Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-18

UNKNOWN: : We are dealing with the point in time until such time as you saw the two policemen approaching the marchers. So it's the marchers coming down de Villiers Street, they enter into the corner, two policemen approach them and they turn and run away. Until such time your statement does not indicate that any person - that you saw any person with a firearm amongst the marchers. Is that correct?

MOSES VELI LLALE: Yes it is correct.

UNKNOWN: : Can you today explain what kind of firearms you saw until that point in time?

MOSES VELI LLALE: If I recall I said at the inquest that I saw only pistols and one AK-47 but these weren't pistols which were not more than five if I had to remember well.

UNKNOWN: : Are you saying today as far as you recall you saw pistols and one firearm, being the AK-47?

MOSES VELI LLALE: Not, not only today even to Mr Judge Nugent I said the same thing.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry I didn't hear that clearly. Just say that again please?

MOSES VELI LLALE: The question was asked that am I only saying this today only. So I am saying if I recall I said this to Judge Nugent and I am saying it now that I saw pistols and only one AK-47.

UNKNOWN: : Apart from the pistols you saw and the one AK-47 can you recall having seen any other firearms with the marchers until such time as the two policemen approach them?

MOSES VELI LLALE: If you refer to other marchers which passed Shell House earlier on, yes, I did see some pistols but the long firearms were concealed, I couldn't identify them whether it was AK or shotguns because they were concealed.

UNKNOWN: : Surely you would agree with me that a very prominent figure or person amongst the marchers on the day was the person who you perceived to have been attacking you, to wit the person with the red T-shirt and the AK-47?

MOSES VELI LLALE: That's, that's correct.

UNKNOWN: : Why don't you make any mention of him in your statement Sir?

MOSES VELI LLALE: When I was writing this statement I think it was a year ago I only generalised that on that day people fired at us but I didn't specify who fired at us who did what, who did what. The details were not here but I knew that in court I will have to be asked about these automatic weapons, it's when I am going to explain further.

UNKNOWN: : No but Sir the attack you had to wear off, the attack against which you had to retaliate was the attack which you perceived to have been coming from the man with the AK-47 rifle. Why is that not in your statement?

MOSES VELI LLALE: I - as I am saying to you I don't know whether you've read my statement. It might not be the way you saw it but in paragraph 11, I think it's 1.10 because you are referring me to 1.11, but in 1.10 I think there is somewhere it says some of the marchers wore red T-shirts. As I am saying I have generalised but in the inquest I was saying things as I was asked then I had to say this because in the inquest you only answered what you were asked.

UNKNOWN: : Sir I think you might be trying or you try to refer to paragraph 10 at the top of the page, at page 111 of exhibit C or bundle C where you say that
"...there were people with firearms and that these with firearms tended to go into the middle of the march and many were wearing red T-shirts."
Is that what you are referring to?

MOSES VELI LLALE: Yes.

UNKNOWN: : But Mr Llale, with the greatest respect, that doesn't answer the question. Why don't you mention the specific individual that was attacking you?

MOSES VELI LLALE: In relation to this statement I'm saying I was not speaking about individuals I was speaking about marchers. As I am saying I generalised in this statement but in court I was dealing with details but here I have just generalised that some of them were wearing T-shirts, they had firearms and automatic weapons. It was the general thing here but in court I had to explain to each and everything that is in this statement.

SISI KHAMPEPE: But Mr Llale the people that you were referring to as having worn red T-shirts in paragraph 10 do not that relate to the main incident? I think that is the problem of Mr Dorfling.

UNKNOWN: : If I may just add to that Mr Llale, it actually relates to the groups which you saw earlier that morning, previous groups in other words, and that is the problem I have why is that not why don't you deal with this specific individual in your statement? 	Paragraph 10 doesn't assist you sir because it doesn't relate to that gentleman who you saw at the time of the main shooting.

MOSES VELI LLALE: I don't know Sir but maybe I am running away from your question but in this statement it's only having three pages. I am saying to you here things are just put in a general way. This is when I was writing it, this is how I understood that. Because we were called in a very short time before I went to the inquest so I had to generalise things.
	But after I've wrote this statement most things came but already then the statement was already submitted to the Attorney-General. As I went to Caroline who was our lawyers I said to him that things that are not contained here I have just remembered them after I've wrote the statement. They said we don't see anything wrong with it because you are actually mentioning people wearing red T-shirts and what-what so you will have to explain in court to Nugent what you saw and that - and which I did on that day. 
	I know that I am not answering that question put to me. I agree with you. I am not running away from the question that is not here in the last event I saw a person wearing a red T-shirt, it's not here I agree with you.

JUDGE NGCOBO: Mr Llale are suggesting that the reason why you did not mention the man with the T-shirt, the red T-shirt was because it didn't occur to your mind when you made this statement?

MOSES VELI LLALE: It did occur Sir but what I am trying to say is on the day when I was writing this statement I've generalised things, that means I was not saying things as step by step as it were happening. Then I was given the task that in court we will have a fair chance of explaining some of the details. As I am saying it is true that the other details are not here but you will find them here in Judge Nugent that this is what you said. They are not contained in here but I was able to answer them in that court. This is what I am trying to say.

JUDGE NGCOBO: It was just that I was puzzled by your long response in regard to what you made reference to certain things that were not contained in your statement that was supposed to be there.

UNKNOWN: : And now Mr Llale do you agree with me that what your statement tries to convey is that you were acting in what we call in terms, in self-defence? In other words you were trying to defend yourself or other people or property at the time when you were shooting. Is that what you are trying to convey in your statement?

MOSES VELI LLALE: Yes Sir.

UNKNOWN: Now how does it happen that such a vital aspect of what you were doing, in other words retaliating an attack of a person with a AK-47 gets omitted from your statement?

MR LAX: Mr Dorfling with all due respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...I think he has said already that he has been talking in general terms I think you've asked this question so many times. He can't take it any further. He said that if he were asked questions in detail in court he would answer it. Here he's given a general account of it. In your address you may make what you want about that point.

MR LAX: Just one thing I wanted to add Mr Dorfling if you read paragraph 12 he talks about being shot at by some of the marchers so you are focusing on paragraph 11 which was just before that, but paragraph 12 he does talk about it. So I'm just saying it is not as if he left out the fact that somebody shot at him or that there was shooting.