accused followed her, grabbed her, tied her mouth with a head scarf, undressed her and then forcefully had carnal knowledge of her. As the prosecutrix went home crying after the incident, she met with PW1 the way. PW1 observed her and found blood running down her legs, her clothes were also stained with blood. The prosecutrix then told PW1 how she had been sexually assaulted by the accused. PW1 took the soiled clothes to the accused residence where she raised an alarm. As people gathered, the accused seized the blood stained clothes from her but later returned same to PW1 through one of his relatives. PW1 then made a complaint to the police, and the accused was arrested. Whilst with the police, the accused volunteered a statement to PW3 which is in evidence as exhibit “A”. The prosecutrix was first taken to the Health Centre at Banjulinding and then to the Royal Victoria Teaching Hospital where was medically examined by PW4 and a report to that effect was issued. This report is in evidence as exhibit “B”. In his defence, the accused denied ever having intercourse with the prosecutrix and stated that he was only made to thumbprint on exhibit “A” at the police station. At the end of the testimonies the prosecution waived its rights to address me while the defence filed and adopted an eight page written brief of arguments. In her written address to the Court, Mrs. O. Uduma of learned counsel for the defence framed the following two issues for determination: 2