure to comply with fatal consequences. He cited OWHORUKE V cOP (201s) 1s NWLR (PT 1483) 557; NNAJIOFOR V FRN (zols) 2 NWLR (PT. 1655) LST,INAKOJU V ADELEKE (2007) ALL FWLR (PT. 353) 3 @ 199 PARAS. E-F. Where the appellant submitted that where corroboration is needed the prosecution must call witnesses in proof of their case. That exhibit Pland P3 are both documentary evidence and cannot even by a stretch of imagination qualifo, as oral confession. See, JUA V THE STATE (2010) LPELR-1637(SC). That adherence to section 15(4) OF ACJDST was sacrosanct in recording statements and that the state failed in this respect. Appellant contends that Exhibit P3 cannot be a corroboration of the confessional statement because it was not demonstrated in open court and that all observation at page L44 of the records which are investigations and enquiry done at the recess of the Judge's chambers. He cited YONGO & ANOR V COP (1992) LPELR -3528 SC, TNTERNATTONAL BANK V cA.AS.40C.2022 12 lPagc