MR LAX
If I could assist there.  You will recall that I spoke about early 1991 when he went for his training.  We actually spoke about months and when it was, and when he would have come back by.  So, I think that all preceded the subsequent set of answers.  I think the context would have been clear to the witness by that time.
	But I accept that his evidence was not in terms of your instructions initially, and there's potentially some possible confusion there.  Perhaps that's a matter that should have been dealt with in re-examination.  But be that as it may, my only concern was I also spoke of 10 months and we clarified that in the process of the questions.  So, really that was why I'm raising the delay with you.