Before the trial court, the Appellant with another accused person were charged with armed robbery. It was alleged by the prosecution that the two had stolen properties valued at Tshs. 167,000/= and cut PW1 with a machete in order to obtain and retain the said properties. The two denied the charge. The case was investigated by PW5 who arrested the Appellant and another. The Appellant confessed to the allegations. His cautioned statement was taken and tendered in Court by PW5 in terms of section 34 B of the Tanzania Evidence Act since PW5 was said to have been on course. The Appellant was also sent to the justice of the peace for recording his extra judicial statement (exhibit PE1). While the Appellant denied the allegations and any knowledge of PW1 and PW2, he admitted that he made his statements before the police and the justice of the peace. At the end of the trial, the Court found that the evidence of identification was not watertight against the accused. However, since the Appellant had confessed to these allegations, the trial court found that the charge against him was proved beyond reasonable doubts. The Appellant was not satisfied with the trial court’s decision hence this appeal.