The court considered whether the trial court relied on hearsay to convict the appellants. The court held that in a case where an immediate report had been made to the police by someone who was subsequently called as a witness, evidence of the details of such report would be inadmissible for being hearsay. The court further considered whether the defence counsel had a duty to clear the deficiency in the prosecution evidence during cross-examination. The court held that the defence had the discretion to decline to cross-examine the prosecution witness where the witness’ evidence was in favour of the accused so as avoid the risk of bringing out evidence damaging to the defence.