After being convicted of unlawfully hunting huntable game, 5 oryx, without a permit, the accused took the matter on review. At trial, accused no. 1 alleged that he did not point out or admit anything, that he did not lead the police to any scene, and that he was handcuffed and beaten. Accused no. 3 denied pointing out anything altogether. The trial magistrate convicted accused no. 1 of hunting the 5 oryx, and accused no. 3 of hunting the one oryx at the first scene. On review of the magistrate’s decision, the following questions were posed: was the evidence of pointing out by accused no. 1 and his admissions inadmissible; if yes, was there sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction of 5 oryx; and if accused no. 1 should only be convicted in respect of one oryx, what should the sentence be?