(2) If an accused has failed to mention any fact relevant to his or her defence as requested in the notice in terms of section 66(6)(b), being a fact which, in the circumstances existing at the time, he or she could reasonably have been expected to have mentioned, the court, in determining whether there is any evidence that the accused committed or whether the accused is guilty o f the offence charged or any other offence of which he or she may be convicted on that charge, may draw such inferences from the failure as appear proper and the failure may, on the basis of such inferences, be treated as evidence corroborating any other e vidence given against the accused. (3) In deciding, in terms of subsection (2), whether in the circumstances existing at the time the accused could reasonably have been expected to mention any fact, the court may have regard to the document referred to in section 66(6)(a). [Section substituted by section 3 of Act 9 of 2006.] 68 – 111 …. [Sections 68 – 11 repealed by section 3 of Act 9 of 2006 which repealed and substituted Part VII.] PART VIII C ONFIRMATION OF EXTRA-C URIAL S TATEMENTS 112 Interpretation in Part VIII In this Part— “confirmation proceedings” means confirmation proceedings in terms of section 113; “expert witness” means any person whose professional, scientific or technical training gives authority to evidence given in his or her professional, scientific or technical capacity; “statement” means any statement, including a confession, that is written or made orally and subsequently reduced to writing; “verification proceedings” means verification proceedings in terms of section 115A. [Section substituted by section 4 of Act 9 of 2006.] 113 Confirmation or investigation of statement (1) Where an accused has been brought before a magistrate, the prosecutor may apply to the magistrate for the confirmation of any statement alleged to have been made by the accused, whether in writing or orally, and reduced to writing. (2) In an application in terms of subsection (1)— (a) the prosecutor shall produce the statement referred to in subsection (1) by handing it to the magistrate and shall inform the magistrate of the details of when, where and to whom it was made; and (b) the statement produced in terms of paragraph (a) shall be read over to the accused and the accused shall be informed of the details provided in accordance with that paragraph; and (c) the magistrate shall ask the accused whether— (i) he made the statement; and (ii) he did so freely and voluntarily without his having been unduly influenced thereto; and shall explain to him the provisions of subsection (3) and of subsection (2) of section two hundred and fifty-six. (3) If the accused— (a) refuses to answer any question put in terms of subsection (2); or (b) admits that— (i) he made the statement; and (ii) the statement was made freely and voluntarily without his having been unduly influenced thereto; the magistrate shall confirm the statement by endorsing upon it the word “confirmed” and his signature and the place and date of confirmation. (4) If the accused alleges that— (a) he did not make the statement; or (b) the statement was not made freely and voluntarily without his having been unduly influenced thereto; the magistrate shall request him to give particulars sufficient to inform the State of the facts upon which he relies for his allegation and, as far as is reasonably possible, to identify those involved in the allegation and shall inform him of the provisions of section one hundred and fifteen. (5) The magistrate may require a person who makes an allegation referred to in subsection (4) to be medically examined and may make such other investigation as he considers necessary or desirable in the circumstances. (6) …. (7) … [Subsections 6 and 7 repealed by section 5 of Act 9 of 2006.]