Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-07-27

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Visser.  Mr Hugo, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?

MR HUGO: No questions, thank you.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: No thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Samuel?  I'll give you an opportunity for re-examination.  Mr Samuel?

MR SAMUEL: No questions.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR SAMUEL

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: Yes thank you, Mr Chair.
	If on your formula you say a person between the range of 1,35 to 1,42 is a considerably short person, what would you say to a person with a height of 1,5?  Would that change your conclusion as to the shortness and the tallness of the person?

S R NAIDOO: Sorry, it's not an easy question to ask.  We've got ask then what is the average height of a black female?  And the average would be - I'm not too sure, maybe an anatomist will help us, and anything that's above the average or significantly above would be tall and anything significantly below that will be short.  All I can say is that the height that I calculated almost certainly falls into the shorter range than normal.  If for example, 1,55 is considered to be an average, then 1,50 will be slightly shorter than average.

MR LAX: Sorry, to interrupt you.  Did you actually check the mean for those ...(intervention)

S R NAIDOO: ...(indistinct) South African black female?

MR LAX: The mean height for a South African ...

S R NAIDOO: No, no, if I'd known that I perhaps would be able to answer this question.

MR LAX: Well are you able to look it up from your books or whatever else you've got and let us have that?

S R NAIDOO: Yes, I'm almost certain that I could access at least to the Anatomy Department, at least some of the growth statistics.

MR LAX: Ja.  I mean, would that be acceptable to the parties if we just got that sent to us?  Just as an objective fact.

MR VISSER: I don't mind.

MR LAX: Okay.  Would you do that please?

S R NAIDOO: I will.

CHAIRPERSON: It will be if possible, the average height of a person who fell within Ntombi Kubheka's group.  That is an adult...

S R NAIDOO: Black female, plus or minus 40 years old?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, in that group.  The same group that you used Lundi's formula.

S R NAIDOO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, the equivalent group.

MR LAX: And if there - just in case there may be, for want of a better word, ethnic differences say between Zulus or Swazis or Xhosas or whatever, if there is that would you indicate that?

S R NAIDOO: Yes.  This is Zulu of course, Ms Kubheka.

MR LAX: Zulu or Swazi I think the family is.

S R NAIDOO: Okay.  I'm not too sure whether we can come up with the details, but I will look.

MR LAX: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

S R NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: ... to the statistics.

S R NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: Then we obviously need to ...(indistinct).

S R NAIDOO: Yes, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes obviously if you can't find it, you can't find it.  We're not ordering you to supply the figures, it's only if you can do so.  If you could find them, we'd appreciate that.  Thank you.  Mr Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: Thank you.
	Why I was asking you Doctor Naidoo, it's because in your conclusion after applying the Lundi's formula you say the figures do point to a considerably short individual, so I assumed the 1,35 to 1,42 metres in height.

S R NAIDOO: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Now what I'm asking is, if a person was 1,5, would you still say the same thing or would it be different in terms of shortness?

S R NAIDOO: I wouldn't - I don't think I would actually have made a statement 1,5 - I understand maybe perhaps your question now, 1,5, I would have made a finding of a considerably short individual.  If you look at my range, the medium point there is 1,38 and that is short by average standards of even laymen.  So - but 1,5 I certainly wouldn't, I don't think, sorry, I would have called that extremely short.  I  would have left it without a comment.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wills, do you have any re-examination?

MR WILLS: No re-examination, thank you Mr Chairperson.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thanks, Chairperson.
	Doctor, based on what we now know, there's a probable height of somewhere in the region of 150, 152, thereabouts.

S R NAIDOO: Yes.

MR LAX: And you have your mean of 1,38 within that parameters and then we have - and this is assuming that Dr Chetty did actually measure it at 1,6, now bearing in mind the scope of that difference, is it still a rule-out to you?  Is it possible that there would have been such a huge fluctuation?  Could we be dealing with the same body, or is it absolutely improbable?

S R NAIDOO: Can I give two answers not conflicting?  First of all, scientifically speaking you can't rule it out.  That's the scientific ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Scientifically speaking?

S R NAIDOO: Yes.  Then non-scientifically speaking, we have so many speculations, no suppositions here ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Assumptions.

S R NAIDOO: Assumptions, sorry.  ... that the figure you give me may be subject to the same kind of variables that we're looking at.  For example, if I say that - we make mistakes as well, now this is non-scientifically speaking, when we look at people standing next to ...(indistinct), I think I'm a little taller than you, I think I'm a little shorter than you, these are variables and it's all - this is observer error and there are many things that come into it.  Allowing for that as well, I think generally speaking you shouldn't be able to rule out.

MR LAX: You see my - I'm putting this to you as an expert now, as a scientist, as someone experienced in this field of identification of deceased remains and in that context, bearing in mind all these fluctuations and variations and possibilities, are you still satisfied in your own mind that it is highly probable that the remains you saw and that you worked on, are those of Ntombi Kubheka?

S R NAIDOO: Not based on stature alone ...(intervention)

MR LAX: No, I'm saying based on the whole conspectus of factors that you've applied, but bearing in mind what we've now heard about the height.

S R NAIDOO: Yes, I understand your question.  What I'd like to say is that the coincident correspondence of all those features that I'd found and then reinforced by the video superimposition photograph on the skull, tells me that we have a high likelihood of having got a positive match and that this is Ntombi Kubheka.  I have to still find a tangible deviation on issue that tells me I might, we might have made a mistake in this identification.

MR LAX: Sorry, say that again, I didn't understand you.  You said you would still have to say that there is a tangible deviation...

S R NAIDOO: Yes, an identifiable deviation as well that tells you there's something wrong and that we probably need to investigate further to look for a match.

MR LAX: Yes.

S R NAIDOO: So there is nothing that's a deviant, or that's out of - there's no feature that is out of that constellation of supporting features.

MR LAX: So there's no feature that's a rule-out?

S R NAIDOO: Yes, yes.

MR LAX: But within the conspectives of factors, what you call a constellation of indicators, there is something missing that would make you want to look further?

S R NAIDOO: No, nothing missing.  There is no finding ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Are you saying - put it another way, we spoke yesterday about positive, you can't make a positive finding on what you have here.

S R NAIDOO: Yes, yes.

MR LAX: But what is within the realms of what lawyers call probability as opposed to possibility, which is lesser than probability, what are we talking about?