"a piece of evidence contradicts another when it affirms the opposite of what the other evidence stated, not when there is just a minor discrepancy between them. It is also not every contradiction, however minute that would be sufficient to damnify a witness. The contradiction that would make a Court disbelieve a witness has to be on a material point in the case. It is also not every trifling inconsistency in the evidence of a witness or an accused person that is fatal to his case. It is only when such inconsistencies or contradictions are substantial and fundamental to the main issues in question before the Court and therefore necessary to create some doubt in the mind of the Court that it may prove fatal. See THE STATE VS. MUSA DANJUMA (1997) 5 SCNJ 126; MUSA VS. THE STATE (2009) 6 - 7 SC 34; THEOPHILUS VS. THE STATE (1996) 1 SCNJ 79; OKONJI VS. THE STATE (1987) 1 NWLR (PT. 52) 659."

Per OSEJI, J.C.A. IN STATE v. ATETE CITATION: (2017) LPELR-43591(CA)