MR COETZEE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: We'd got to 12(c). 

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Do you know a person by the name of Liebenberg who was apparently a member of the South African Defence Force?

MR COETZEE: Never Sir.

MR VISSER: Although it is not alleged here in the application I wish to put it to you, did you have anything to do with an attack of the house of Mrs Winnie Mandela in Brandfort?


MR VISSER: Indeed page 12, bundle C, it is alleged by Mr Ngo that he himself, Mr Motsamai, Mr Mtyhala and Sergeant Mamome had attacked Jannie Mohape's Ford Cortina with pertrol bombs as well as a minibus which belonged to Elijah Mohape and that this was done at your instructions.

MR COETZEE: I deny that Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Did you have anything to do with Jannie or Elijah Mohape?


MR VISSER: And then in (e), page 12, same bundle, he refers to an incident where a member of the UDF with the name of J.J. or Papie was killed. You are not implicated by name, but do you know anything about this?

MR COETZEE: No, I don't.

MR VISSER: Then he has submitted a further document to this Committee in which he implicated you in the alleged assault and torture of comrades in Bloemfontein at Fountain Street building in 1986 and stated that you and Colonel Stevenson had organised the members of the security branch into groups which were supposed then to interrogate and assault the detainees. Firstly, do you know anything or did you have anything to do with the group of 19 people who were detained here in Fountain Street building and interrogated there?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Visser, are you referring to bundle A here again now or which bundle are you referring to?

MR VISSER: I beg your pardon Mr Chair, it is bundle A, yes. I'm very sorry that I didn't give you the reference. And it is on page 27 Mr Chair, my apologies.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the reply?

MR VISSER: I don't think there has been a reply.

Did you have anything to do with this group of 19 people?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I remember the incident in this particular instance. The Defence Force arrested these people who were on their way - who were on the point of leaving the country, they were brought to Bloemfontein and Colonel du Plooy, who was in command of the investigative unit at that stage and General Smit, asked me whether I could people available to help with the interrogation. I detached everybody or I gave everybody that I had at that stage to help with the interrogation but I myself had no contact with them.

MR VISSER: Did you yourself have any contact with them?

MR COETZEE: No, all that I can remember is that at one stage I went up to the 5th floor and there were two or three people sitting in the passage. I can't remember who they were as I didn't have physical contact with the people. They were sitting in the passage so I said: "Why were the people sitting in the passage"? and they replied that there was no longer space in the office, or no more space in the office for them.

MR VISSER: Then on page 25 of bundle A, Mr Ngo also implicated you in an incident in Botshabelo which allegedly took place in 1986 where a group of 40 to 45 people - I'm sorry Mr Chairman, it's page 31, where a group of people who were school pupils of Kowha High School were arrested and processed at the Botshabelo Police Station. Can you remember that incident?

MR COETZEE: I can't remember that incident but there were a number of cases where steps were taken where the Bloemfontein branch people at Botshabelo took steps. I can't remember the incident, I can't remember whether I was there. Had I been there I wouldn't have allowed anything else ...

MR VISSER: Can you remember any other incident in Botshabelo where people were assaulted?

MR COETZEE: No, Chair.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I believe that I've covered all the incidents, if I haven't I'm sure my learned friends will rectify the problem.

If we could continue with Mr Motsamai. Mr Motsamai on page 146 of bundle A, involved you in an incident which we refer to as the Melk Street or Milk Street murder, a person by the name of George Musi. He said that you had given instructions that George Musi had to be killed.

MR COETZEE: Firstly Mr Chair, I don't know a person like George Musi and secondly I didn't know him and that I hadn't given such an instruction.

MR VISSER: He also alleged that the house of Mrs Winnie Mandela in Brandfort, as well as here clinic next to the house had been set alight and he stated that he himself and Mamome did it. He doesn't mention your name specifically but he later on involves you, what is your reaction to this? Did you give instructions to this effect to Mr Motsamai?

MR COETZEE: No, Chair.

MR VISSER: Thirdly, he referred to Bobby Sebotsa's house or a house in which he lived. It was his parental home to which fire was - which was set alight, do you know anything? Did you give any instruction to this effect?

MR COETZEE: No, no such instruction.

MR VISSER: Paragraph 4, page 146 of bundle A, Mr Motsamai said that he, Mamome, Mtyhala and Morakile used petrol bombs to attack the house of Nichos. Do you know anything about this or did you give any instructions to this effect?

MR COETZEE: No Chair, no such instructions.

MR VISSER: Paragraph 5, that same page, Mr Motsamai states that he and Mamome had set fire to a motor vehicle of Jannie Mohapi, did you give him that instruction?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Page 147, bundle A, paragraph 6, he says that - and you've already replied to this but that was with regard to Mr Ngo, that they'd gone to the house of the parents of Mr Citi Mzuzwana and used petrol bombs to set fire to that house. Did you give any instructions to this effect?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Then in paragraph 7 he says that he, Motsamai and Mamome had organised or arranged for members of the - as he's referring to it, the uniform branch to shoot Matthews Mzuzwana. Did you give any commands to this effect or any instructions?


MR VISSER: Mr Motsamai further says that - on page 8, that he and Mr Ngo had attacked Citi Mzuzwana's house itself. Did you give any instructions or do you know anything about this?

MR COETZEE: No instructions to this effect were given.

MR VISSER: Then further on it says he and Mamome had attacked Thabata or Thabang's of the Vulamasango High School in Bloemfontein, they attacked this motor vehicle. Did you give any instructions to that?


MR VISSER: Paragraph 10, he says that he and Mamome as well as Morakile, Mtyhala, Litseho and Lesale had used petrol bombs to attack a house of a teacher, Molosha or Bolosha. Did you give any instructions to this effect?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Lastly, paragraph 11 on that page, he said there were also other houses which they had attacked. He refers to two such houses which belonged to a certain Khuze - K-h-u-z-e and Sekopi Malebu. Did you give any instructions to that effect to Mr Motsamai?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Then page 184, bundle A ...[intervention]


MR VISSER: 148. Did I say something different? I'm sorry, did I say something else again Mr Chairman? - 148.

Mr said that he and Mamome, Sesedianye and Morakile had attacked a house at a church which appears to be the Manse, had been attacked by them. Did you give any orders to this effect?


MR VISSER: Then he also refers to assaults and torturing of detainees. We believe it's the Bloemfontein incident regarding the 19 people, you've already covered that haven't you?


MR VISSER: Then lastly on paragraph 14, page 148, bundle A. Mr Motsamai states that he, Mamome, Mtyhala, Lesale, Miningwa and Ramoseau had participated in an attempted murder of Oupa Makubalo on the day when they went to arrest him. Do you know anything about this incident?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Did you give orders to any of these people to murder Oupa Makubalo?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Would you ever have given this kind of order like we referred to?

MR COETZEE: No, Chair.

MR VISSER: You have heard Mr Erasmus testify as to the presence of female members of the police in the instances of interrogations and searches of female detainees, do you agree?

MR COETZEE: Yes, that's correct.

MR VISSER: Can you give us a date as to when a directive came when female police staff had to be present in the case of interrogation of female detainees?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair, I can't remember a specific date.

MR VISSER: I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chair.



Brigadier Coetzee, you've already said that you were not the author of the Venter murder. Could you please tell the Commission, did you discuss the murder at any stage with a Captain Flip Loots?


MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know Constable Hendrik Bokaba?


MR DU PLESSIS: Did you have any contact with Mr Ngo after he left Bloemfontein for Pretoria?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair, no further questions.


CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STANDER: Brigadier, could you please assist us? When an admission of guilt has to be taken down, we understand that the procedure was in Bloemfontein, to take the person to the local Magistrate's Court.

MR COETZEE: Yes, Chair, I can expand on this. The custom was that members of another branch were taken to the Magistrates office.

MR STANDER: And what was done if a confession was not taken?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you talking about admissions of guilt or confessions?

MR STANDER: Confessions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You said admissions of guilt or it was the interpreter.

INTERPRETER: It was the interpretation, sorry Sir.

MR STANDER: I'm sorry, confessions.

ADV DE JAGER: It was the interpretation.

MR COETZEE: Confessions, the custom was, if a person wanted to make a confession then members of another branch would take these people to the Magistrates Court.

MR STANDER: I understand there was a so-called roneoed form which the relevant Magistrate had to complete.

MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge of that Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say: "Someone from another branch", does that mean a completely different branch which is something other than the security branch or do you merely mean another unit in the security branch?

MR COETZEE: Any other branch than the security branch.

MR STANDER: What would you say would happen to this co-called confession or roneoed form, should a confession not be taken then.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I can't reply to that.

MR STANDER: It is my information Sir, that such a document would then be disposed of because it is of no value.

MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge in this regard.

MR STANDER: At the time when you were still in the police, didn't you take any confessions?

MR COETZEE: Not that I can remember Chair.

MR STANDER: Could you please tell me, during March/April 1986, were you indeed in command of the black section, as it was called?

MR COETZEE: That's correct Chair.

MR STANDER: Am I correct if I say that if there were orders with regard to the activities of the black section, these instructions had to emanate from you?

MR COETZEE: Yes, Mr Chair. Colonel Shaw sometimes acted on my behalf. I had many other responsibilities, duties and I could expand on that if you would like to hear. I was in charge of the IUP unit which protected the State President and Ministers. I had duties at the border posts which resorted under the security branch. I also had the five security branches where I had to do inspections, so there could have been orders not emanating from me.

MR STANDER: I understand. But you say, on the day when the group of 19 were brought from the Lesotho border you gave instructions that people had to be made available to help with the interrogations.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, yes. Colonel Smith at that stage told me that I had to make people available to Colonel du Plooy. I didn't have a choice, I had to give the people who were available.

MR STANDER: Can you remember what you were doing that particular day, you yourself?

MR COETZEE: No, Chair.

MR STANDER: Wouldn't you yourself have participated in the interrogation?

MR COETZEE: Definitely not.

MR STANDER: Did you never participate in any interrogation?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, while I was at the investigative unit until 1985, I sometimes participated in interrogations. [End of tape 3B - no follow-on sound as English only, tape 4A completely blank]

MR STANDER: Can you tell me, the placing of the group of 19 at the various police stations, who made this decision?

MR COETZEE: Colonel du Plooy Sir.

MR STANDER: The three persons who sat in the passage there, were they female members?

MR COETZEE: It's difficult to tell, I think one was a woman but I'm not certain.

MR STANDER: Do you know why they were sitting in the passage or don't you know at all?

MR COETZEE: Well, I asked about it and they said there was not space in the office and I left it there.

MR STANDER: Can you remember whether they were upset when you saw them there?

MR COETZEE: Well, they didn't appear to be upset Mr Chair.

MR STANDER: Were you very close to them?

MR COETZEE: Yes, Mr Chair, I was close enough.

MR STANDER: Can you give us an indication of how far away you were from them?

MR COETZEE: It could be a yard or a yard and a half.

MR STANDER: Was it the only time that you saw some of this group on that particular day?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, there could have been more occasions but I can't remember.

MR STANDER: Would you say that you could have been aware, had they been indeed assaulted on the day there?

MR COETZEE: Yes, I think I would have known about this.

MR STANDER: Is there a possibility that you wouldn't have known about it?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, while they were in the building I don't think so, I think I would have had knowledge of it.

MR STANDER: Let us accept then that the action of the members who committed these assaults acted contrary to the service regulations at that stage, then one could have expected them to have hidden it from you or have attempted to do so.

MR COETZEE: It could be so Mr Chair, but it would have reached my ears had somebody been assaulted while he had been in the building.

ADV DE JAGER: While we are on this point, if people shout and scream and cry because they are being assaulted, would you have been able to hear so?

MR COETZEE: Yes, Mr Chair, I would have been able to hear it.

MR STANDER: Mr Chair, may I just take instructions? I have had a note placed next to me, could the author just come to me for a moment so that I can clarify this with him? I ask for your indulgence.

Thank you Mr Chair, no further questions to the witness.


CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MEMANI: Mr Coetzee, in your evidence in chief you told us that at some you were investigating matters relating to terrorist and - I didn't hear the second thing.

MR COETZEE: All acts of terror and sabotage. It was stopped at a certain date and transferred to the detectives and there were certain other cases which I can't remember now, I can't remember the exact date when it was transferred to the detectives.

MR MEMANI: Now, isn't it so Mr Coetzee, that if people were arrested or detain, who were about to skip the country to join the ANC you've had had an interest in the matter?

MR COETZEE: Are you referring to before '85?

MR MEMANI: I'm speaking in particular about the group of 19 now.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, ...[intervention]

ADV DE JAGER: That was in April 1986, I think it was 6 April 1986.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I didn't have interest in that particular matter except to detach people.

MR MEMANI: Isn't is so Mr Coetzee, that you would have been one of the policemen who had valuable information that would assist in the investigation of any information which may be divulged by these people?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair no, the information mainly came from the terror investigation unit, that's what their work involved.

MR MEMANI: What I wish to propose to you is that you had been a member of the unit that investigated terrorism, you would therefore have been knowledgable about the workings of the ANC and Ukhonto weSizwe and that you would have been a handy person when there was a group of people to be investigated who were about to go and join Umkhonto weSizwe.

MR COETZEE: Yes Chair, I had information but the members who were to do the interrogation I believe, would have shared it with the people.

MR MEMANI: Now, the next thing that I want to ask you about briefly relates to the question relating to the feeling of ...[indistinct] and confessions are made. Have you, during the course of your investigations, arrested people who have made confessions?

MR COETZEE: No Mr Chair, I can't remember a single instance.

MR MEMANI: Have you perhaps been involved in a confession or rather, in a case where one of the people involved made confessions? Let me remind you, do you remind ...[intervention]

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, as I've already stated, members of other sub-sections were called into the office and they would take this person, take him to the Magistrate's Court and bring him back again and I wouldn't have insight into that.

MR MEMANI: Have you had a suspect who was being investigated by you, making a confession?

MR COETZEE: Not yet, Chair. Are you talking about a written confession?

MR MEMANI: That is correct.

MR COETZEE: No, Chair, not yet.

MR MEMANI: Do you remember the occasion when you were part of a group that interrogated an MK soldier known as Nkomo?

MR COETZEE: Was it in Bloemfontein Mr Chair?

MR MEMANI: That is correct.

MR COETZEE: I can't remember the case.

MR VISSER: Can the name be spelt Mr Chairman?

MR MEMANI: Nkomo is N-k-o-m-o.

Now, I'm instructed that that person appeared in the Supreme Court and was acquitted and that his legal representatives were Ishmail Ahob and had instructed George Bizos, don't you remember that case?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I can't remember such a person's name and I can't remember the particular case.

MR MEMANI: I'm instructed that that person was acquitted because the court found that his confession was not admissible because you and others investigating the case, had assaulted him before he made the confession.

MR COETZEE: I don't remember such a case at all Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: When was this?

MR MEMANI: My instructions are that it was in 1986


My instructions further are that on an occasion you - while Jannie Mohape was detained, he was assaulted by yourself and others.

MR COETZEE: I deny that Mr Chair.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, may I be allowed to enquire, is there now going to be evidence about these statements that are put to the witness? What is the status of these questions Mr Chairman? We don't know of any trial where my learned colleague Mr Bizos appeared in and where a confession was thrown out because of a finding by the court that it was improperly obtained.

The statement is made without production of any proof. There is no evidence before you Mr Chairman, ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: And it has been denied. The witness says he doesn't remember any such incident, that's it. I Mr Memani can produce the Judgement ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: Then it's a different matter.

CHAIRPERSON: It's a different matter.

MR VISSER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MEMANI: Now, I want us to deal with George Musi. Information must have been given by the people who were arrested attempting to skip the border, that they were staying with George Musi.

MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge of this.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that pure speculation Mr Memani? You were saying: "Information must have been given by the people who were going to skip, that they were staying with him". Have you got any information that they were?

MR MEMANI: Mr Chairman, I recall that some of the witnesses said - at least one, said that she was asked about where they had been camping prior to them attempting to skip the border.

MR VISSER: If I may, I'm sorry, I thought he was - my learned friend's finished. If I may Mr Chairman, Mr Oliphant gave that evidence, but you will also recall that each and every one of those witnesses told you that they told their investigators, their interrogators nothing.

MR MEMANI: Mr Chairman, that is not correct. What they said is, that when they wouldn't answer the questions they would be beaten up.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on with your questioning. You say: "One person said" - is it Oliphant who said he stayed with Musi?

MR MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.

Now, ...[intervention]

MR VISSER: I'm sorry, I don't want to mislead you. He said that all stayed.


MR VISSER: With Musi before they left.


Very well, carry on.

MR MEMANI: At that stage, then the police must have known that he was co-operating with MK?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I can't remember the name Musi at all and I can't remember if there was a file on such a person. And there was also no steps taken against that Musi.

MR MEMANI: And you being amongst the people who specialised with MK, would have had a motive to do something about Mr Musi.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chair, I've never before heard the name Musi.

MR MEMANI: Didn't you hear about Mr Musi, even after Mr Musi's house was burnt?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chair.

MR MEMANI: Now Mr Coetzee, you also - we were told that after Motsamai testified about Bobby Sebotsa that the reason for the burning of the house of Bobby Sebotsa would have been that he had killed a comrade. Do you know anything about that?

MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge about this.

MR MEMANI: Did you know Bobby Sebotsa?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, the name sounds familiar but I don't know the person.

MR MEMANI: You see, as the person who was investigating terrorism and sabotage, you ought to know about Bobby Sebotsa because he's one of those people who had some military training.

MR COETZEE: That is correct Mr Chairman, that's why I said I know the name but not the person.

MR MEMANI: And you would also therefore have a motive to do something about Bobby Sebotsa.

MR COETZEE: I had no motive except to act according to the law.

CHAIRPERSON: You put it that Bobby Sebotsa killed a comrade.

MR MEMANI: No, Mr Chairman, I ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: But that's what you put. I understood you to say: "The reason for burning the house of Bobby Sebotsa was because he killed a comrade"

MR MEMANI: I said that that is what was put to Motsamai when he was testifying about Bobby Sebotsa. - or rather Bobby's brother.

Now let me clarify this, when Mr Motsamai testified about the bombing of the house of the brother of Bobby Sebotsa, it was put to him that the probable reason was that he had killed a comrade and you said you don't know anything about that.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, can that question be repeated?

MR MEMANI: I'm saying to you, that when Motsamai testified about the bombing of the house of the brother of Bobby Sebotsa, it was put to him that the probable reason for the bombing was that he had killed a comrade and your answer was that you know nothing about the incident or what was put to Motsamai.

MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge about that.

MR MEMANI: So it is not you who gave the instruction to the lawyers?

MR COETZEE: The instruction to the attorneys to do what?

MR MEMANI: It is not you who told the attorneys that the probable reason for the bombing of the house of Bobby Sebotsa's brother, is that he had killed a comrade. MR COETZEE: I don't have any knowledge of that Mr Chairman.

MR MEMANI: I put it to you Mr Coetzee, that Mr Motsamai has correctly implicated you in all these matters.

MR COETZEE: I deny everything Mr Chairman.

MR MEMANI: And I put it to you that Mr Motsamai has no reason at all to falsely implicate you in these matters.

MR COETZEE: He must have a reason, I don't have any knowledge about that.

MR MEMANI: And you on the other hand have every motive to lie about your involvement in these things because to admit them would land you in prison.

MR COETZEE: I have no reason to lie Mr Chairman.

MR MEMANI: Are you still a policeman?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, in the beginning I said that I retired in 1995.

MR MEMANI: Now, let us talk about Ngo. You said that you did not like Ngo.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, let me put it in this light, I liked the other members more.

MR MEMANI: And you merely tolerated Ngo.

MR COETZEE: Yes, I tolerated him Mr Chairman.

MR MEMANI: And you tolerate a person only if you don't like a person.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, no, tolerate means he received certain instructions which I gave to Colonel Erasmus to give to him, certain identifications and other tasks he had to do. I tolerated him to such a degree that certain tasks were given to him. I did not fully trust him.

MR MEMANI: Isn't that quite different from what your evidence in chief was?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, the words may differ but the context is the same.

MR MEMANI: In your evidence in chief, you shifted him to Motsamai and Mamome and you said he worked with Motsamai and Mamome primarily because you wouldn't take him into your confidence and you did not like his presence in the office and you merely tolerated his presence there.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, Motsamai and Mamome I trusted wholeheartedly and together with them he did certain small tasks.

MR MEMANI: And Mr Coetzee, I put it to you that you, because you don't like Mr Ngo, would not associate yourself with anything that would assist Ngo, such as testifying to an effect that would lead to him getting amnesty.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, I don't have a problem with his amnesty application but as long as he implicates me in his offences, I'm objecting to that.

MR MEMANI: And you also have a difficulty admitting because if you admitted the things that he says about you, you would again land in prison.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, I have nothing to hide.

MR MEMANI: Those are my questions Mr Chairman.



Brigadier, that passage in which you found those two - I think you said: "two women sitting", was that ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Three people sitting of which one may have been a woman.

MR BRINK: Oh, I beg your pardon, three people. Was that passage commonly known as Violent Street?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, this Violent Street incident, I he0ard this during the first or second session. I've never heard of Violent Street before.

MR BRINK: So you've never heard of Violent Street until you attended these hearings?

MR COETZEE: That is correct Mr Chair.

MR BRINK: And you never saw a sticker on the wall of that passage, marked Violent Street?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, it could have been there but I can't remember that, I wasn't interested in that.

MR BRINK: Did you yourself use that passage frequently?

MR COETZEE: Chairperson, it happened seldom. We were situated on the 4th floor and the people who came to see me visited me on the 4th floor.

MR BRINK: Thank you.


MR VISSER: No questions in re-examination, thank you Mr Chairman.


JUDGE NGOEPE: It seems to me that this sticker was quite conspicuous.

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, there was a sticker in the passage but I can't remember what was written on it, I can't remember it. If this was the one near the toilet in the passage, it could have been the one, but I can't remember.

JUDGE NGOEPE: You don't remember a sticker with the words Violen Street?

MR COETZEE: No, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE NGOEPE: What would your attitude have been, had you noticed this?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, it depends on the interpretation you attach to it. For me it wouldn't have meant anything except if the interpretation was given that it had to do with an offence or an assault or something like that, otherwise it wouldn't have meant anything.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Well, the word: "violent" simply means violent and would you know have been curious to find out: "But what has violent, the word: "violent", what has that got to do here with our passage, our peaceful non-violent passage"? "What does this sticker want here"?

MR COETZEE: Mr Chairman, if we refer to Violent Street, it did not play any role at all if I interpret that. If that was the interpretation, it never impressed me.

JUDGE NGOEPE: Thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: I don't know much about bioscopes, but do you know whether there was a film called: "Violent Street"?

MR COETZEE: I think during one of the sessions one person's evidence was led that there was a film called: "Violent Street," but I'm not sure, I'm not up to date with films.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that concludes the evidence of the implicated person, thank you Mr Chairman.


MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, I mentioned earlier that the proposed witness, I've preconised him more fully since I've had the opportunity. I don't propose calling him as he does not directly involve any of two - either of the two applicants although he was one of the 19 but he doesn't involve the two applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: If that concludes the evidence we now come to the question of argument. As we indicated we would like oral argument from you, but we understand that you will not be able to start now. What we propose, is that we take the adjournment now until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

We would also like to explain - I would like to explain that we do not expect you to deliver detailed argument. We would welcome later written argument making references to pages, to passages and matters of that nature. What we wish to hear argument on is the broad approach to be adopted, the matters of the principals involved, the probabilities and other such matters.

We do not expect you now to give us a detailed reference to the evidence that was led, that you can do later. We would welcome such assistance from you, where you can refer us to specific passages that you want us to - tomorrow and thereafter we would just like to hear a general argument to give us a chance to debate with you the approach to certain evidence and matters of that nature.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that's an eminently sensible approach, speaking for ourselves. Could we just ask you to perhaps give an indication of the order of argument. We imagine that Mr Memani will start, followed by Mr Stander, so that we can ...[intervention]


MR VISSER: As it were. Mr Chairman, there's one outstanding issue and that is now the question of these documents from this docket. What are we going to do about that?

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think that we consider it necessary to hear this further evidence, you have told us what it is. As I indicated earlier, this is primarily as it sees, and I - to clear the names of your clients, it is the credibility of one of the victims that's in issue. It does effect obviously by inference, the credibility of Ngo but I don't think we consider it necessary to hear any further evidence on that aspect.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, that being so, I take it that it would be improper for me then in argument to refer to it at all. Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR STANDER: Mr Chairman, can I just enquire from you, seeing that I've acted on behalf the so-called disadvantaged or prejudiced persons, I want an indication what specifically you require from me to say that I must argue. If I understand my position correctly, and also the position of the victims, I just have to convince you that they should be regarded as the so-called victims ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well, that the incidents took place. We have had a complete denial by every policeman who gave evidence, save for the two applicants, that anything improper took place anywhere at any time. Now your victims have given fairly detailed evidence about what did happen to them at various times and it is on that that we would like to hear argument from you.

I take it - I may have forgotten some things I have been told, that your efforts ...[indistinct] elucidation from the court here were not successful.

MR STANDER: I went to the local Magistrate's Court and there are no records of any confessions and this may sound strange but there are no records. I'm sorry, I can't take this any further.

CHAIRPERSON: I think understandably enough, it's certainly my experience, ...[indistinct] that after a limited period the courts just haven't got the space to keep records any more, they are sent elsewhere where they are kept for a further period and then they are destroyed.

It is a pity. In other cases when one has wanted to obtain, but I don't think it indicates any underhand behaviour on anyone's part, it's one of the problems of busy courts. I'm of course old fashioned, it may be now with the modern equipment we have, that they can be put onto disks and things and kept very much more easily. You have been ...[indistinct]

MR STANDER: There are no records available, I couldn't trace any.

CHAIRPERSON: And I imagine also - I don't think there's much ...[distinct] about that, the Magistrates who were doing that sort of thing in 1986, are no longer about.

MR STANDER: Mr Chairman, they are here.


MR STANDER: Mr Housigo is still here and also the other person who took confessions here. In the first place they can't remember this incident and they don't remember anything so it's useless.

CHAIRPERSON: Will 10 o'clock tomorrow morning be suitable for you? And Mr Memani, you have the distinction of opening the innings followed by Mr Stander and Mr Visser can close.