Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

NEO POTSANE: Well in response to that I'm going to repeat again that after I fired my shot I went back into cover and I'm stating it for maybe at that time, that fire continued after that from all directions and from all directions, I'm not saying no from the right or from the left, it could have been from the parapet, it could have been ..., so to claim that, for you to say that I'm the last to fire while I heard shots went on for several seconds, they could have been from the parapet still.

MR PRETORIUS: Furthermore Mr Potsane if four shots, only four shots were fired by shotguns on that day from the parapet at the crowd and the guards testify, including you, that if you add it all together, three of those shots were fired whilst the marchers were attacking.  Do you understand still what I am saying?

NEO POTSANE: Yes.

MR PRETORIUS: And one take the further objective fact, and that is that the four people that died at the corner from shotgun wounds were all four shot in the back, then I put it to you that objectively speaking, the guards cannot be telling the truth.  Do you agree with that?

NEO POTSANE: I think that line of questioning, I will try to explain it again.  I think again I'll go back and say whilst I still stand with what I saw that day but in the general pandemonium, where a group of people could be surging forward it could happen that a certain number of them just are - had their backs on me and that's why I'm saying that no, if people were shot at the back, that could have been the case but I'm not changing my statement that I shot at the surging crowd.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Are you saying Mr Potsane that it may well be that as this group of marchers were surging forwards and attacking it may well be that you shot them at the back, but whilst they're still surging forward?

NEO POTSANE: No what I mean sir is that whilst they were surging forward, it could be that amongst them there was some of them who were actually turning back or running away and as a result you know those people would sustain shots at the back.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take the adjournment now and resume in 15 minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: You're reminded you're still under oath.

NEO POTSANE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please proceed.

MR CURRIN: As requested I've consulted with my client with regard to the amnesty application, the other two amnesty applications around which you wanted certain clarification.  You might recall at the beginning that issue arose and you - what I would just like to place on record is that, and I'm sure that the committee's aware of the fact that the amnesty applications are confidential until the application commences, unless the commission or committee authorises the publication prior thereto.  However, since the Silverton incident was a trial, the record is a public document, my colleague is quite entitled to have access to that.  I'm quite happy to record that that incident relates to a limpid mine which was placed at the Silverton shopping centre which resulted in death and injury.  I'm also willing, without giving any details at all, willing to say that the other incident for which the applicant is applying for amnesty relates to a limpid mine that he placed on a road which was used by army hippos, it was detonated by a front end loader and no-one was killed or injured and the incident relating to Brigadier Malope, just so that the information is before you, Brigadier Malope was in charge of the police at the time of the Winterveld Massacre in which many people were killed and injured by the police and as a result of that, he was targeted for assasination.  And that is another incident in respect of which the applicant is applying for amnesty and that is the only information which I'm willing to provide without authorisation from the committee.

CHAIRPERSON: ... (inaudible) need any further information?

MR PRETORIUS: Thank you Mr Chairman I don't need any further information as well, I just wanted to know the nature of it.  Mr Potsane can I refer you to the inquest record, in particular page 3556.  Have you got that in front of you?

NEO POTSANE: 3556?

MR PRETORIUS: That is correct.  As from line 19.  The court starts examining you, it says:  "Just a minute, you were both ...", now that is you referring to yourself and Mr Moolman, "you were both taking cover when you took the shotgun from him as I understand?",  "Yes that is right".  "And did you take the shotgun for the purpose of shooting yourself because he was scared?",  "Yes".  "What did you want to shoot?",  "Because of the situation that was running at the time".  "What situation?",  "We were under attack".  "But you had not even seen the crowd at that time, at the time you started to take the shotgun and shoot yourself.  Is that correct?",  "Yes that is so".  "Well ...", then Mr Ferreira continues:  "Well how did you know then you were under attack?",  "Because Moolman had told me that they were being shot at".  Did you read that Mr Potsane?

NEO POTSANE: Yes.

MR PRETORIUS: I put it to you then that it was your evidence then, if one looks at it, that the reason why you knew you were under attack at that stage was the fact that Mr Moolman told you.  Is that correct?

NEO POTSANE: It was one of the factors.

MR PRETORIUS: I do not intend to read the rest, but if you look at the whole of page 3357 further, that was the only factor that you mention at that stage why you said you were under attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes do carry on.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Potsane, at that time, that is now when the main incident took place on that day there at Shell House, you were a seasoned soldier, MK soldier.  Is that correct?

NEO POTSANE: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: At the same time no shots were fired at you or you did not perceive that any shots were fired at you on that day.  Is that correct?

NEO POTSANE: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: You did not even see a firearm amongst the crowd when you stood up and fired your shot.  Is that also correct?

NEO POTSANE: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: Taking all that together, why were you scared and handed the gun back to Moolman?

NEO POTSANE: After I fired the shot I'd seen the way the crowd was surging and with intent to attack and kill and that scared me.

MR PRETORIUS: But in the circumstances I've just sketched, it is quite clear that what you had to do then is to protect the building.  Isn't that correct?

NEO POTSANE: That is correct.

MR PRETORIUS: Then taking that into account, as well as the fact that you're a seasoned soldier, why didn't you shoot at this charging crowd?  Now that is other shots than the one that you testified to.

NEO POTSANE: I will just to put another matter straight.  I think when you say a seasoned soldier, it would be fair to a person who has just been trained and is prepared and ready and I was trained like about ten days ago and I've not been in the action like for some time, maybe more than ten years and that wouldn't qualify for a person to be a seasoned soldier.  If I would be seasoned enough, then I'd have to go for a refresher course in order to get seasoned.
So I will tell you that I was not seasoned at the time.

MR PRETORIUS: Do you now say that you were not a seasoned soldier as on the 28th of March 1994?

NEO POTSANE: I tell to you that I was trained, I was military trained but not like - I mean a position like - any commander will be doing a false thing to take a person like me who had not been in touch with military situation for that long and put me into combat because he will be doing a false thing and in that respect you know I was deployed because they knew I had training and I could use some of the tactics which I've been taught.  But that does not mean that I could not be scared.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Potsane you were active in operations by the MK in the ten years preceding the 28th of March 1994.  Isn't that correct?