CHAIRPERSON
Yes I mean it is hard to conceive of a basis to reject that evidence.  You see the question in regard to the Clackers matter really comes into the goings on inside the shop, exactly what happened it could very well be that the circumstances under which the three applicants landed up at the shop are as they testified acting on an instruction to go tell her to close down because she seems to concede that there was a consumer boycott and it's common cause if she was trading and that she was a White shop but the real issue concerns what actually happened inside the shop.  You clients seem to deny that they robbed her, they were convicted of robbery so it appears as if there's some difficulty in conceding of a basis of an amnesty application in respect of that incident because they were convicted of robbery, they don't admit that, the two versions seem to diverge completely as to what happened inside the shop and of course to be able to reject the evidence of Mrs Clackers which isn't being challenged in cross-examination, there has to be compelling reason.