CRIMINAL LAW — Confessional Statement — Retracted Confession — Requirements for Conviction Solely on Retracted Confessional Statement
Ratio Decidendi
Per Rhodes-Vivour, JSC, in Ogudo v. State (2011) NLC-123-341-2010(SC) at pp. 5—6; Paras A—C:
"A Court can convict on the retracted confessional statement of an accused person, but before this is properly done, the trial Judge should evaluate the confession and testimony of the accused person and all the evidence available. This entails the trial Judge examining the new version of events presented by the accused person, which is different from his retracted confession and the Judge asking himself the following questions: (a) Is there anything outside the confession to show that it is true? (b) Is it corroborated? (c) Are the relevant statements made in it of facts true as far as they can be tested? (d) Did the accused person have the opportunity of committing the offence charged? (e) Is the confession possible? (f) Is the confession consistent with other facts which have been ascertained and have been proved?"
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a court may convict solely on a retracted confession after evaluating the confession, the accused’s testimony, and all evidence, applying the six tests: truth outside confession, corroboration, truth of facts, opportunity, possibility, and consistency. The principle applies where conviction rests on a retracted confession. It ensures that retracted confessions are carefully scrutinized. The principle reflects the requirements for conviction on retracted confessions. It prevents wrongful convictions. The court must apply the tests. The principle provides guidance on retracted confessions.