In Tanganyika, Uganda, and Zanzibar all trials in the High Court take place with the aid of Assessors. The same rule applies in Kenya, except in the case of Europeans, when the trial is before a judge and jury. In trials with the aid of Assessors, as in the case of trial by jury, at the conclusion of the evidence and the addresses on behalf of the prosecution and the defence the Judge may sum up to the Assessors the evidence for the prosecution and the defence. In the relevant section in all four Criminal Procedure Codes the word preceding the words “sum up” is “may”. That is to say, there is no statutory obligation on the trial Judge to sum up the evidence, but, as said in Washington v. R. (1954), 21 E.A.C.A. 392, it is a very sound practice which is almost invariably followed by Judges in East African territories except in the very simplest cases. Furthermore, as held in R. v. Lute (1934), 1 E.A.C.A. 106, in all but the clearest cases, it is desirable that the Judge should make a note of the points put to the Assessors in such summing up, and the evidence which he has stated as supporting or otherwise each point.