Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-07-21

MR VISSER: Precisely.  Alright.  At any rate, you know in November of 1999, on the 26th of November, my attorney wrote a letter to the Amnesty Committee of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Cape Town, in which he pointed out certain aspects of the whole issue of the investigation into the remains, as to whether they belonged to Mrs Kubheka or not, were you ever made aware of the contents of this letter?  Do you know which letter I'm talking about?

STEPHANIE MILLER: When was ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: November 1999, the 26th.

STEPHANIE MILLER: I have been given a copy of that letter, yes.

MR VISSER: When did you receive a copy of that letter, Mrs Miller?

STEPHANIE MILLER: I can't tell you exactly, but fairly recently.

MR VISSER: Only fairly recently?

STEPHANIE MILLER: Well I wasn't employed by the Truth Commission after September '97.

MR VISSER: I thought that you were kept being employed in regard to this case.

STEPHANIE MILLER: No, that isn't strictly so, I was re-employed effectively, or reappointed for the duration of this amnesty hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: When was that reappointment?

STEPHANIE MILLER: In June of this year.

MR VISSER: I see.  Alright, more-or-less how long ago did you hear about, did you take note of this letter?

STEPHANIE MILLER: Since my reappointment.

MR VISSER: In June?

STEPHANIE MILLER: Some time since, between - the last couple of weeks.

MR VISSER: Yes.  In paragraph 4.2, were you aware that what we requested to be handed to us was the full investigation file of the Investigation Unit in this regard, in the Kubheka incident?

STEPHANIE MILLER: Well I have read the letter, I'm aware you've requested it.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And are you aware that an answer came back to say that the full investigation file is contained in the bundles before this Committee?

STEPHANIE MILLER: I'm not aware of that response, no.

MR VISSER: If that is the response, it would be entirely incorrect, isn't that so?

STEPHANIE MILLER: The investigation that I had, that I conducted was done as a special investigation.

MR VISSER: Yes, and that's not in these bundles?

STEPHANIE MILLER: Well part of it appears to be in these bundles.

MR VISSER: Mrs Miller, just listen, just listen to this, is your full investigation report contained in the bundles before us?

STEPHANIE MILLER: No.

MR VISSER: Thank you.  So whatever Mr Taylor may or may not have said at the Section 29 Inquiry, we only have your word today to go on?  That's the position we find ourselves in.

STEPHANIE MILLER: I am not sure how extensively Mr Taylor discussed any of these cases, I don't have access to those Section 29 documents.

MR VISSER: Yes, and what is worse is you weren't even there full-time, you were in and out you say.

STEPHANIE MILLER: I wasn't required to be there full-time.

MR VISSER: Yes, you were there in and out.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Correct, in the matters where I had interest.

MR VISSER: But that didn't stop you from drawing the adverse inference against the other applicants that there was some conflict in the evidence between Mr Taylor and Hentie Botha and the others?

STEPHANIE MILLER: I'm not sure that I drew an adverse inference at all, Mr Visser.

MR VISSER: Well you say that there was a conflict ...(intervention)

STEPHANIE MILLER: If I finish, if that's okay with you.  I would like to just add that I did not draw an inference, what I noted was a discrepancy.

MR VISSER: Are you finished?

STEPHANIE MILLER: I did notice a discrepancy and as a result of that, it obviously made me look at the case a little differently.

MR VISSER: Yes.  Now let's just go through that discrepancy again.  The discrepancy as I understand your evidence, was that he was not present at Winkelspruit all the time and he applies for murder, is that the discrepancy?

STEPHANIE MILLER: The discrepancy is that he applied for murder.

MR VISSER: Just that?

STEPHANIE MILLER: And culpable homicide, whereas the others allege that she died of natural causes.

MR VISSER: Yes.

STEPHANIE MILLER: I infer from what he said by using that terminology, he is a policeman, a high-ranking policeman, he was a policeman, a high-ranking policeman, he knows the difference, my presumption would have been that if he believed that she died of natural causes, he would have said so.

MR VISSER: Mrs Miller, did I hear you correctly say in your evidence
"Taylor alleged that he was not present when Kubheka died."
Did you say that or didn't you?

STEPHANIE MILLER: I believe I did say that.

MR VISSER: Will you please turn to page 4 and 5 of bundle 1, and indicate to this Committee where you read that.

CHAIRPERSON: Just for the record, page 4 and 5 are part of Taylor's amnesty application.

MR VISSER: Thank you, Chairperson.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Are you wanting me to say that he was present when Ms Kubheka had convulsions?

MR VISSER: I don't want you to say anything, your evidence was that according to your reading of his amnesty  application, he wasn't present when Ms Kubheka died.  That's what you've testified to.  Now I ask you, please tell the Committee where you read that in his amnesty application.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Well the way I read it is that he was present when she was interrogated and then he says
"All of a sudden the woman started having convulsions, she seemed to be out of breath, grabbed her chest and fell over."

MR VISSER: And you say that indicates to you that he wasn't present when this happened?

STEPHANIE MILLER: No, I didn't say that, I said I don't know that he was there when she had the convulsions, I know that he was there when she was interrogated.

MR VISSER: He said so.

STEPHANIE MILLER: He says he was there when he interrogated her.

MR VISSER: And when the rest happened, Mrs Miller.  With great respect to you, where do you read any indication in his application that he was not present when she died?

STEPHANIE MILLER: He says
"The reason that I apply for amnesty in this matter is that I'm not certain whether she did indeed die of natural causes."

MR VISSER: That's the point you see, that's the point.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Yes.
"Although I have no personal knowledge of any injuries inflicted on her, or anything done to her which could have caused her death."

MR VISSER: Hence, I apply for amnesty for murder because some court of law may find what we call dolus eventualis in regard to her death, or common purpose of whatever.  It's just a safe thing to do, there's nothing sinister in that.

STEPHANIE MILLER: So he would apply for murder and the others would not?

MR VISSER: The others are also applying for murder, Mrs Miller, it's just not in their amnesty applications, but they're also going to ask this Committee to grant them amnesty for murder.

MR WILLS: With respect, Mr Chairman, that's not accurate.  I specifically asked Capt Botha whether he was applying for murder and he said he wasn't.  It's a misleading question.

MR VISSER: I'll withdraw that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it's not stated in their applications.

MR VISSER: It's not stated in their applications, I withdraw that Chairperson, I'm trying to concede to the witness that there was a difference between the various applications and I'm just trying to say to the witness that in spite of that difference, there's nothing sinister in it.  But I withdraw that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think just on the line that you're following, Mr Visser, whatever Ms Miller might have thought, the fact is what was said in this application sparked her into action.

MR VISSER: Yes, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Whether you agree that it should have sparked her or not is a different matter, it did in fact get her on the track.