by Chioma Angela Okeke
Here, the accused is not saying that he was coerced or induced to make the statement at the police station, but that he did not make any statement at all or that the contents of the document is alien to him. In Isah and others v State,[1]the issue was whether denial of making a confessional statement is synonymous with alleging that it was involuntarily made or obtained, and, whether mere denial of the confessional statement renders such statement inadmissible? In that case, the court per Orji-Abadua, J.C.A stated thus:-
It is a known principle that an involuntarily obtained statement admitting commission of crime or confession cannot be used in prosecuting an accused person. Such a statement is inadmissible both because it is likely to be unreliable and because of society’s aversion to forced confession, even if true. It is clear as crystal that denial of an alleged confessional statement is, not in the least, the same as alleging that it was made without the volition or free will of the accused. Therefore, the law is that a confession or an admission by an accused of the commission of the offence with which he is charged is not rendered inadmissible in evidence merely because the accused, at the point of tendering the said statement or during his examination in chief or cross-examination denied ever making such statement. A confessional statement is rendered inadmissible if the accused claimed he was coerced into making the same, and, a trial within a trial was conducted during which he was able to prove to the Court the frightful circumstance under which the said statement was obtained from him.
Trial within trial is ordered and conducted where the voluntariness of the making of the statement by an accused person, is in issue or raised by an accused person. It should not be conducted where the accused claimed that the signature on the confessionary statement was not that of the accused and that the accused was seeing the document for the first time. In this instance, the court should admit the document and decide the weight to be addressed to it. The question of the weight to be attached to the contents of a statement which has been denied becomes an issue for the Judge to determine at the end of the trial.[2]
[1] (2010) LPELR-5077(CA) 26 – 27 para E.
[2]Akpan v State (2008) 14 N.W.L.R (Pt 1106) 97 – 8 paras H-C.