Amnesty Hearings — Thohoyandou — 1999-07-14

MR RAMASITSI: The first one was when we tried to put his house on fire, the second one was when he went to Edward Mahvunga's house during the day and we were coming from the kraals place,

CHAIRPERSON: Now the question is, when did those assaults of those girls that you talk about with the sjamboks and slings and all that occur, you had already attempted to burn his house?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairman.  On the date of the 6th of April when that attack took place, the crowd any yourself allowed the deceased's wife and the children to escape, that was your evidence, is that correct?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes it is true.

MR VAN RENSBURG: And the reason why...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...because Mr van Rensburg?

MR VAN RENSBURG: That is in fact common cause, I will put it to the witness, thank you Mr Chairman, perhaps I should do it now.   Rossinah will come and testify that they escaped through the narrowest of margins with their own life and through their own actions and it is not a question that you allowed them to escape.

MR RAMASITSI: Truly we realised that the situation was uncontrollable.  There was no time in which one could say this one is to separated from their people who were to be beaten, so there was no reason why one really protect a person.

MR VAN RENSBURG: So would you then agree with me that they escaped on their own steam and not because the crowds allowed them to leave?

MR RAMASITSI: That is not true.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Is it not so that Rossinah on that day was also hit by some stones?

MR RAMASITSI: Well she had already been beaten, or she had already been given a slap, not by stones.

CHAIRPERSON: What Rossinah's going to say is that she wasn't opposed to take the children and go to the chief's house, she escaped and ran away.

MR RAMASITSI: Well there was no one who could move out if the crowd didn't want, we made it possible for them to escape, it was just one gateway where we were standing.  If we didn't want them to escape we wouldn't have wanted it to be like that.

CHAIRPERSON: Was this crowd of 3000 right around their house?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And she had to go through this crowd from whichever angle she escaped. There was no pass through a part of the  crowd in any case?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes she had to escape through the mass.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay and why were there stones thrown at Rossinah on that day?

MR RAMASITSI: She was resisting.

MR VAN RENSBURG: How was she resisting?

MR RAMASITSI: She was also throwing stones.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I see; this will be denied by Rossinah when she gives evidence, she said that she did not throw stones at the crowd.

MR RAMASITSI: She will be lying.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I see.  So in your own mind she deserved what she got by being hit by stones, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: You'd better ask it, not put it as a proposition.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I don't understand?

CHAIRPERSON: Well was she hit by stones?

MR RAMASITSI: She was resisting, I said earlier.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja but was she hit with stones, at any time?

MR RAMASITSI: There was stone-throwing, I can't say from which direction, it was all over.

CHAIRPERSON: Well did you see her hit by stones?

MR RAMASITSI: I could see her throwing stones.  You see these stones, were hitting one-another or each other on the way.

CHAIRPERSON: Listen to me.  Was she injured by a stone thrown from the crowd?

MR RAMASITSI: Well yes, finally, eventually it happened like that, she was injured.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, now why did you just tell us a couple of minutes ago that she was not hit by stones, she was slapped?

MR RAMASITSI: Well I was saying that because when it happened, during the time of her escape we were not really fighting because the old man or the deceased was already late.

CHAIRPERSON: Come Mr Ramasitsi, we're all adults here.  We're not playing games here.  Your co-applicants' futures are also at stake.  Please tell us or answer the question properly.  Stop giving us added information only when we pose particular questions to you.  One of the issues or requirements of the Act is that you must make full disclosure and many occasions now you're saying one thing and a little later you're saying something different, you're not being helpful in your own cause and your co-applicants' cause.  Do you understand what I'm saying?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes I am with you.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's proceed Mr..

MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Okay it is established according to your evidence that Rossinah was resisting, she threw stones, she was hit by a stone and you say that she was allowed to escape.  What I want to know is, why the sudden change, the attack was also launched by her, and then according to your version, was allowed to escape.  Why this change of heart?

MR RAMASITSI: Well it is because the person we wanted was already injured or dead.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think she was on the, as you call it, the hit list.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I think she got caught up in the circumstances and perhaps the cross-fire.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes that is our...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And therefore, what I'm trying to say is that is understandable that she would have been allowed to escape if you want to call it, as opposed to her husband's position.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairman, yes, what I'm aiming at and I'll put it to you as a quote from your previous evidence, when you were asked this question by your legal representative or a similar question, you testified that there was no grudge against the family, can you remember that?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes I can.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Meaning that the grudge was only against the deceased?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes.

MR RAMASITSI: Would you describe this word grudge for us, as you have felt it yourself?

MR RAMASITSI: Well the grudge initiated from the witchcraft, the lack of co-operation between the youth and him.

MR VAN RENSBURG: And you felt angry at him?

MR RAMASITSI: He was the one who angered us, the youth.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes if you talk about lack of co-operation, what obligation, what onus was there on him to cooperate with the youth?

MR RAMASITSI: Well he should have wanted to know why the youth were meeting and toyi-toyiing and he could have received that explanation.  That is why we said he wasn't co-operating.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I put it to you Mr Ramasitsi that this was a personal grudge, a thing that got personal and that is one of the reasons why he was eventually killed.  A personal grudge.

CHAIRPERSON: A personal grudge on the part of this witness?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, and others.

CHAIRPERSON: Well...(intervention)

MR VAN RENSBURG: But obviously I'll only ask his opinion on this Mr Chairman.

MR RAMASITSI: Can you repeat your question please?

MR VAN RENSBURG: The question is, I put it to you that you at that stage held, you yourself, a personal grudge against the deceased?

CHAIRPERSON: Which would be, what would that grudge be based on?

MR VAN RENSBURG: Must I explain?

CHAIRPERSON: If you're saying he did it because of a grudge, tell him what that grudge was.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay I'll do that.  Okay a personal grudge based on the fact that he was thought to be a witch, that he was more wealthy than the rest of the community and also that as you say, did not want to cooperate with the youth.

MR RAMASITSI: Well all the above is true except jealousy.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I see, so let's not confuse each other.  You will say you will admit that you had a personal grudge against him because he was thought of as a witch and he was uncooperative?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes.

MR VAN RENSBURG: I see.

CHAIRPERSON: May I ask something from him.  You've worked for the deceased on the farm, is that correct?

MR RAMASITSI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you leave his employment?