15 [38] The charge sheet noted that the complainant was 12 years’ old. It is important to note that the child complainant commenced her testimony without resort to an intermediary, in terms of s 170A of the CPA. It was only when she began to cry, shortly after she had started testifying, that the State considered the use of an intermediary. The magistrate recorded that an intermediary would be used because it was clear during the complainant’s testimony that she was suffering and she was emotional and could not manage. Having regard to the history of the matter and the evidence available to the State, which is set out in the judgment by my learned colleague, it ought to have been clear that the complainant would require the assistance of an intermediary right from the commencement of her testimony. In this regard the State failed her. [39] The charge sheet stated that the offence in question occurred ‘upon or about’ 1 – 28 February 2006. At the commencement of her evidence the complainant had no doubt that the rape about which she complained had occurred during February 2006. Under cross-examination the complainant was asked whether she could remember the month during which the alleged offence had occurred. This time her answer was: ‘I do not remember.’ When she was asked further why she had previously (at the commencement of her evidence in-chief), agreed that the offence had occurred in February, she replied that she had been scared. When asked where the prosecutor had obtained February 2006 as the date during which the incident occurred, she replied that he had obtained it from her. When asked why she could not now remember the date, she replied that the incident had occurred a long time ago. A short while thereafter she was once again certain that the offence occurred during February 2006, saying the following: ‘I just remembered the date, I just remembered it.’ [40] The official form completed by Dr Gunaselva who examined the complainant and who testified on behalf of the State recorded that he had been told that she had been sexually abused between ‘January to June 2006’. The complainant insisted that she had not told the doctor that the incident had occurred between January to June 2006. She was equally unyielding when she stated that she had not told the doctor that a relative had sexually abused her. He explained that the dates he recorded as the time during which the incident occurred were supplied by the