Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-11

MR NGUBANE: And you had consulted with Rosslee when the statement was prepared, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Rosslee was not there when I made the statement, when I was consulted over these notes.

MR NGUBANE: Well did you at any stage consult with Rosslee in preparation of this statement?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes I did.

MR NGUBANE: When was that?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Possibly a week prior.

MR NGUBANE: You consulted with him individually or with his - in the presence of your legal representative?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: In the presence.

MR NGUBANE: And you had all the papers relating to his amnesty application and your amnesty application, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Not all papers, I don't believe Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Did Rosslee during the consultation indicate to you that in his amnesty application he had stated that you gave him instructions to kill?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I beg your pardon, in Rosslee's amnesty application?

MR NGUBANE: Yes.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I didn't hear you Mr Ngubane, say that again?

MR NGUBANE: Right, did Rosslee indicate to you that in his amnesty papers he had said that you gave him instructions to kill?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I saw that yes.

MR NGUBANE: And did you tell him that that was wrong?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I pointed out that was wrong.

MR NGUBANE: And did you consult with any other applicant other than Rosslee regarding this incident prior to your coming to these hearings?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I did Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And did Rosslee point - well was it pointed out to you during the consultation that there was an allegation that Mhieza was present when this operation took place?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I didn't understand that clearly, please say that again?

MR NGUBANE: Okay, was it pointed out to you at any stage during the consultations that there were allegations that Mhieza was present when this consultation took place?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes, that became evident.

MR NGUBANE: And did you tell Rosslee that that was incorrect, Mhieza was not there?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: In my recollection I didn't think he was correct and I was correct.

MR NGUBANE: Now yesterday I gained the impression of the fact that you were positive that Mhieza was not there, now you say "according to my recollection I didn't think that Mhieza was not there."

MR VISSER: No, that's not what he said.

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That's not correct.

MR VISSER: Just a moment.  That's not what he said, he said he pointed out at the consultation that he thought he was correct and Rosslee was wrong, that's what he said Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you.  Now what is your evidence, I want to get it clearly, I don't want to mislead you, was Mhieza there or he was not there?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Mhieza was not at the shooting range when I arrived at the shooting range.

MR NGUBANE: And you are positive about that?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I'm positive about that.

MR NGUBANE: Now let's look at Exhibit G paragraph 44 where you say
"I certainly to this day cannot remember was that Spyker was at anytime involved in this incident or that Bhila was ever interrogated at the pistol shooting range."
Those were your words, is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct.

MR NGUBANE: In this statement you say you cannot remember whether he was there or not?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That's on the notes, yes Mr Chairman.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, really, with all due respect to my learned friend, he has now elicited an answer, a positive answer from the witness on a false statement made to him.  With all due respect to my learned friend he should just read the words and not interpret them and place his own interpretation on the clear words as they stand there.

MR NGUBANE: Mr Chairman, I've just read what is contained in the statement.

MR MALAN: Mr Visser, I think the statement is badly drafted, if you read it you will find that it's confusing.

MR VISSER: But Mr Chairman, the problem here is this is not a statement and these were my consultation notes, that's the problem which we try to point out.

MR MALAN: Allow me then just to say that the consultation notes are confusing as drafted.

MR NGUBANE: Now let's turn to page 11 now at paragraph 40, the last line which starts with "we", you say
"We also had reliable information that after his (meaning Bhila) release from the Ramatala case, he continued with his terrorist activities."
Is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Yes that is here on the paper.

MR NGUBANE: And you can't attribute that to bad drafting, is that right?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Well they are only notes after all, it's
...[inaudible]

MR NGUBANE: ...[inaudible] that sentence - oh, sorry Mr Chairman, it's last but one sentence, I made a mistake there.  Do you stand by what is contained there?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: He definitely would have continued with military activity.

MR NGUBANE: No, no, no, my question is do you stand by what is contained in that sentence?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: As I was informed, that is correct, yes.

MR NGUBANE: And within three days of his release your information was that he had been involved in terrorist activities?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Mr Chairman, I didn't necessarily have the only information appertaining to Mr Bhila's activities.  If there was information on his activities which was not necessarily at hand to me, it could have been passed on by somebody else but I was informed by my officer commanding that he had reliable information that Bhila was to continue with his activities.

MR NGUBANE: He had reliable information that?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That Bhila was continuing with his activities.

MR NGUBANE: Were you told what those activities were?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I knew what his activities were.

MR NGUBANE: You were never told what they were?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: It would have been the same as before?

MR NGUBANE: No, answer my question, you were never told about those activities?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I cannot recall exactly what the wording would have been told to me.

MR NGUBANE: And you cannot recall whether you were ever told what those activities were?

CHAIRPERSON: Had you been told in the past what they were?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And you were now told he was continuing with them by Major Taylor?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: By Major Taylor, yes.

MR NGUBANE: Let's come to the actual killing of Mr Bhila.  You say it was dark when he was killed?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Correct Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And you indicated yesterday that you were standing at a distance of about ten paces from him?

CHAIRPERSON: Five to six paces.

MR NGUBANE: Five to six paces from him?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That is correct Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: Alright, when the first shot was fired at him was he facing you?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No he was not.

MR NGUBANE: And was he facing the person that shot him?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No he was not.

MR NGUBANE: He was facing away from the person who was shooting him is that correct?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: That's correct.

MR NGUBANE: Was there any moonlight on that particular day?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I can't recall, it was dark but there was a silhouette.

MR NGUBANE: You say he was shot in the head, did you manage to see where about in the head he was shot?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: Not exactly.

MR NGUBANE: And did you examine him after he had been shot?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I did not Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And when at least a further shot was directed at him, you say it was also in the head or you don't know?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: No it was also in the head.

MR NGUBANE: And he was lying down at that stage?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: He was in the lying position yes.

MR NGUBANE: And you didn't participate - well except by being there in the scene, you didn't participate in the actual shooting?

LAWRIE WASSERMAN: I didn't participate at all in any of the shooting Mr Chairman.

MR NGUBANE: And you say you also didn't participate in the interrogation of Mr Bhila?