CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Evidence — Extra-Judicial Statement — Inconsistency with Testimony
Ratio Decidendi
Per Ogbuagu, JSC, in Edoho v. State (2010) NLC-123-372-2007(SC) at p. 30, para. A:
"The 'inconsistency rule' is that where a witness makes an extra-judicial statement which is inconsistent with his later testimony at the trial, such testimony is to be treated as unreliable while the statement is not regarded as evidence on which the court can act."
Explanation / Scope
This principle applies where a witness has made a prior extra-judicial statement and later gives inconsistent testimony at trial. The inconsistency rule treats the later testimony as unreliable and the prior statement as not substantive evidence upon which the court can act. It does not automatically destroy the witness’s entire evidence but affects weight. The court may consider the inconsistency in assessing credibility. It applies in criminal and civil proceedings. The statement may be used to impeach credit but not as proof of facts. The court must carefully evaluate other evidence. It ensures that untested prior statements do not become evidence.