I (see pages 20- 21 of the record ). I then ask: what ambiguity that need to be explained in ~he above assertions? I took judicial notice of the fact that Niger Opticals is a hospital that treated PWl of his injuries. How cou ld the names w ritten on exhibits "Cl" and "C2" change these facts. To me, I believe that it would nol accord to common sense if the defendant's name is w ritten on the exhibits. Of course, the defendant never contended tha t he was :~dt: h~:i~~ :vr~;t:n~:t~::t 5 Niger Opticals to warrant his nam .-~ ~~ (~'.9" - I must stress this point at this stage. The defendant, I assume, is facing trial for assault occasioning harm and stealing. What is the essence of the name written on receipts have on t hese offences I am really at lost over the sign ificance of this storm in a tea cup scenario. I am of the firm view that thi s appea l is not even necessary. The prosecutor should have seized the opportunity offered by the learned trial magistrate court to rephrase the question . Probably, PWl could have adduced evidence or explained why his name is written on exhibits "C ln and "C2". I believe that embarking on this appeal is not necessaryatall. l saynomore. In the main , thb appeal lacks merit and it is hereby dismissed . The decision of the learned trial magistrate is hereby upheld. The