由此 - 5 A A 12. The second defence witness was the applicant’s mother B B (“DW2”). Her evidence mainly concerned the whereabouts and settings C of the applicant’s home in 2004, which differs in many ways from the C description of the applicant’s “home” given by Miss X. D D E Grounds of appeal against convictions E F 13. F Mr James McGowan, who represented the applicant both before us and in the District Court, advanced 8 grounds of appeal. G H G 14. The first four grounds centred on the evidence of Miss X. H The applicant complained that the learned judge (1) erred in accepting I Miss X’s evidence without question; (2) failed to direct himself on the I J danger of acting on the unsupported evidence of Miss X; (3) failed to J consider the “prejudice to” the applicant caused by the lack of particularity K L as to the dates in the charges and/or delay in reporting the allegation; and (4) failed to consider the relevance of the absence of any photographs of K L Miss X or any pornography in the applicant’s possession or control. M N M 15. The next three grounds centred on the evidence of the defence N witnesses. The applicant complained that the learned judge (5) erred in O P placing “little or no weight” on the evidence of DW1; (6) failed to consider or direct himself that the burden of disproving alibi evidence is on the O P prosecution; and (7) erred in finding that DW2’s evidence had no Q Q relevance. R R 16. The last ground was the usual catch-all ground that the S convictions were unsafe or unsatisfactory. S T T U U V V