Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1997-10-31

UNKNOWN: Now, I am actually just looking for the part 
where, sorry on page 47 Mr Chairman, at line 20, because you will 
recall that the applicants were also charged with attempting to kill 
you, attempting to murder you?
	Quentin Cornelius, as we have already seen, was a visitor to 
Cape Town.  He was in the company of Lindi Anne Fourie, 
Bernadette Langford and David Deglon.  He sat at the same table on 
the platform.  He suddenly heard a pop sound and immediately knew 
that this was rifle fire although he did not see anyone firing.  He 
dived towards the left, but while diving, he was hit by one of the 
projectiles which flung him two metres further onto the ground.  He 
realised that his lower body was lame and pulled himself by his arms, 
under one of the tables to hide.  There was pandemonium in the 
Tavern.
	My question to you Mr Cornelius is, why are you only saying 
that there were two of these killers inside the Tavern because you 
saw the video evidence?  Is that the only reason why you are now 
saying - because may I just add before you answer, that in your 
statement to the Police which I had Mr Chairman, but somehow I 
can't get hold of it, I don't know if Mr Prior's got a copy, you don't 
say there either that anyone was inside the Tavern?
	Why are you  now insisting that there were two people inside 
the Tavern and also before you answer, in your own prepared 
statement which is in front of us, on page 28, you also say that you 
believe that there were five gunmen firing automatic rifles at random 
at the patrons inside the Pub.
	I've got the statement now in front of me, Mr Chairman, 
maybe I should just read this bit.  It is paragraph 3 and it is in 
Afrikaans.  Roughly at midnight I heard shots, I jumped up.  My 
back was turned towards the attackers and at that moment, I was 
injured in the back.
	"There were numerous shots fired, but these were single shots 
and not automatic fire".  
That is what you said in your statement.  The date is unclear because 
of the photocopy.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, the original is available, it is dated the 
5th of January 1994.

JUDGE WILSON: Shouldn't you read the next paragraph as well?

UNKNOWN: The next paragraph says I subsequently fell to 
the floor and dragged myself away underneath one of the tables.  I 
did not see the attackers and do not know how many attackers there 
might have been.

MR CORNELIUS: My response to that is I did not know how many 
people there were exactly.  As I said in this statement as well, there 
was a lot of shots fired, but I can distinctly remember and I never 
lost consciousness throughout this, I do remember single shots as if 
one and two at a time, and not automatic fire. 
	The reason why I say there were two gunmen inside is I heard 
and it was at a very, very close range, when you have a gunshot on 
this side and a gunshot on this side, from behind you, you can 
distinctly understand or remember that it is two separate rifles and 
although I didn't see them, it is my belief that there were two 
gunmen inside.
	And because of other evidence after the time as well, like the 
amount of spent cartridges found inside the Pub, is it to me obvious 
that there must have been two.  I distinctly remember the gunfire of 
two separate rifles from inside the Tavern.  I also heard gunfire 
outside, but you could hear the difference between inside and 
outside.

UNKNOWN: Mr Cornelius, unfortunately I've got to take 
issue with you on that.  Firstly, I can understand why you said in 
your statement and at court, why firstly you never saw any of the 
attackers and also why you couldn't say how many of them were 
inside or anywhere at the Tavern.
	And I also want to suggest to you, and I think you've partially 
answered that question, that whatever view or suspicion you might 
have had as some are being influenced by what you saw on the video 
camera, when you saw the video here.  Would it be fair to say that?

MR CORNELIUS: It could be fair to say that, I was obviously 
influenced by that, but I would like to say again that and I am 
tempted to use this as the applicants did as well, I was there and I 
really did hear gunfire from separate rifles inside the Tavern and 
they were single shots fired and not automatic fire at that time.  I 
might have been influenced later on by the video as well as by the 
Police records and evidence and the amount of cartridges found 
inside, but it just confirmed my suspicions and my belief.

UNKNOWN: Now, Mr Cornelius, on my reading of the 
summary that is contained in the Judge's judgement, apart from a 
Ciska du Plessis, who also happens to be a Captain in the South 
African Police, apart from her alleging that she saw two men come 
through the front door, no one else had mentioned anything about 
any gunmen, any of the attackers being inside the Tavern.  Do you 
remember that?  You were there during the whole of the trial?

MR CORNELIUS: Yes.  I was however, not inside.  What I hear 
from you now, is from the records, because we were only allowed 
into the court when I gave my evidence.

UNKNOWN: Yes, of course.

MR CORNELIUS: So I wasn't actually in the trial.

UNKNOWN: Okay, I am sorry then.  Yes, that would be right. 
 Whoever then came after you, I don't know in which order 
witnesses came.
	It also seems to me from reading of the evidence, and I just 
want to put this to you, I don't want to have a fight with you, that 
there were what is referred to in Afrikaans as two volleys and I am 
reading from the evidence or the summary of Mr Gary Donovan 
Atkinson who was the owner of the Tavern at the time, and it is on 
page 43 from lines 8 onwards, Mr Chairman.  He says, he is the 
owner, and then he goes on to say that at about ten to twelve that 
evening, I heard a loud popping noise, followed by gunfire which he 
thought was rapid fire.

MR CORNELIUS: Sorry, was that ten to eleven or ten to twelve?

UNKNOWN: Sorry, did I say ten to eleven, it is ten to twelve, 
sorry.  Followed by gunfire which he thought  was rapid fire.  He 
took cover and shouted at the other persons in the Tavern to fall 
down.  This firing continued for a brief while and it was then paused 
as though the attackers had departed.
	He stood up to approach the telephone and at that moment, 
the fire resumed.  He again shouted at the roughly  50 patrons, 
mostly in the central part of the bar, to fall down.  This second 
series of firing lasted longer than the first.
	So it seems to me, what is the English word, I forget now ... 
(intervention)

MR CORNELIUS: Two sessions?

CHAIRPERSON: Two bouts of firing, two separate occasions?

UNKNOWN: Yes, bursts.  I think bursts is probably the better 
word.  There were two bursts of gunfire, it seems to suggest that, I 
don't know.

MR CORNELIUS: I would agree with that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Arendse, the only real difference is 
that he is drawing an inference, he doesn't say he saw two people, he 
is drawing an inference from the fact that he heard firing from two 
sides and that evidence was not given and was not asked in the 
court, at the trial.  Can you take it any further?

UNKNOWN: Okay, thanks.  No, in fact Mr Cornelius, the 
evidence here of the applicants is in fact that Mr Madasi who is 
sitting nearest to you with the white top, came inside the Tavern 
through the side door and sort of partially hiding behind the wall 
there, was firing at you and I think that is what the Judge meant that 
you, on the raised platform were immediately closest to him and 
visible, and he fired and at the same time, the evidence of the 
applicants is that Gqomfa was on the far right, and Mabala in the 
middle, sorry not Mabala, someone else who is now not here, 
Jantjie, were firing from outside the Tavern through the double 
doors and through the windows.
	Would that correspond with what you felt was happening that 
night?