corroborative evidence The test is whether there is an independent testimony which affects the accused by connecting or tending to connect him or her with the crime ODHIOERE v STATE (1996). In R. v CHRISTIE (1914) AC 545, the accused was charged with indecently assaulting a child. The evidence was that after the act, the child went home and told the mother what happened. The mother took the child to the Police and the three of them went to Christie. On meeting Christie, the child pointed to him and said: “this is the man”. He repeated the assault story. Christie was silent. At the trial, it fell for determination whether the story of the child was corroborated by that of the mother. The House of Lords held as follows: That the mother’s evidence being a repetition of the children’s story does not amount to corroboration in law The statement made by the child in the presence of the police and the accused could not be admitted as part of res gestae because there was a sufficient time lag between the act and the word The silence of the accused did not amount to an admission and a fortiori to corroboration. However, the statement was admitted as evidence of complaint in that it showed lack of consent on the part of the complainant and consistency between the evidence he gave outside the court and in the witness box In CREDLAND v KNOWLER (1951), the accused was charged with indecent assault on a girl aged10 years. The investigating police officer gave evidence that when the parties met, the accused first denied and later admitted association with the girl. The girl and another girl aged 9 gave unsworn evidence of indecency. The prosecution claimed and the defence denied that the lies told by the accused amounted to corroboration of the girls’ story. The