15 were going somewhere by car, Mrs B entered the lounge where the appellant was reading the newspaper and asked him to leave their home. She alleged that the appellant had molested the complainant and A. He left the house. [34] Under cross-examination, he testified that he had felt ‘somewhat shocked’ when Mrs B had made these accusations against him. He had not, however, then told her about the complainant’s alleged homosexual relationship or about an incident that had allegedly happened in the first quarter of 2002 – about which he had testified in his examination-in-chief – during which he (the appellant) had woken up to find A trying to open the zip of his trousers. According to the appellant, A had accompanied him to visit the T family and, at the T family home, the appellant had taken two painkillers because of a headache and had gone to lie down in one of the bedrooms. When he woke up, A was tampering with the zip of his trousers. He (the appellant) took A to task about this, told him that he must never do it again and took him back home. [35] The reason given by the appellant for his failure to mention either of these things to Mrs B when she accused him of having molested her sons, was that he did not want to get into an argument with her, impliedly because of his medical condition. The appellant conceded that, in view of his previous convictions, he had to be very careful in his relationships with children and that if his version of the boys’ conduct, particularly A’s behaviour, were true, this could have placed him in a very difficult and dangerous position. He reiterated, however, that he had rebuked A for his behaviour and that the latter had never again behaved in such a manner. He insisted that the incidents of sexual activity about which the complainant and A had testified had never happened and that both boys had been lying to the court. He had been very good to the B family and had no idea why they would lay such charges against him. [36] The appellant admitted that, before this confrontation between himself and Mrs B in 2003, he had again been charged with a sexual offence, committed in Randfontein, the allegation being that he had indecently assaulted a minor child on 2 November 2000. He was convicted on this charge and sentenced on 21 November 2002. According to the appellant, he had told Mrs B about the pending matter in November 2000, long before it had been finalised. He had pleaded not guilty to the