The issue which a then, is whether PWS had the presence of mind to identify the a in conditions participation ofanyone . - -· were described and to ru out the se in the defilement . -- Since conditions appear to have been dark, on account of a closed window -- n incid~t}t o~~LJ)T~d_,_~Jtbq~gb room _a_bQlJ:t the morning, the court will narrowly examine the ascertain whet ---------·--················· 9m__Ln PWS her identification evidence is reliable and if she was truthful. In the case of John Katuramu vs Uganda, Criminal Appeal No 2 1998.the thus on this point; "The legal position is Supreme Court of Uganda, that the court can convict on the basis of evidence a single identifying witness alone. However, the court should always warn itself of the danger ·of possibility of mistaken identity in such a case". The court did warn the Assessors, just as it now cautions i~self, on the dangers of mistaken identification. The court will accordingly look for corroboration in the identification evidence pointing to the that it was the accused and no other that committed the offence. On this point, the court notes that PWS had seen and day and particularly before day. It is a proceeded lked to the accused at about 11 am that quite evident that the accused knew that PWS was sleeping in her f;randmother's room as he had just given her some medicine to her ailment and advised her of PWS, when go and The court accepts the evidence that she heard and recognized the accused' the accused was outside the room voice, whi was in, as he ordered, her younger brother, Lorraine to stay outside the house before he for immedi~tely unched his attack. nally, immediately that PWS was ab the incident, to· call and summon Lorrai go and call her 11 ndmother for help, is