Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-07-26

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, I am not sure exactly what it would be, I can...

MR VISSER: But just to ask the last question on this issue, when you describe a person as a considerably short person, we now know it would fall within the ambit of 1.35 to 1.42, do you confine it to that kind of length?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: No, I just, I was inferring that it was shorter than average.

MR VISSER: What would you regard as average?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: As a male I would think I am average height.

MR VISSER: I think you are tall.

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Maybe slightly, slightly higher than average.  I am 1.78, so I would think maybe 1.75 would be right average.

MR VISSER: Average.  And a female?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: From a female, I am just speculating, but maybe between 1.68 and 1.70.

MR VISSER: As much as that?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Maybe a bit shorter.  It depends upon the race group we are talking about, because some peoples are much taller.
	That is basically all I was saying.

MR VISSER: Yes.  Well, let me ask you the question straight out.  Would you say that a Negroid female person of 1.6 metre would be described by you as a considerably short person?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: No, at 1.6 I wouldn't say considerably short, no.

MR VISSER: All right.  Just to give the figures perhaps to save anybody else who is interested in having to work it out, but on the ...(indistinct) scale the difference between PM580 and PM1155 and I am going through the same exercise as you explained in your evidence-in-chief, if one subtract it from the 1.6 metre, the difference, you will find that on Mr Chetty on the 35 mm ...

MR LAX: Sorry, how on earth are you doing the calculation without the femur measurement?

MR VISSER: Well, I am taking what we have as a fact from Dr Naidoo, and I am taking 1.6 metre, because that is the evidence before you.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you trying to get?

MR VISSER: Well Chairperson, I am just trying to indicate the difference in height, but perhaps I am wasting time, perhaps because Dr Naidoo has already conceded that that is considerable.  So perhaps I should just leave that.
	If necessary, I will give that to you later, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Can we just come back to, while we are still on height, I had one other question that was worrying me.
	Your height is worked on averages?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: And do those averages take account of someone being shorter than usual for example?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I am assuming, these figures give me the 95%  confidence interval, so I am assuming that there is a 5% of people that would fall slightly outside that average, but here again, not way out, because in the ...(indistinct) shape distribution of biological values, you should fall in that range.

MR LAX: Yes.  But if you came from a family that was dramatically shorter than average for example, the 5% is not the 5% variation in height, it is the 5% in terms of the distribution of population?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, that is right.

MR LAX: In other words it is a statistical 5% per however many of the population, not a variation in height that the 5% relates to?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, that is right.

MR LAX: And so, if you came from a family that was, whose mean height was much shorter than usual, you would need to add another factor into this to take account of that, for example?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, I see what you mean.  Although, I think, maybe we are going very technical, although the measurement of the femur is calculated to be itself scientific.

MR LAX: Yes.  I mean just to show you, some people have short upper bodies, but long legs, for example?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: Or long upper bodies, and short legs?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: And what I am asking is does the 5% take account of all of that or are those the people who fit into the 5% for which the formula is not as accurate as it would otherwise be?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: No.  No, you are quite right.  Well, shall we say the 5% doesn't consider individual or familial or genetic variation, but purely to the public population.

CHAIRPERSON: But do you know how Dr Lundi arrived at his formula?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Well, ...

CHAIRPERSON: You don't know what he has built into that formula?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I cannot recall the exact technique, but what I do know is that there were known living heights of deceased.  All the deceased that he had examined, had known accurate living heights and upon their deaths, having those bodies being donated for research, he then measured the femur, so what he's got is an accurate measurement, right, and he's got correct living heights.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  I have had a request for a short adjournment, we will take a break.

MR VISSER: Yes.  I am almost through with what I can do in any event, Chairperson, but I have no objection to an adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: I would like to finish with Dr Naidoo, subject to what you have to say, because then also I have been requested by Mr Wills that we adjourn by four o'clock, he has an important engagement shortly after that.
	If we just have a very short adjournment now, so that we can be sure to finish.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: (Cont)   Thank you Chairperson.  I don't propose to be much longer.
	I want to put it to you, doctor, that on what we have on paper in front of us, it does appear that between PM580 and PM1155, there are three factors which have to be taken into account when coming to a conclusion on whether it was the same skeleton.
	The one is the height.  You said we must disregard Dr Chetty's specification of height.  I understand what you are saying.  That is a factor and that is your answer to it.  The next is there was a broken arm on yours, you said it is probably post-mortem, I understand that to be your answer, that is a fact.

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MR VISSER: Excuse me, you must forgive me, it is going to happen to you too, just give it time.  I forget things, I am sorry.

MR WILLS: Can I help you Mr Visser, it is probably the PM number.

MR VISSER: No, no.  I am embarrassed Chairperson, one moment ago, I remembered the three of them.

CHAIRPERSON: Maybe you forgot that it was two, not three.

MR VISSER: It is the length, it is the arm ...

MS THABETHE: Weight?

MR VISSER: And - it will come to me some time, but it is obviously going to be too late for today, Chairperson.  Chairperson, at this stage I cannot take the matter any further with Dr Naidoo.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, and if you remember the third, you can just tell us.

ADV BOSMAN: Wasn't it the age, Mr Visser?  Wasn't it the age?  No?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hugo, do you have any questions that you would like to ask Dr Naidoo?

MR HUGO: No thank you Mr Chairman.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nel?

MR NEL: No thank you Mr Chairman.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NEL

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: No, I don't want to consult, thank you.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Wills?

MR WILLS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Dr Naidoo, just concerning your report on page 25, page 2 of your report, and I am referring to the Groutville PM number 109/97.  Is it my understanding that, I mean your assumption as regards this, was that the body was taken from the exhumation to Stanger?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MR WILLS: And that that PM number 109/97 will be reflected in the Stanger register as 109/97?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: That is correct.

MR WILLS: And that the reason Groutville is written there, is because the body was exhumed in the Groutville area?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Yes.