however surprised and shocked on how an offence of such a magnitude had been handled in the way it was done for so long a period. It is incomprehensible to so imagine. Be it as it may, I say so on the following grounds namely:1. Firstly, the evidence of the charge points to the offence of rape and not defilement which ties the court’s hand to that issue before it. 2. Where it is a charge of rape and the evidence tilts to defilement or a lower offence, then the court can invoke its inherent jurisdiction and convict on that offence and not vice versa. 3. Several names such as Samba Jallow, Alhagie Mendy, Babacar Mbaye, Yusuf Ndoye, Momodou Keita, Alpha and Nyanga were called and referred to in the trial. These people are certainly material witnesses more particularly on the issue of corroboration but were never called to testified. No reasons had been given. The defence never bothered to call any of these people to testify on their behalf if infact what had been said was not true. 4. That Babacar Mbaye was said to have been the first person to whom the accused had confessed to, but was never called as witness by either side 5. The cautionary and voluntary statements obtained from the accused and witnessed by an independent witness was subsequently abandoned because the police could not trace the said independent witness on grounds that there was no identifiable address or number to trace him. At the end of the case for the prosecution and defence, the defence submitted a no case to answer which was overruled. The defence 12