8 namely his sister-in-law (with whom he and the complainant had resided in Cape Town) and Professor Francois De Villiers, an expert in customary law. Given the common cause facts, what follows is a summary of the evidence of the various witnesses on the disputed issues only. [15] The complainant testified that during her errand to fetch a cigarette for her uncle, one of the two men who she met there had asked her to identify herself by her name which he already knew. She became suspicious and when she returned with the cigarette, pleaded with her uncle never to force her into a customary marriage. She knew that this had happened to a number of other young girls and dreaded the prospect of it occurring to her. [16] Whilst being forcibly restrained by being held by her arms en route to her “marriage” by her uncle and the appellant’s family member (a considerable distance away) she cried and pleaded but was instructed by her uncle to stop. She was then handed over to the appellant and two of his family members who they met along the way. She was similarly restrained by them for the remainder of the journey to the appellant’s village. [17] After being instructed to put on her amadaki, the complainant was told to sit behind a door, thereafter to eat and later to spend the night with the appellant. When she refused to eat the appellant’s brother threatened her with a stick. She again protested and he left her alone. She wept and told the appellant