Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — UNKNOWN

MS QUNTA: So in fact what you're saying Mr Sibaya, is that on that evening when you drove around this, you did not know what these streets were and in fact what is here is what Mr Segal told you after you gone back to the place, is that correct?

BENNET SIBAYA: I saw 113 as we entered, we went down the road, we turned and I say NY115.  When we entered the other road after 115, I no longer knew what road we were on.  We asked this lady where 114 was, she told me.  Mr Segal then said the place where this all occurred was not 113 but 129 in agreement with the lady we had asked for directions.

MS QUNTA: So, I'm a bit confused because you said a few seconds ago that in fact the lady that you alleged you went and asked where you were, told you it's 129 and that that was 113 and then immediately thereafter you tell me that you actually saw that is was NY113 when you got in.  Which one is correct, which one of the two versions is correct?

BENNET SIBAYA: We entered through 113, went down the road ...[intervention]

MS QUNTA: Sorry, sorry to interrupt you, I just want us to stop at 113 - how did you know you were entering 113, did you see it or were you told the next day by Mr Segal that this was 113.

BENNET SIBAYA: I saw that it was 113.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, Miss Qunta, can I interrupt for a minute?  When you say Mr Sibaya, you that it was 113, what do you mean?  Was there a street sign here, was there a symbol that this is 113?

BENNET SIBAYA: It was written NY113.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we move on, otherwise we'll be going round and round these streets for the next half an hour.

MS QUNTA: Mr Chairman, the streets are actually very, very important and I will come to that just now.  It's very important for me to find out exactly what the witness means because there is - he says this in his statement, then later on he says an entirely different thing so I need to understand what he means.
	Mr Sibaya, you also say there that 113 faces NY115, did you see that in the evening?  Was that what you saw in the evening you were there - on the 30th?

BENNET SIBAYA: What?

MS QUNTA: Sorry.   133 you say - you told the police on the 5th of January that you went into NY113 and NY113 faces NY115.

JUDGE WILSON: Does he say that or does he say that the vehicle parked on the Northern side of NY113, was facing 115?

MS QUNTA: ...[inaudible]  I still want to pursue that question.
	Now you say the vehicle was parked in NY113 and it faced ...[intervention]

BENNET SIBAYA: What car?

MS QUNTA: The white Audi.  You say that vehicle was standing facing North in NY113 and it faced - it was on the Northern side of NY113 and it faces NY115.

BENNET SIBAYA: No, 129 starts at 113, crosses over to 115.

CHAIRPERSON: Miss Qunta, just read to him paragraph 4 of his statement.

MS QUNTA: Yes.   I'm going to read for you Mr Sibaya, it reads
"I noticed a white Audi motor car which was parked on the Northern side of NY113 facing NY115"
That's what you told the police and that's what they recorded it - what they recorded.  Do you recall saying that to the police?

BENNET SIBAYA: Yes, however when Mr Segal went with me during the day, he then rectified this and said that it was 129.  When I took him there - showed him the positions where the cars were parked, he then rectified me.

MS QUNTA: So in fact, when you said that it faced NY115, there was in fact no NY115?

BENNET SIBAYA: Where the white car was parked?

MS QUNTA: Yes.

BENNET SIBAYA: The next day I found out that it was 129.

MS QUNTA: So in fact Mr Sibaya, you've said several times that what you say here, just in this one paragraph relating to that location, it was all a mistake and you found out the next day - Mr Segal told you the right address and the right street names, is that correct?

BENNET SIBAYA: He said that we must go to the location, I took him there and I showed him where this had transpired.  He then said that: "If you're saying these cars were parked in such a way, then your statement was incorrect".

MS QUNTA: So in fact, what you are saying here was not your own knowledge Mr Sibaya - in this statement?

BENNET SIBAYA: What Madam.

MS QUNTA: Paragraph 4 that I've just for you, is incorrect?  There was no vehicle standing in 113 facing NY115?  I really need from you, a yes or a no.  Was there a vehicle parked in NY113 facing NY115?

BENNET SIBAYA: The car was parked on 129 facing 115, the darker car was parked on 129 facing towards 113.

MS QUNTA: So this was incorrect therefore Mr Sibaya, that's all I'm asking.  I really want a yes or a no, I don't want a long explanation, answer yes or no.  There was no white Audi ...[intervention]

BENNET SIBAYA: No English translation.

MS QUNTA: Mr Sibaya, wait until I finish because perhaps why you don't understand, you don't wait until I finish.  There was no vehicle parked in NY113 facing NY115, yes or no?

BENNET SIBAYA: Elaborate.  I'm saying that there was a car on ...[intervention]

MS QUNTA: I don't want an explanation, I want you to say to me whether this statement that a white Audi motor car was parked on NY113 facing NY115, was correct or was incorrect.  Is it true or not?

BENNET SIBAYA: What truth do you want now?  Do you want to know if there was a car or if there was no car there?

MS QUNTA: I want to find out where the car was parked, was it parked in NY113 facing 115 or not?  You've said that Segal told you in fact it wasn't 113, so all I want - this statement is therefore not correct, this statement that is contained in paragraph 4 of your statement to the police is not correct?

BENNET SIBAYA: If you say something is not true then it had not transpired, what I'm saying is true.

JUDGE WILSON: We're not disputing at the moment whether a car was parked there or not, that's not the issue.  What counsel is asking you about is the street that it was parked in, it was not parked in 113 was it?

BENNET SIBAYA: What is written here is not true.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: It took a long time.

MS QUNTA: Thank you.  Now Mr Sibaya, when did you go to see Mr Segal or Superintendent Segal?

BENNET SIBAYA: I was fetched.

MS QUNTA: Do you recall when that was?

BENNET SIBAYA: On a Tuesday.  This policeman came on a Monday, he said that he's going to come fetch me the next day, the Tuesday.

MS QUNTA: Was it - I'm trying to establish Mr Sibaya, did you see - did you speak to Superintendent Segal before or after you made this statement?

BENNET SIBAYA: I did not make the statement with him or I did not give the statement to him, I gave it to somebody else.  He fetched me on another day asking me to show him the location.

MS QUNTA: So when he took you to the location, had you already made the statement or where you about to make the statement?

BENNET SIBAYA: I had already made the statement.

MS QUNTA: You had already made the statement?

BENNET SIBAYA: Yes.

MS QUNTA: Now, what was the purpose of Superintendent Segal then taking you to the township?

BENNET SIBAYA: He said that there's something he did not understand in my statement, I therefore must take him to the location.

MS QUNTA: And ...[intervention]

BENNET SIBAYA: He then took me and I showed him where all this had transpired, he then clarified with a map.

MS QUNTA: Now in spite of Superintendent Segal taking you there and putting the correct street, the police did not correct the statement - they didn't correct this, they left it as it is?

BENNET SIBAYA: No, because I had already give a statement and it was written down.

MS QUNTA: Okay.  Now, if you had made the statement before Superintendent Segal took you to the township and you say he told you not to mention Mazibuko - you see in your evidence in chief you said he told you not to mention Mazibuko, that's why you didn't include it in the statement.  Now if he said these things now the implication is that he said these things after the statement was made.  Which version is correct?