In the defendant's trial for aggravated robbery the trial court should have given the jury a Code of Criminal Procedure art.38.22(6) general voluntariness instruction relating to the defendant's inculpatory videotaped statement. The victims each identified other people as the assailant in both the photo lineup and the live lineup, and another witness identified someone else when she viewed a photo lineup. At least six hours passed between the robbery and when the stolen car was found at the defendant's girlfriend's apartment complex. Other than one in-court identification, the only direct evidence of the defendant's guilt was his videotaped confession. Omission of the voluntariness instruction seriously affected a defensive theory and the basis of the case. Oursbourne v. State - 01-05-00141-CR.