EVIDENCE 2.5A CORROBORATION 1
Generally, the courts are concerned with the quality rather than quantity (i.e. number) of evidence-See Section 200EA, Ugwumba V State. However, in certain situations (as shall be highlighted) the courts usually require that evidence should be substantiated/confirmed by another evidence-Igri V State. Also Dabiri V COP.
Corroboration was defined in Nwambe V State as “confirmation of a witness’s evidence by independent testimony”. See also Okafor V COP and Ohunyon V State where definitions similar to this were provided. See also R V Okagbue. As noted by Kaglo JSC in Iko V State (citing DPP V Hester): evidence which is deficient, suspect or incredible needs to be confirmed/supported. Similar point noted in Isiaka V State.
 1993 5 Nwlr Pt 296 p 660.
 1995 NWLR pt 348 p 405.
 1964 NMLR 89.
 1996 3 nwlr pt 436 p 264 at 273.
 1958 3 FSC 27.
 Maybe as a result of bias, lies, concoction, and so on-See Lord Morris in DPP V Hester.