Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1998-03-18

UNKNOWN: His first statement is in the first pages, 
page 299 and then it is placed again at a later point in the same 
bundle but I will refer you to these statements.
	The applicants has also mentioned that during those long 
hours of questioning, alcohol was given to him.  That was 
confirmed.  One can also see on one of the video cassettes that he 
is drinking beer.  The applicant said that he could have been given 
sedatives because the alcohol effected him quite severely.  
	But the most important aspect is that Captain Deetliefs 
tricked the applicant with his lies.  The applicant then provided 
these details as appears in the hand-written documents but the 
applicant testifies that Deetliefs always, with everything that he 
said, sketched it or sketched the applicant's words to be more 
sensational in order to qualify what Deetliefs was actually looking 
for.
	The applicants was continuously questioned by Mr Bizos 
and especially as I understand, it was to prove this larger 
conspiracy and that the applicant was not making a full disclosure 
and so it was put to the applicant that he had reconnoitred 
Mandela's home and that is why Mrs Beyers was called, in order 
to prove that the applicant was telling lies when he said that he 
had reconnoitred Mr Mandela's home.
	According to the statement of Mr Deetliefs he said, and 
that is R4, 306 continued and 361, where he says especially on 
page 361 in the middle, that would be the statement which 
Deetliefs had written but it was written as if it was the words of 
the applicant
		"Rekkies was also done on Mandela's house.  I 
thought the old goat was not worth it"
But nowhere, on one of those cassettes, there are 10 cassettes 
which have bearing on Mr Walus, this does not appear on one of 
those cassettes.  
	As it appears in this statement from page 306, the 
Honourable Committee will note that 301 or 304 and 305 are the 
typed versions of the hand-written notes.  From page 306, 
Captain Deetliefs went to a lot of effort, he wrote his statement 
and then there's a question
		"Captain"
and the question follows, then it says
		"Walus"
and then there's an answer that follows.  Where are those notes 
from which he would have retrieved this information? 
	He could not submit this to the Honourable Committee 
because what was said there never was said in fact.  And it is also 
said in various places in the statement that the applicant was 
warned according to Judges' rules.   It does not appear on the 
cassettes and it won't, it cannot because the Honourable 
Committee must understand and it was conceded by Advocate 
Brand, that the applicant had been misled.  Captain Deetliefs 
could not have warned him because they were busy with 
clandestine discussions where Deetliefs would be assisting the 
right-wingers, why would he warn them then?
	In my heads I submitted to the Honourable Committee that 
Captain Deetliefs was a liar and that he's nothing else but that 
and that the video cassettes and the statement are proof of that.
	The applicant told the Committee that at a stage he had 
driven past Mr Mandela's home at that point and the translation it 
would appear, the English of the applicant in the statement is 
quite clumsy, one does not know how the translation came 
through from the Polish to the English but he said that it was put 
to him - I don't have it here at the moment, it was asked of him 
how he managed to obtain the address of Mr Mandela and he said 
- and he continues, I must concede, but as, and there is such 
proof, the home of Mr Mandela appeared in the Citizen 
Newspaper and according to the applicant he drove past simply 
out of curiosity.
	I submit to the Honourable Committee that the target which 
they had discussed and which was pointed out by Mr Clive Derby-
Lewis was only Mr Hani and not Mr Mandela.
	It was also put to the applicant during cross-examination 
and it is also supported, that there was a conspiracy to murder 
the others whose names appeared on the list - and I refer to R4 
on page 308, where Captain Deetliefs once again - this is point 2 
on page 308, once again it is
		"Captain"
I have never seen a policeman make this kind of statement, 
nonetheless
		"Captain Cuba, do you think there is a 
possibility that others on the list could 
still be eliminated after your arrest"?
then it is
		"Yes, they are all bastards.  The one is only more 
dangerous than the other one.  Clive is a guy with 
balls, he will know what to do.  You must know, we 
saw it as a war situation, a political issue"

<UNKNOWN>: It is absolutely frightening Mr Chairperson, if one would watch 
the tape, that is tape number 8 - and I mentioned that in my heads 
of the 22nd of April 1993 and the time is 12H25, what appears on 
the tape and if one would watch the entire tape it would still be 
this Deetliefs and Beetge, no notes are being taken.  One can see 
Beetge's hand, they are planning to help the right-wingers.  
	And Deetliefs will say "They don't want to discuss it too 
openly because it's supposed to be a secret".  Then Deetliefs says, 
while they are discussing who will be the successor of Hani, 
Deetliefs says, and this is not the applicant, Deetliefs proposes 
that Sexwale would be the possible successor.  Then Deetliefs 
says that "Sexwale is a bastard", upon which the applicant 
answers -he's sitting there and this was recorded within the 
prison, he's sitting at the table with his head turned and he says
		"They're all bastards".
	On the same tape further on, the typed 1301, Deetliefs is 
still in discussion with the applicant and he expresses great praise 
of Clive Derby-Lewis, that he is such a wonderful man, that 
people trust him - this is Deetliefs speaking, and then they discuss 
the fact that Clive Derby-Lewis was involved with the 
Witwatersrand ...[indistinct] and then the applicant makes the 
following remark
		"Clive Derby-Lewis is a good man, he is a man of 
balls - he's a guy of balls".
excuse me.
	What is contained there on page 308 does not exist. It is 
not that it was interpreted incorrectly, it simply doesn't exist at 
all.  That which Deetliefs had written here was his own story.  He 
had taken discussions with the applicants, written it down to suit 
his own purposes.  
	He also wanted to try to prove that there was a greater 
conspiracy at hand because already from that point when the case 
was being investigated, foreign investigators were called in to 
assist with the investigation but it doesn't end there.  I have 
simply highlighted those sections with regard to which the 
applicant was cross-examined, but it is absolutely frightening to 
watch those tapes.
	On page 301 - I'd like to refer the Committee to this, 
Deetliefs here makes a very long statement and it is here where 
his style changes - I don't know if he became tired, but now 
assumes a sort of discussion form of what the applicant had said 
to him.  What appears on page 301 certainly does not appear on 
the video tapes.  He refers, himself, to the video tape.  He also 
states  that is was the 18th of April at 11H02 in Pretoria 
Maximum and all these details are given, for example that - this in 
the middle of that page, that Clive's wife Gay, was not present on 
that particular evening but at the handing over of the weapon and 
the murder list, that is not on the video tape and it does not 
compare with the testimony delivered in the Supreme Court.

JUDGE WILSON: ...[inaudible]

UNKNOWN: 310, I'm sorry, I'm so sorry.

SISI KHAMPEPE: ...[indistinct] Miss van der Walt, your head 
refers to ...[indistinct] to be amended should be
amended.