"The explanation for this need for circumspection is simple: evidence that falls within this category may be fabricated to cast aspersion on other people, per Lord Normand in R v Tepper (1952) 480, 489 approvingly adopted in State v Edobor [1975] 9-11 SC 69, 77. That is why a court must, properly, appraise the circumstantial evidence adduced by the Prosecution before convicting an accused person thereon, Adepelu v State [1998] 9 NWLR (pt 565) 185; Iko v State [2001] FWLR (pt 68) 1161; [2001] 14 NWLR (pt 732) 221; Orji v State [2008] AH FWLR (pt422) 1093,1107"". 

1. PER C.C. NWEZE, J.S.C IN THE CASE OF SOPAKIRIBA IGBIKIS V THE STATE; LER:(2017)SC. 316/2014