MR COETZEE
Chairperson, my respectful submission is that and I must point out that I did not have the opportunity to appear during the court a quo but my instructions has been and it has been put to all the witnesses, that when Mr Holder was approached initially by the police, that they asked for a pistol.
	Now, if Sergeant Swart at the outset or Constable Swart at the outset, knew that a revolver was being used in this process, one would not have expected this kind of conduct from the Investigating Officer.
	Furthermore it was further put that during the trial, the question of the back dating or back timing of a statement and what information was available to Mr Swart at the time of the giving of the statement, that that was properly perused.
	I was not in a position to personally investigate that matter, and I could not take it further.  My instructions had been that in view of the back dating of the statement and the fact that the police at the time when the statement had been finalised, already knew what kind of firearm was involved, that the police had the opportunity to inform Mr Swart that a silver coloured firearm or revolver had been used.  My instructions are that this pointing of the firearm did not happen and my argument with respect is that given the totality of Mr Swart's evidence and the unreliability of his observations, that there is no basis to reject Mr Holder's evidence in this respect.