Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-07-26

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: The laboratory came back to me after quite some work on this and said that they had been able to isolate some DNA from some teeth, one tooth I think and one bone, but unfortunately the DNA was so degraded that it wouldn't be able to replicate.
	You must replicate in order to subject it to testing.  It was too degraded DNA.  But what they advised me with that negative report, they advised me that they would like to send the specimen to what they would consider ...(indistinct) in the European countries, Prof Brinkman and Munster, Germany, and it would not cost anything.  I waited several months more for a result.
	They did write back to say that in spite of exhaustive tests carried out and in spite of mitochondria DNA being sought, they were unable to get a positive result.  The laboratory tests are telling us then that they were unable to isolate DNA, to make it available for testing.

MR LAX: Just for the record, doctor, are these letters and reports which you got at 43, 44, 45 and then 46 appears to be from Germany?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: That is right.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Lax.  What other attempts did you make in trying to get identification of the skeletal remains?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Finally what I did was, thank you, I was asked to pursue, well, we did this parallel, just in case we were not able to get good results and typable DNA's, good isolated DNA, I then consulted a local Durban cranial facial expert, Dr Olsbrook who in discussions with me, suggested that I first try the quicker and more updated procedure of computerised cranial facial reconstruction.  He gave me three or four names of people to consult, two were from Briton, one from Germany, one from Japan.
	The only one I knew, was one of the two from Briton and Prof Vanezis.  I consulted him and he was happy to do this.  It was some time before we sent the skull, the specimens were all the time in my possession.
	Prof Vanezis' result, the Commission does know at the moment.

MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.  If the Committee would bear with me.
	With regard to the conclusions that were reached by Dr Vanezis that it is highly likely that the skull is part of the remains of Ntombi Kubheka, what is your comment to that?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I find that his conclusions support and add to my findings in that it does not represent, it represents one more addition to the constellation of features that   I find that do match those of the alleged deceased.
	It does not for example, give me a finding that, tells me that we have a different feature or a non-identifying feature or an exclusionary feature in this case.  His report supports the general constellation  of features that tell me that or suggests to me that this could be very high likelihood of positive identification.

MS THABETHE: Okay.  Sorry Dr Naidoo, just to take you back a bit on the DNA.  Did you at some stage take the blood samples of Ntombi Kubheka's relatives?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I didn't do it myself.  I requested by telephone consultation and by letter, my colleague in Pretoria, I think it is Pretoria, to assist me, which they gladly did and it kept the chain of evidence, by recording the seal numbers, etc.
	Louis Pasteur Building, I think it is Dr Ferreira, that took blood samples for example from Sibongile Kubheka, Gugu Sibongile Kubheka?  I must just check my record.

MS THABETHE: We do have the records.

CHAIRPERSON: We know that the DNA wasn't positive, it doesn't take it any further, does it really?

MS THABETHE: Thank you, I just wanted to put it on record.

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I do recall, I took one sample of the son of the alleged deceased.

MS THABETHE: Now, coming back to the dress.

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

MS THABETHE: That was found, or that was together with the remains when it was presented or handed over to you, did you examine the dress in any way?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry,  your first question I didn't hear?

MR LAX: Examine.

MS THABETHE: Did you examine the dress.

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes, I did examine the dress.

MS THABETHE: What were you looking for, or what did you seek to find in examining the dress?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: The two things I was looking for, were evidence of injury or particularly characteristic defects that could tell me that there was injuries to the body itself, and secondly just to record the special identifying features of this, of these clothing for future identification.

MS THABETHE: Did you make any findings from examining the dress?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.  Yes, I described it as a burgundy short-sleeved, thin nylon dress, showing large white and red flower prints around the lower portion - I am reading on page 25 of the Bundle, the second paragraph  - lower portion and fine pale and red/white oblique stripes across the upper front and rear, with a thin fabric belt around the waist, through loops, showing a label "swing set" and a button with a loop, the rear neck, and the other clothing.

MS THABETHE: So my question is, did the clothing, did you make any findings in relation to the identifying, the identification of the skeletal remains from examining the clothing?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I mentioned that the clothing didn't specify size, that there were no characteristics, defects of trauma that I could link together with bone injuries, and there was definitely extensive discoloration and staining by  post-mortem fluids.
	At this stage, you cannot make out whether this is just blood, or if it is blood stained post-mortem fluid.  Those were, there were no special identifying features apart from that.

MS THABETHE: Okay.   From the type of gunshot wound that was on the skeletal skull, on the skull, would you say there would have been bleeding?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: There probably would have been a little bleeding, and if there was bleeding, it would have probably been from the mouth and nostrils a little, rather than from the vertex.
	Because the bullet remained there, there was no exit wound, there would have been a little bleeding from the nose and mouth and from the vertex, the entrance hole, but little.  There is also a possibility that the hair would have been, would have dampened the flow, and you don't get a visible amount of bleeding.

MS THABETHE: Okay.   I want to come now to Dr Chetty's report, which is on page 67 of ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you move on to that, also just mainly for record purposes.  I see from your report that you say the probable cause of death was a bullet wound?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You are still of that view?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Yes Mr Chairman, I am.

MR LAX: Just on that issue if I may, Chair.  If I was to say to you that this person died of a heart attack, what would your comment there be?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: I wouldn't be able to reconcile that with my findings, at all.  That would be one, secondly, of course, I have no soft tissue, this is only skeletalised remains, so I wouldn't be able to comment on that, and thirdly is that I find in a young black female of 40 years old, it would be something hard to buy, hard to swallow.

MR LAX: Unusual?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: Extremely unusual.

MR LAX: Can I, assuming the person had died of other causes and being shot after death, would you be able to determine any difference to the injury?

SEGARAN RAMALU NAIDOO: No.  There wouldn't have been, in other words, I wouldn't have been able to  make out whether this was an anti-mortem or post-mortem wound of the skull.

MR LAX: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Thabethe.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, just to follow up on the question posed by Mr Lax.   You say it would be unusual of a person in the age of 40 to have a heart attack, why is that so?