Similarly, PW8 who was a dependant of the accused and girl friend to the accused's son called David Mpagi explained how she was taken into hiding by Mpagi and was in May 2009 taken to the Central Police Station to make additional statement to conform to the version of the defence. She was the person in the next room and heard what was going on. 2 days after burial, both PW2 and PW3 who are her sisters testified about her disappearance from the village. DIIP Adupa Vincent (PW13) testified about how he arrested Mpagi and when Mpagi was detailed to produce PW8, Mpagi took him to Old Kampala Police Barracks in October 2009 more than one year since the death of her sister in April 2008. PW13's evidence on how PW8 was discovered in hiding was not challenged and PW8 herself confirms it. PW8 admits she was a girl friend to the accused's son. This relationship though obscene given the fact that Mpagi was in a sexual relationship with a sister of his father's wife brought pressure to bear on PW8 to save her father in law - the accused by making an additional statement that is false to save her inlaw from criminal charge. I would dismiss her second statement as I would dismiss PW5's second statement as false statements procured with criminal intentions of compounding a felony. I would accept the testimonies of PW5 and PW8 given on oath as truthful of what happened on the night of 19th and early hours of 20th April, 2008. Let me examine other aspects of circumstantial evidence as adduced by the Prosecution. This is in regard to threats to kill the deceased which frightened her so much that she called her two sisters PW2 and PW3 and told them to pray for her because the accused was this time more annoyed than ever before and she was expecting the worst. The Prosecution asked the Court to treat the verbal statements of the deceased to her two sisters just a few hours before her death as relevant and constituting circumstances of a transaction that led to her death. The Prosecution asked me to admit those statements to PW2 and PW3 under Section 30(a) of the Evidence Act and cited the case of Mureba Janet and 2 Ors. Versus Uganda Criminal Appeal 13/2003 (SC) in support of that submission. The defence argued that Mureba's case requires at pages 13 of the Judgment that such evidence be examined narrowly because it could be fabricated and that co-existing circumstances existed which made Mureeba's case inapplicable. In the present case, there is no dispute about the accused's presence at the scene. His defence is that it is the deceased who pulled the trigger to herself causing her death. This is a possibility which can amount to a co-existing circumstance. Indeed the lady assessor believed so and advised me to find the accused not guilty. However, why should the deceased who had lived with the accused for about 5 years ring her two sisters a few hours to her death in a depressed voice telling them to pray for her because the accused was in a bad mood after suspecting her to have been in a lodge with another man? The accused testified that she read the letter written by one Peter who had seen her go with one Akuraja a policeman. But this letter if it existed did not say that the two had gone to play sex. However, the accused says she was guilty and decided to end her life. There was time between when she is supposed to have read the letter and when she died. She had time to call her two elder sisters. She told them that the accused was suspecting her and was very annoyed more than ever before. According to PW2, the accused was threatening to kill her and requested for prayers. This was at 8.00 pm and by midnight, another call came through from a lady that said the deceased had been shot and was in Kawolo Hospital before getting another call at 6.00 am that the deceased was dead.