In In re Eugene M. (1976) 55 Cal. App. 3d 650, a minor was convicted solely on the basis of an out-of-court statement made by an alleged accomplice, recanted under oath at trial. But the facts of that case are distinguishable from the case at bar. There, Hamm, the witness and alleged accomplice, was threatened by police into making an incriminating statement regarding the defendant. Additionally, the court found the statement was "apparently confused and intermingled with the narrative of another crime." ( Id. at p. 658.) It concluded that the unsworn statement was "'so fraught with uncertainty as to preclude a confident determination of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.' " ( Id. at p. 659.)