6 However, the crucial issue which has turned out to be the lone issue for determination as far as Count I is concerned is whether it can be said from the totality of evidence on record that it was the accused that kidnapped PW1. PW1 said of the accused as follows “he later met me in the market. He called me and invited me to his house. He said he had something to give me. He coaxed me and took a taxi and we went…” Although this piece of evidence was never challenged under cross examination, the accused in both his cautionary statement exhibit “B” and his testimony before this Court completely denied this allegation. It is perhaps important to mention that the accused is not a stranger to PW1 as there is a consensus on both sides that the accused was a constant visitor to the residence where PW1 lives. Of further relevance is the fact that PW1 would later lead the police to the residence where the accused lives and identified same as the place where the accused had contemptuous sex with her. This piece of evidence was never challenged by the defense. Rather, the accused admitted under cross examination that “it is true that PW1 led the police team to my house in Fajikunda ... I do not know how she led the police to my house, all I know is that she has never visited me…”. The accused in trying to deny the allegations in Count I stated further that when PW1 arrived his residence with the police, she pointed at his step mother’s room as the place wherein the accused had kept her for two nights.