Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-15

MR COETZEE: So you can't remember how firmly he had it under control?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No, I wouldn't be able to tell.

MR COETZEE: So you actually had an impression that the person who was standing to the left behind you, was indeed responsible for removing the firearm from the holster?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And that impression was strengthened by the fact that after the shot had gone off, you dived away, you found your firearm under the table?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: You don't know how the firearm ended up under the table?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No.

MR COETZEE: But you assumed because you hadn't removed it yourself, somebody else must have removed it?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And because it was laying on the floor there, you assumed that the person who had robbed you of the firearm as you had believed, would have dropped it there?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct, that is the way I would have thought it could have happened.

MR COETZEE: Would you agree that after you had unclipped the retaining strap from the holster and had dived, that it is possible that the firearm might have fallen onto the ground?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, it could have been as a consequence of that.

MR COETZEE: The person who stood to the left, behind you, you described him as wearing a balaclava on his head.  Was it your impression throughout that it was a balaclava, in other words a hood with holes for the eyes and possibly for the nose?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: My instructions are that Mr Holder, the person here on my left, you know him well after two court cases, that he was indeed the person ...

ADV STEENKAMP: I am objecting, your client himself indicated in his evidence in chief that he was wearing a balaclava, so you can't contradict him now.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you could correct me, one of the applicants stated that he was not necessarily wearing a balaclava, but a type of vest which he had over his head.

MR COETZEE: As it pleases you Chairperson.  My instructions are that Mr Holder was wearing a vest with a net woven pattern, over his head?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: That could have been possible, I agree.

MR COETZEE: But this particular vest didn't have any eye holes?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that could be so.

MR COETZEE: My instructions are that during the trial of Messrs van Zyl and Holder, you testified that you saw the blue of Mr Holder's eye during the incident?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I did give that evidence, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: If we accept that his vest was a very finely woven vest,  could we accept then that under those circumstances you would be able to see his blue eyes?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I maintain that, I do remember that I saw the blueness of his eyes.

MR COETZEE: You said that the person, you grabbed the person behind you in a certain manner?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: That is correct.

MR COETZEE: But you don't know which part of his body you grabbed?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And was it at the point that you had grabbed hold of him, that the light was still on?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, one could say that.

MR COETZEE: At that stage, while you grabbed hold of him, you say that you were actually focusing more on Mr Terreblanche and the other person who were on your left side?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes.

MR COETZEE: Would it be unfair to say that in the process you turned to the left, while you were trying to grab the person and that Mr Holder at that stage would also have been on your left side?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And the firearm which he allegedly had on him, would then have been in your immediate reach?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: You say that up until today, you don't know at all who fired that first shot?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: If it had been Mr Holder, then you would in all probability have seen this?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Strictly spoken yes, I probably would have felt it as well, because as I said the revolver was next to me.

MR COETZEE: And you are satisfied today still that it was not Mr Holder?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, as far as my knowledge goes, I know that it wasn't him, but that is only as far as I can recall.

MR COETZEE: Then one could correctly say so.  And when the first shot was fired, the lights went out?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I can't say that the gunshot went off and then the light went out, and so forth, I can't say with clarity.

MR COETZEE: But you don't even have a recollection of a flame which emanated from a weapon when the first shot went off?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: No, I don't.

MR COETZEE: If it had been dark at that stage, then you would have seen such a flash?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct, one would have been able to see it.

MR COETZEE: Would it be fair to say that given the small area of this guard house, if a shot had been fired in that room, it would have been deafening?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And have you previously had the experience that when a shot is fired within a confined space, it causes a tremendous crash, much more so than had it been fired out in the open?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And not only that it would have had a deafening effect, it would have had a disorienting effect?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is possible.

MR COETZEE: These two shots which you heard, can you give an indication of how long afterwards you would have heard it?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: I can't remember correctly any more, but if I remember my evidence said that they were fired shortly after each other.

MR COETZEE: Shortly after each other?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, I think that was my evidence, but I am not one hundred percent certain.

MR COETZEE: It is not a case of now we have a gunshot and then a few seconds later another gunshot and a few seconds later, another gunshot, it would have been gunshots in quick succession?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: If indeed three shots had been fired, then I accept your explanation that you would have heard two as a result of the disorientation caused by the gunshots.

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that could be so.

MR COETZEE: The total time, according to your estimation, that you watched Mr Holder, what would it be in seconds?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: That is after ...

MR COETZEE: No, let's take it from when he entered the door until the point that the lights went out?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: I would say approximately half a minute, more towards a minute.

MR COETZEE: And your observations were made during highly stressful circumstances?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: Initially you thought it was a joke when the persons came walking in?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: And you say that you could have smiled at this sort of conduct?

ANDRE RENIER SWART: Yes, that is correct.

MR COETZEE: Can you recall, if I might just remind you, that there were actually two court trials during which you testified.  Initially you testified against Mr De Meillon and after that, you testified in a court case against Mr Van Zyl and Mr Holder.
	My instructions are that during the second court case, that is the one against Mr Van Zyl and Mr Holder, there Advocate would have questioned you about this smile which you may have had when the persons entered the doorway and your evidence then was that you didn't smile.

ANDRE RENIER SWART: You are asking me to recall something of which I gave evidence in court.  It could have been a grin, I can't remember entirely.