The court held that as the first appellate court,
it is required to re appraise the evidence on
record and reach an independent conclusion.
That it is now trite law that sexual offence of
defilement can be proved without the victims
testimony, that what is required to prove are
the ingredients of the offence and not the
testimony of the victim. That the ingredients of
the offence of rape were not disputed save for
the appellant’s participation. That the charge
and caution statement made by the appellant
though retracted was corroborated by the
evidence of the witnesses and since the
harshness and legality of the sentence were not
challenged, the appeal failed.