CHAIRPERSON
What my understanding is, and I might be wrong Mr Cachalia, is that this test for the hands, is to establish whether the person had been handling some sort of firearm.  So how is that a defence?  Because that would have been evidence for the State.  Because he said they'd, he said he handled a firearm, he handled this other person's firearm when they were at the sports ground.  Then he said when they were arrested he was taken to Morningside and they tested his hands, so that probably, I don't know, probably presented evidence that he had had a firearm.  Now where is the defence?  What?