1055.  […] Further, a trial chamber’s conclusion on the individual criminal responsibility of an accused is the result of a complex evaluation of all the evidence presented in relation to that accused.[1] Thus, while the assessment of the conduct of co-accused in general, and of alleged members of a JCE in particular, will often depend on evidence of their involvement in the same events, they will not necessarily be considered alike. Any given case contains a multitude of variables and “[t]o focus on one or two variables that are similar to the exclusion of numerous others that differ will not suffice to make the cases […] analogous”.[2] The appellant bears the burden of showing that the Trial Chamber’s findings in relation to his own participation in the commission of the crime were unreasonable.