Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — UNKNOWN

MR MILLER: Because you see, the evidence before this Commission from the Asvat family is that there was no money missing, they balanced the books and they found nothing missing.
S.A. POLICE: Well, one would have to look at this page - what I'm saying is, we have this page and at the end of the page it says R135-00 and from what the statement we have in court and from the statements we've come across, that's roughly R125-00 with the charges put to it.
 I'm not saying that that is the document - what I'm saying is, there is a document.  Whose handwriting I'm saying - I'm not prepared to say whose handwriting, I'm saying there is a document and the Commission can look at it and look at the value of the document.

MR MILLER: And it would appear to me that - from what I've heard over here, that the only evidence of the robbery that was placed before the court, was the confession of Mbatha.

MR HESSLINGA: (English translation inaudible)

MR MILLER: But you see, I find that interesting because those admissions made by Mbatha, cannot possibly be admissible against Dlamini.

MR HESSLINGA: (English translation inaudible)

DR BORAINE: One more minute Mr Miller.

MR MILLER: I am winding up Deputy Chairperson.

DR BORAINE: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Finally - and here I wind up, I want to put it to you Director Hesslinga, that the reason why the aspect of Mrs Mandela was not further investigated is because to proceed with the theory that it was a robbery and that it was a common-law crime without a political motive, was a far easier way for the police to solve the case and to obtain a conviction, whereas if it had been that the police were implicating Mrs Mandela, it would have been politically far too sensitive.

MR HESSLINGA: (English translation inaudible)
(start of new tape)   49 witnesses made statements which made part of this docket and which was then presented to the Attorney General.  The Attorney General then decided not to use the testimony and the statements of the accused.   A letter of the Attorney General in which he explains why he chose not to use this testimony is in my possession and ...[inaudible] in paragraph 11. 
 Chair, I would very much like to tell this Commission that the Asvat matter and the claims against Mrs Mandela also bothered me as a police official to such a degree that after both of the accused were found guilty and after they were in fact given the death sentence, I visited them on the 18th of December on death row in Pretoria.  I have with me a copy of the visitors book at death row and it is indicated that on the 18th of December 1989, I did have meeting with certain prisoners.
 I saw Dlamini and I said to him - in view of the death sentence which might in fact be effective, whether he would not be willing to assist us with regard to the allegations made by himself against Mrs Mandela - he refused.  I also spoke to Mbatha separately and Mbatha said to me that he would stick with his story.  I asked him specifically with regard to the allegations of Dlamini against him in the trial and what he said to me was that it was a bunch of nonsense and that he would stick to his story - I then left.

MR MILLER: ...[inaudible] to a letter from the Attorney General and your reply and I think you mentioned the paragraph 11 if I'm not mistaken, is it a very lengthy paragraph?

MR HESSLINGA: (English translation inaudible)

MR MILLER: Can you sum it up very briefly, what was the Attorney General's comment there?
MR HESSLINGA
"...[inaudible] statement made by accused 2 before the Justice of the Peace that placed him in the scene of the offence but is in essence of ...[indistinct] statement.  It was also stated by accused 2 in the statement that the person whom he accompanied to the surgery - one Johannes who later transpired to be accused 1, had reported to him that he, Johannes had been paid the amount of R20.000-00 by Mrs Mandela to assassinate the deceased in this case - he mentioned nothing of the robbery.
 This statement was not proven by the State and the contents did not amount to the confession to any offence by accused 2 and the facts were in conflict with the State's case as testified to, by the eye witnesses.  The claim by accused 2 has been investigated by the South African police but no corroborative evidence could be found to substantiate these claims"

MR MILLER: But it was not true that the claims by accused 2 had been investigated?

MR HESSLINGA: I think it's true Mr Chairman.

MR MILLER: Is that correct, the claims by accused 2 - by Mr Dlamini, had not been investigated?

MR HESSLINGA: I have just given testimony that I in fact after the trial, went to see them to attempt to investigate it in ...[intervention]

MR MILLER: ...[inaudible]

MR HESSLINGA: No, not prior to the trial.

MR MILLER: Thank you Chairperson.

DR BORAINE: Thank you.  Mr Kades?

MR KADES: Norman Kades, on behalf of the Asvat family.
 Do I understand Mr Hesslinga, that the position is that when the investigation was re-opened on the 24th of April of 1995, you and Mr Moodley were, are of the view that there was no new evidence to be discovered in the case of the murder of Doctor Asvat and that the police had really concluded their investigations?

MR HESSLINGA: That is correct Chair.

MR KADES: Why did you undertake - why did you mislead if you knew this?  Why did you mislead the Asvat family, Tony Leon and the present Minister, that you would proceed and further investigate the Asvat murder?  Wasn't this misleading, why didn't you say the matter is finished, the matter is concluded?

MR HESSLINGA: Chair, I did state this to the Asvat family after our investigation.  We did re-investigate various aspects of the Asvat matter and after the investigation we said this to the Asvat family and to Mr ...[indistinct].

MR MOODLEY: ...[inaudible] the question put is that - did we know when we started the investigation ...[intervention]

MR KADES: Yes, absolutely.

MR MOODLEY: No, no, from the information we got - these were the leads given to us, we investigated those leads.

MR KADES: What were the leads Mr Moodley?

MR MOODLEY: That we should see Cebekhulu, speak to Richards and those kind of leads.

MR KADES: No, no, what kinds of leads Mr Moodley?

MR MOODLEY: Well, that's the letter from Tony Leon and ...[intervention]

MR KADES: I'm sorry, what is the letter from Tony Leon, I know nothing about a letter from Tony Leon.  I want to know from you - please, leave the letter of Tony Leon, tell me please - you and Mr Hesslinga, we've come a long way to find this, tell us please what leads you had that you were going to investigate - Mr Hesslinga has already answered, he didn't misunderstand my question.  Now you please Mr Moodley, tell us what new leads you had.

MR MOODLEY: I think Mr Chairman - in all fairness to me, I think we must find that letter and see why we were directed to do what we did - by the Commissioner and the Minister, I think we must be given a fair opportunity to do that.