Amnesty Hearings — Kroonstad — UNKNOWN

<UNKNOWN>: How do you come to the conclusion that thatview was the general attitude and view of the people at the meeting,how did you become aware of that?

ROLAND PETROS: Could you repeat that?

<UNKNOWN>: How would you at such a meeting, how wouldyou be able to determine that a view voiced by any particularperson was the view of the entire meeting?  How could you be surethat an individual's view had the support of the entire meeting?

ROLAND PETROS: The command was directed at all of us.

<UNKNOWN>: So it wasn't for instance the chairperson whowould say that this is the proposal and that's what we must do?

ROLAND PETROS: No, no, that's not how it happened.  It wasn'tformal in a sense of a motion tabled and that a voting had totake place.  That did not take place.

<UNKNOWN>: In other words what you would like to tellus is that a view held by a particular person at the meeting,you all then had to agree with it, whether you actually agreedor not?

ROLAND PETROS: No the view was then negotiated and talkedabout until everybody understood it.

<UNKNOWN>: Mr Petros I would like to clear up a few thingsin your evidence.  You remember you filled in an application foramnesty?

ROLAND PETROS: That is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: And you were asked in that form what crimeyou were seeking amnesty for, do you remember?  You were asked...(intervention)

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: And you were asked about your justificationsfor the act.

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: And you were asked also, and I read from question11A,
  "Was the act or offence committed in the execution of anorder or of or on behalf of or with the approval of the organisationconcerned".
And you said,
  "Yes it was by the organisation African National Congress". 
And you were then asked,
  "If so state particulars of such order and the date thereofif known and the name and address of such person who gave suchorder or approval".
Do you remember you were asked that question?

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: "Answer", that is the person whogave such order or approval you wrote down "Mr Dennis VictorBloem, Brentpark, Kroonstad".

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: Did he give you the order?

ROLAND PETROS: No.

<UNKNOWN>: Why did you put false information on your applicationform?

ROLAND PETROS: I did not say that - I put down the name ofthat person as the person who also was aware of what had happened. I did not thereby indicate that he had given me the order.

<UNKNOWN>: The question that you answered was the personwho gave such order or approval, not anybody who was aware ofit, but that is your explanation is it?

ROLAND PETROS: Pardon?

<UNKNOWN>: That is your explanation you don't want togive any other?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: Right.  Now you now talked about this meetingof the self- where you were told at the meeting of the self-defenceunit to remove the deceased, when was that meeting?

ROLAND PETROS: If I remember correctly the meeting took placeon a Sunday the 23rd of February 1992.

<UNKNOWN>: And that was when the instruction was giventhat he must be removed?

ROLAND PETROS: Pardon?

<UNKNOWN>: That is when he was given, you were given theinstruction to remove him, on Sunday 23rd of February, two daysbefore he was killed?

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: Yes.  Now reverting to why you mistrusted theorganisation you said that on one occasion the deceased went andstayed with a Mrs Pienaar, the Prosecutor?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: When was that?

ROLAND PETROS: I can't remember exactly, but I think it wasduring 1990, if I remember correctly.

<UNKNOWN>: 1990?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes 1990 or 1991, it happened on various occasions,it didn't only happen once, it happened several times, he wentthere quite often to Mrs Pienaar's home so I can't remember anexact date.

<UNKNOWN>: You said, "there was a time when we werelooking for the deceased to remove him and he received informationand went and stayed with Mrs Pienaar", do you remember tellingus that in your evidence?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: So you were trying to remove the deceased in1990 or 1991?

ROLAND PETROS: No, there was a time when a part of the self-defenceunit was looking for this person, not I personally.  There wasa time when a section or some members of the self-defence unitwere looking for this person I think this was during 1991 or 1990,I can't remember exactly.

<UNKNOWN>: To remove him?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes, that's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: I take it the statement you made, the supplementaryaffidavit you say you were somewhat confused, that was writtenby your attorney was it?  You were shown it, remember?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes, yes he just put it a little bit moreformally.

<UNKNOWN>: He wrote it though?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes, that's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: Did you return the firearm to Sergeant Jacobsafter you had killed deceased?

ROLAND PETROS: No.  The State kept the firearm.

<UNKNOWN>: Oh they found it did they?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: And you've told us how you went up to the deceased,he was with 12 to 15 members of his gang and you didn't want themto recognise you so you pulled a balaclava down over your head?

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: Didn't you think that would look very suspicious?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes it did look very suspicious but I can'tunderstand it how I actually managed to shoot him without hissupporters and gang members actually doing anything to me.

<UNKNOWN>: And after you shot him you told us you werealone there?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes, just myself and the deceased at the taxirank.

<UNKNOWN>: What happened to the 12 to 15 gang memberswho were there?

ROLAND PETROS: I really couldn't tell you, I think they ranaway perhaps to go and look for help.

<UNKNOWN>: What had you been doing that day before youshot the deceased?

ROLAND PETROS: I can't remember exactly, I think I was justat home the whole morning.

<UNKNOWN>: The day before?

ROLAND PETROS: On the previous day we went looking for thisperson to kill him.

<UNKNOWN>: That's on the Sunday, the day on which you...(intervention)

ROLAND PETROS: That was a Monday.

<UNKNOWN>: The previous day?

ROLAND PETROS: Ja, that was a Monday, ja.

<UNKNOWN>: Were you living in Kroonstad then?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: How long had you been there?

ROLAND PETROS: I had been in Kroonstad, well, I stayed inKroonstad during the week and on weekends I went to Johannesburg,so on the weekend before this I went to Ennerdale so I remainedbehind for two days in Ennerdale so I think it was about on theWednesday that I came from Ennerdale to Kroonstad.

<UNKNOWN>: So you made a statement at your trial in termsof section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Act, do you rememberthat?

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: In which you said,
  "On Thursday the 20th of February I came to Brentpark,Kroonstad, to attend the funerals of two of my uncles, Simon Bloemand Abyssinia Buthelezi".

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: "During the vigil I learnt that Simon Bloemhad been killed by members of the Three Million gang".

ROLAND PETROS: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: "I also learnt that certain other of myrelatives had been assaulted and raped by members of the ThreeMillion gang".

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.

<UNKNOWN>: "I was upset at hearing of these eventsand seeing the effect they were having on my relatives in Kroonstad...."
all this is what you learnt when you were at the vigil at thefuneral, but you tell us you had been living at Kroonstad thewhole time, how is it you hadn't heard of it before the funeral?

ROLAND PETROS: That is correct.  I had already heard allof this whilst I was still in Ennerdale but it was just that itwas far more emphasised at the funeral and the vigils.

<UNKNOWN>: Oh you heard it at Ennerdale?

ROLAND PETROS: That's correct.