appellant who beat him. She was his wife. appellant administered the beating on the deceased which forced him to cry out loudly that she was beating him. also raised an alarm which, with his loud yell, attracted PWl and PW2 to """""-""""""" the where """"" found the appellant The appellant became furious when PWl talked to her about further warned the witness not to interfere · the appellant's husband. All fight. She the deceased points to the appellant the person who assaulted the deceased. 10 Thirdly, the testimonies of PWl and PW2 show that when the deceased made the statement about his wife's beating him, he talked easily and without difficulty. condition to make was still in good and fit staten1ent. F ou1ihly, we find nothing 1n the evidence on record that appellant sought to the of the above by way of cross-examination. This failure to cross examine witnesses on this material evidence in the whole trial 20 appellant leads to the · that the appellant. See James Sawoabiri and the is accepted by the Musisi Vs. Uganda, SCCA No. 5 of 1990 (unreported) and Didas Kibengi Vs. Uganda C.A. Cr. App. No. 19 of 1997. See also Akol Patrie and Others Vs. Uganda C.A. Cr. App. No. 60of2002 (unreported). 7