In the entire judgment of the court there was no thorough analysis of the said confessional statement, Exhibit P3, by the court, contrary to the laid down procedure to test the veracity of the confession given by an accused person. The tests are whether; a) the confession is the truth b) the confession was corroborated c) the confession was consistent with other proved or ascertained facts. OSEMUDIAME DANIEL LPELR -495L4 (CA), ONYENYE V STATE (2019) V STATE (2012) 15 NWLR (PT L324) s86 The confession was not passed through any of this test, no analysis about whether the confession was corroborated or consistent with other proved facts, The lower court dealt with the video exhibit P1 at length and analyzed same in comparison with the evidence in chief and cross examined' The video was tendered by PW1 and admitted exhibit PW1, I have examined the record and read the entire judgement and nowhere can it be seen or observed that the video was ever played or demonstrated in court by the prosecution. In the apex coutt decision of DICKSON V SLWA 2016 LPELR 4L257(SC) the meaning of document was defined thus; "By the provision of section 258(1) of the Evidence Act, }OLL, "document" i ncl udes: a disc, tape, sound track or other device in which sounds or other data Cnot being visual images) are embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of some other equipment) of being reproduced from cA.AS.40C.2022 15 lPage