Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-18

MR DORFLING: : It was quite clear during the cross-examination of Mr Pretorius that what the witness said is he moved halfway down the block.  I'm specifically asking about the time when after his first shot, this is the time we talking about now the witness at that point in time positions him halfway down the block in King George Street.  He says at that point in time bullets hit the parapet.  That was his evidence and I am putting it that, that is my note on it and that this is in conflict with what the witness testified at the inquest.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Today he did testify though that there were, as far as I recall, that there were shots that were fired whilst he was at the corner did he not?

MR DORFLING: : Indeed so Mr Committee member.

JUDGE NGCOBO: And there was no indication - was he asked as to where those shots struck?  I don't recall him being asked that.

MR DORFLING: : My memory doesn't serve me, I'm not sure that he was asked that specific question.

MR LAX: You see Mr Dorfling ... (intervention)

JUDGE NGCOBO: ... and the second shooting occurred when he was now more-or-less in the middle of the parapet is that...

MR DORFLING: : That would be the impression that I get from his evidence today.

JUDGE NGCOBO: What you are putting to this witness is that the passage that you have just read out to him relates to the second shooting, that is just before he fired shots.

MR DORFLING: : It relates to the one and only shooting he testified about.  He testified as to one shooting when they were positioned on the parapet.  I don't want to be as specific as saying it was the second or the first, he only testified as to that and I am saying that is in conflict of his evidence today.

MR LAX: Just so I understand you correctly Mr Dorfling so there's no confusion on my part, are you saying that at the inquest he said nothing about being halfway down the parapet between King George and Plein Streets, in other words between de Villiers and Plein in King George at the time he shot?

MR DORFLING: : No he did in actual fact mention that Mr Committee member but he related the time of the shooting to be at the time when he was at the corner of King George and de Villiers and those shots to have struck the parapet.  And that is the only shooting he referred to at the time of the inquest - hitting the parapet.

MR LAX: Okay, but what's more important is where he shot from because all the questioning of Mr Pretorius was initially this morning was focused around when he shot.  It started of with him hearing the shots, running, taking cover, moving and then being halfway down that parapet and then going over and shooting, and then shots as well at that stage hitting the building.  That is my recollection of his evidence this morning.  So what I am trying to understand is what is the contradiction you are putting to this witness?

MR DORFLING: : The witness today testified as to a shooting that would have transpired at the time, a shooting in his direction, that would have transpired at the time when he was positioned halfway down the block between Plein and de Villiers Streets.

MR LAX: And you are saying that, that never happened he didn't testify to that effect at the inquest?

MR DORFLING: : That is indeed the nature of it.

MR LAX: That is the major contradiction you putting to him? Because you see no one else has put that to him so far on that basis.  You are the first person to do that.

MR DORFLING: : That is indeed the contradiction I'm putting to the witness.  What from the inquest record is that this shooting which struck the parapet wall, which is the only shooting he referred to that struck the building occurred at the time when he was positioned at the corners of King George and de Villiers.  He seemed to have added a second shooting today.  And what Mr Pretorius had indicated to the witness is that there is no ballistic evidence to support this so-called second shooting at the parapet.
	And I'm - maybe I can in conclusion put it to the witness that the reason there is no ballistic support for this evidence of yours Mr Moolman is because you are fabricating; you are adding on to your evidence and the ballistic evidence is clear proof of that.

MR LAX: Do you understand the question that has been put to you?  It's been put to you that there was no shooting at you that hit the building at the time you were halfway down from the corner where you fired your shot from, as you've told us today, because there is no ballistic evidence to support that proposition.  Do you understand what I am saying?  Have I put it correctly Mr Dorfling?

MR DORFLING: : Ja, that is the gist of the proposition.

MR LAX: You may answer.

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: When I was in the middle of King George I heard bullets hitting the wall at Shell House.  I testified to that effect even in the inquest.

MR DORFLING: : I'll leave that for purposes of argument Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yeah.

MR DORFLING: : Mr Moolman I want to put it to you in conclusion  that I am appearing on behalf of nine objectors who have been injured on the corners of King George and de Villiers Street or in that proximity on the day of this shooting, and those persons whom I appear for, would, if called to give evidence in front of this committee, give evidence that they were never part of any attack of Shell House.  First of all can you respond to that, if you can?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: I do not know the people that you are representing and I never had a chance to know them even on that day.

MR DORFLING: : Those objectors would say that there was no reason for the ANC guards to shoot at the marchers whatsoever there was no justification for that happening at the time when it did.  Would you like to respond to that please Sir?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: No.

MR DORFLING: : Now I want to give you a proper opportunity to respond if you disagree.
	The objectors on whose behalf I appear say that there was no attack at the time when you allege there was an attack and that there was no justification for you having shot at the crowd, for you, in the plural, you and your co-applicants as ANC security guards?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: In my mind I still have the picture of an attack on that day.

MR DORFLING: : And lastly I want to put it to you that the objectors on whose behalf I appear will say, if called to give evidence, that they were on this day or they intended on this day to attend a meeting to be held at Library Gardens on behalf of the Zulu king.  Would you like to comment on that statement Sir?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: No comment.

MR DORFLING: : Do I understand you correctly don't you know or are you not giving any response?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: Maybe I don't know the meaning of comment because you said any comment, I said none.

MR DORFLING: : I'm saying to you Mr Moolman, the objectors, those people who got injured they will say they were going to a rally or a gathering on behalf of the Zulu king.  That was the purpose of them coming to town on that day.  Do you know of that or don't you know of that?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: I would not dispute that.  I really do not know.

MR DORFLING: : Thank you Mr Chair honourable members I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DORFLING

CHAIRPERSON: Any further questioning.

MR HUMAN: Thank you Mr Chairman just a few questions for this witness.  Sir on that specific day did you receive a bullet proof vest to put on?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: That is correct Sir.

MR HUMAN: From whom did you receive it?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: I found it at the control point.

MR HUMAN: Round about what time was that in the morning?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: It was at the time when I was started to go up at the parapet.

MR HUMAN: Did you have a radio with you that morning?

STEPHEN MAROLE MOOLMAN: No Sir.