ADV BOOYENS
Mr Chairman, yes, I think the way it was seen initially was that he was applying as an accessary after the fact in all probability, because he was a policeman, he had a duty to disclose.
	And I agree that it does seem that included, I think the way it was seen in fact it was not so much defeating the ends of justice, but being an accessory after the fact, in other words being an accessory after the fact in the sense that he defeated the ends of justice not to do his job.  But I would ask for an amendment in that regard, and let you have something in writing by tomorrow.