LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Confessional Statements – Effect of Retraction at Trial
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where an extra-judicial confession has been proved to have been made voluntarily and it is positive and unequivocal and amounts to an admission of guilt, it will suffice to ground a finding of guilt regardless of the fact that the maker resiled from or retracted it at trial, since such retraction does not necessarily make the confession inadmissible.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"Where an extra-judicial confession has been proved to have been made voluntarily and it is positive and unequivocal and amounts to an admission of guilt, as in the instant case, it will suffice to ground a finding of guilt regardless of the fact that the maker resiled therefrom or retracted it altogether at the trial, since such a u-turn does not necessarily make the confession inadmissible."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
This reiterates and reinforces Principles 257, 259, 306, and 350 on retracted confessions. Extra-judicial confessions (made outside court) can support convictions despite retraction if: (1) Voluntariness is proved (through trial within trial if challenged); (2) The confession is positive (affirmatively admits guilt); (3) It is unequivocal (clear, not ambiguous); (4) It amounts to admission of guilt (not merely implicatory). Retraction affects weight, not admissibility. Courts assess retraction credibility considering: timing (immediate versus delayed), reasons given, explanation plausibility, and consistency with other evidence. However, even implausible retractions don’t render confessions inadmissible—they remain evidence for court consideration. The repeated articulation of this principle across multiple cases demonstrates its firm establishment in Nigerian criminal jurisprudence. While courts should exercise caution and preferably seek corroboration (Principle 338), retracted confessions meeting the criteria remain legally sufficient for conviction.