the accused told me to say that its one boy that did that to me if I am asked. That if I said its him he will beat me up In evaluating the probative value of the evidence of PW6, the learned trial Judge found her evidence in Court clear, credible, unchallenged and unshaken that it was the Appellant who did that to her. In addressing the circumstances leading to PW6s earlier statement that it was one boy in the school who did that to her, the learned trial Judge at page 103 of the record held: The PW6 has also stated the circumstances in which she earlier first stated that it was a boy in her school that did the act to her. Given the close relationship between her family, herself and the accused person who is a teacher in her school, who enrolled them in the school who sometimes brings her back home from school and who is their next door neighbour whose house they frequent as the accuseds wife herself stated in Court, it is not 26 hard to see that the accused person will have such authoritative effect on the PW6 as someone she looks upon and will not disobey so easily. This is buttressed by the way and manner in which she divulged the information of what really happened to her mother when she first extracted the mothers assurance that she will not tell the accused or any other person. The above finding made by the learned trial Judge based on the evidence on record, cannot be said to be speculative. It is based on the evidence on record as found by the learned trial Judge, that the two families are next door neighbours; appellant sometimes takes PW6 to and from School back home, and PW6 looks upon and even calls the Appellant her Uncle in the School. A finding is said to be speculative when it is not based on facts or knowledge of its details but on guesses or conjectures but not when as in the case at hand, it is based on or derivable from the evidence on record. Whereas speculation is a mere variant of imaginative guess which, even when it appears