Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — 1999-02-23

MR LAX: Now I want to take you to page 29 of your affidavit.  You said that, at paragraph 5.4, that when this mob was outside your house that Mpongosi and other IFP members arrived there and spoke to you, during the time the mob was there.

MR SITHOLE: They came and spoke to me and indicated that the ANC was attacking.

MR LAX: Yes, you're missing the point of my question.  According to your testimony so far, that has not been what you've told us.  However, in your affidavit you say that Mpongosi and other IFP members arrived while the ANC people were at your house, not afterwards or at another time, but while they were there.  Please explain this mix-up.

MR SITHOLE: Mpongosi and these others came to me twice, for one they came at a time to inform me that the ANC was attacking, and when I tried to get out of the house, that's when the ANC were now surrounding my house, and they also came at a time when I raised my hands and asked what was happening, during Mpongosi and Zwane came.  There were five of them, and I was the sixth one, and they stood behind me.

MR LAX: Well you haven't said a word about that in your evidence so far.  You haven't mentioned it at all.  In fact you've given us the exact opposite impression.  The impression you gave us was that you were alone when the ANC mob arrived at your house.

MR SITHOLE: Yes, I was alone.  They came only to find the ANC at my place.

MR LAX: The other problem I have is that in the same paragraph you say you spoke to Mr Dastile, the chairman of the ANC, who was there.  That's not the version you've given us so far.  You said somebody else spoke to you, and said he would go back to the shebeen and find out what happened there.  I beg your pardon, to the office, to find out what happened there.  Whereas here you make it clear that it was Dastile who ordered the mob to wait and listen to you, and who informed you that there was a problem at the shebeen.  You said you knew nothing about that.  Why's there such a different version here in your affidavit from what you told us in your testimony.  Can you explain this to us please?

MR SITHOLE: There's no contradiction.

MR LAX: Then, just two other small issues.  At paragraph 5.7 on page 30, you say, and again in contrast to what you said in your testimony, that only a shot rang out at the point at which the attack happened.  You only speak about one shot ringing out.  Not many people were shooting at you and you were taking cover and so on.  Please explain that.

MR SITHOLE: The shooting that happened once here refers to the time when Zwane and others left my place, during which time I indicated that heard a gunshot.  But at the time when there was fighting, gunshots went on.  Not once.

MR LAX: Let me refer to be fair o you, read to you the entire paragraph in its context.  This is after you've received the AK-47 from Magwaza, you say that Magwaza refused to listen to you, that he'd already heard what had happened from the others, and there was no time for discussions.  You say that the mob of ANC members under the leadership of Dastile approached in the direction of the sports field which was adjacent to Magwaza's house
"I moved in their direction, shouting and asking whether they came to discuss the same issues.  They did not seem to hear me.  I was under the impression that they were armed with an assortment of weapons, including firearms."
And then this is the important part:
"Whilst I was approaching them they seemed to spread out as if planning to attack.  The tension was very high and the visibility poor.  A shot rang out.  I cannot say where it came from but under the circumstances believed it was the ANC attacking us.  I started to fire in the direction of Mr Dastile, leading the group.  I am not sure, I think I shot Mr Dastile."
Now, several questions arise out of what I've just read to you, and the first one I was dealing with was that, on this version that you have given, before you opened fire you only heard a single shot at that point in time, and that's in great contrast to your evidence to us that there were many shot, that you had to fall on the floor and take cover and so on.  I want you to explain why you gave us the impression there was a great deal of shooting before you opened fire, whereas in fact in this affidavit you only mentioned a shot.

MR SITHOLE: I think my evidence was not well comprehended.  I said that when they started firing and throwing stones I threw myself to the ground, during which time I also started shooting.

MR LAX: Yes I want you to explain the difference between that evidence, and what is in your affidavit, which your lawyers prepared with you.  They had an interpreter present I am assuming, is that right?  When they took this affidavit?  Correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, there was an interpreter.

MR LAX: I assume that because you did say to us earlier that it was read back to you.  Now what I was asking for you was can you explain the difference between what's in your affidavit and your testimony today.  That's really all I'm asking you to explain.

MR SITHOLE: I would like to know what difference or conflict of evidence you are talking about.

CHAIRPERSON: The main difference is in your affidavit you mention one shot ringing out, whereas in your evidence you give the impression that many shots were fired.  That's not the only one, that's what Mr Lax started you on, on this one.

MR SITHOLE: I think the person who was interpreting for me must have made a mistake because I did indicate that these people fired several shots, not one shot.

MR LAX: In your testimony today you were asked by Mr Cachalia whether you had shot at Mr Dastile.  You in fact denied that you had shot at him.  You said you didn't know who you had shot at, you just saw a person fall.  Do you remember you said that today?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, I do remember.

MR LAX: In this affidavit you make it clear that you were shooting at Mr Dastile and you think he fell, sorry, you think you shot him.  The impression that is created is that you were consciously shooting at him, the leader of the ANC.

MR SITHOLE: Yes, that is correct.  I directed the shot at him and I could see him fall.

MR LAX: Well then why did you deny that when Mr Cachalia put it to you, that that was in fact so?

MR SITHOLE: I thought I did indicate that I fired a shot and I saw someone falling onto the ground.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson, I won't traverse all the other numerous contradictions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Claassen do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by members of the panel.

MR CLAASSEN: Thank you Mr Chair.  Maybe just a single question specifically relating to Mr Lax's question that he put to the applicant that there is a discrepancy between the fact that he said, relating to the present of Mr Dastile when the mob approached his house.  Now Mr Chair I stand to be corrected but I went through my notes, and I specifically wrote down here he did make mention of Mr Dastile's name at that stage, if I'm not mistaken.  He said "...when they" I think the initial version he was he said "...they were killing me" and he then indicated, he said Mr, he wanted to know from them why they wanted to kill him and Mr Dastile said, wait, let's listen to what he's got to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it not Justin, or is Justin and Dastile the same person?

MR LAX: Yes I had the same note that it was somebody else called Justin, as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Unless Justin is Dastile, I don't know.

MR CLAASSEN: I'm not sure, I recollect hearing the name and I wrote down Dastile and I'm not sure if Justin and Dastile is the same person.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sithole, are Justin and Dastile the same person?

MR SITHOLE: These are two different people.

CHAIRPERSON: That's what we thought.

MR CLAASSEN: Thank you Mr Chair, I must have been mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising Mr Draht?

MR DRAHT: No questions Chairperson.