Before pronouncing my verdict it is only proper that I pause and look at the submission of the defence. They did not call any evidence which they have a right to do. Counsel for the Accused submitted that the evidence of PW 1 is manifestly unreliable in that when initially asked who raped her, she said one Samba Jallow. That she subsequently changed her story and said that it was the accused person. Counsel however did not say why PW 1 did that. With due respect to Counsel, it is clear from the records of proceedings that PW 1 stated that the accused threatened her with a knife first if she refused to undress and then if she tells anybody that he did it. On account of that apprehension of fear particularly for a child of such a tender age it would be common for her to take it seriously and so she believed him and did as directed. Under cross-examination, Counsel had the golden opportunity to discredit PW 1 but failed to do so. In any event, Counsel did not refer me to any authority to substantiate her arguments. I therefore believe the story of PW 1 as being true and the actual state of affairs. Counsel for the accused also submitted that PW5 threatened PWI with beatings and that was the time she mentioned the accused person's name which she contended was corroborated by PW3 the victim's mother, PW5 and PW6 the victim's stepfather and aunty respectively. With due respect, nowhere in the records of proceedings have I come across any such statement. Counsel further referred to the testimony of PW 2 Mariama Manga Jallow, a Police woman. That she told the court that on the 8th August 2002 she accompanied the victim and her mother to Bakau Health Centre where they were referred to the RVTH for medical check up. That she tendered a medical certificate of the examination of PW l which shows that the victim was defiled. Counsel did not refute, discredit or challenge the veracity or 22