Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
July 15, 2019 8:17 am
"Now, "corroboration" as explained by Lord Reading, CJ, in Rex v Baskervitle [1916] 2 KB 658, must be independent evidence, which affects an Accused by connecting or tending to connect him with the crime. It must be evidence, which implicates him, that is, which confirms in some material particular not only the evidence that the crime was committed, but that the Accused committed it. So, corroborative evidence is evidence that shows that the story that the Accused committed the crime is true, and not merely that the crime has been committed, but that it was committed by him." PER A. A. AUGIE, J.S.C. IN
FRIDAY UZIM V THE STATE
Appeal No: SC. 877/2015
LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: LER[2019]SC. 877/2015
