EVIDENCE LAW — Retracted Confession — Quality of Evidence Required
Ratio Decidendi
Per Mahmud Mohammed, JSC, in Ogudo v. State (2011) NLC-123-341-2010(SC) at pp. 17—18; Paras E—A:
"The quality of the evidence contained in the facts narrated in the alleged confessional statement of the Appellant, fell far below the requirements of proof of the offences with which the Appellant was convicted, beyond reasonable doubt. Infact, the reality of the situation is that the evidence in the alleged confessional statement had raised reasonable doubt which ought to have been resolved in favour of the Appellant resulting in his discharge and acquittal."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a retracted confession must meet the quality of proof beyond reasonable doubt; if it raises reasonable doubt, the doubt must be resolved in favour of the accused, leading to acquittal. The principle applies where retracted confessions are relied upon. It ensures that convictions are not based on doubtful confessions. The principle reflects the standard of proof. It prevents wrongful convictions. The court must assess the quality of the confession. The principle provides guidance on retracted confessions.