Human Rights Violation Hearings — Pollsmoor — 1997-02-17

ADV POTGIETER: Ja - ja but I mean surely from what you were expecting you didn't just expect to arrest a person I mean you - you prepared yourself to somehow incapacitate the person not so.

MR STERRENBERG: We prepared for any eventuality in the situation sir.  But if the person did flee without offering arrest he would have been merely physically arrested.  If he then offered resistance by using firearms then we were prepared for that eventuality as well.

ADV POTGIETER: So - so you say that the planning in this instance was to just issue with you with a more lethal shot.

MR STERRENBERG: And to arrest a person physically if he escaped in our direction.

ADV POTGIETER: And I assume that you understood that by using your SSG shot - a very high likelihood that you would kill the person that you shoot at.

MR STERRENBERG: If the person was offering resistance in the form of firearms yes sir.

ADV POTGIETER: And then you seemed to have had a pistol.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: Is that the normal police pistol.

MR STERRENBERG: It's the normal - normal issue yes.

ADV POTGIETER: Were there - were there any standing orders within the South African Police that in regard to the use of SSG.

MR STERRENBERG: Not that I can - not in standing orders sir but contained in your operational orders when you went onto the operation  or when you were tasked to perform a certain assignment.

ADV POTGIETER: Now what were those - what were those orders  - whatever they are called.

MR STERRENBERG: Well if you went into a situation where it was merely a riot where you didn't expect such heavy resistance you wouldn't have used such heavy calibre ammunition.

ADV POTGIETER: But what is the - just to explain in a - in a sentence or two - what was the policy underlying this - these orders.

MR STERRENBERG: The police would always be the minimum - minimum force starting with a physical arrest without the use of violence or force in order to effect that arrest.  But should resistance be offered depending on the degree of resistance offered - obviously your action would be more heavy handed.

ADV POTGIETER: Just to try and understand that, was the standing order that SSG this sort of heavy calibre shot - is a sort of a - almost a last resort.

MR STERRENBERG: Well it would be a resort to put out of action the person firing at you.

ADV POTGIETER: All right, Superintendent I am reminded that we have reached a stage for the tea adjournment - the Chairperson is a very strict timekeeper.  So I'll hand back to him.

UNKNOWN: We will now take a tea adjournment but we will continue with questions put to you Superintendent when we return.  We'll take the tea adjournment for fifteen minutes and we will return at half past eleven.

UNKNOWN: Thank you ladies and gentleman of the press - it's still the same witness - thank you sir.  This is a resumption of the evidence of Superintendent Sterrenberg - I just have to remind you sir that you are still under oath.

MR STERRENBERG: Sir.

UNKNOWN: Advocate Potgieter - can you switch off cell phones and can we have some measure of order and quite - thank you.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you Chairperson - Superintendent Sterrenberg - lets move on a little bit, when the person that you admit you shot was running that person was moving away from where you were not so.

MR STERRENBERG: Was moving - he was moving diagonally across my vision sir.

ADV POTGIETER: But he was going to move in a southerly direction down NY1.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct yes.

ADV POTGIETER: And if I understood your evidence correctly you were out of the bushes on the eastern side of NY1.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: So for all intends and purposes this person would have been moving away from you.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct Your Worship.

ADV POTGIETER: And that person was not posing a direct threat to you.

MR STERRENBERG: Not at that stage, but he could have been posing a threat - I had assumed that of my colleagues had been injured by his actions - the threat at that time would have been to the people further down in the road.  This is a residential area and is been frequented not only by the police officers who were in that area at that time, but also innocent civilians.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes you have - you have jumped the gun slightly.

MR STERRENBERG: I beg your pardon sir.

ADV POTGIETER: I want to see if we understand each other - we are speaking about yourself there was no direct threat to you personally.

MR STERRENBERG: No but there was an obligation on me to stop him in what he was doing sir.

ADV POTGIETER: Ja but you agree there was no direct threat to you  personally.

MR STERRENBERG: Not at that stage no.

ADV POTGIETER: Was there okay good - you thought that you should act because of the threat that was posed to other people.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct Your Worship.

ADV POTGIETER: Who are those other people?

MR STERRENBERG: It could have been other police officers in that vicinity as well as well as other innocent civilians.

ADV POTGIETER: But you not sure.

MR STERRENBERG: Not at that stage I wasn't no.

ADV POTGIETER: There could have been nobody there.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: But you still decided to fire seven shots with SSG at this person.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: Now were you sort of firing these shots in succession or how were you firing?

MR STERRENBERG: In quick succession yes.

ADV POTGIETER: Why did you do that?

MR STERRENBERG: In order to stop him in what he was doing.

ADV POTGIETER: But why do you fire seven shots in quick succession, why don't you fire single shots.

MR STERRENBERG: Because as I was firing the shots it occurred to me that these shots were having no effect whatsoever.

ADV POTGIETER: But how did you have time to assess that if you shooting in quick succession.

MR STERRENBERG: Because if I [intervention]

ADV POTGIETER: Perhaps I could just sketch the full scenario to you and then I will give you enough time to respond.  Isn't the prudent thing under those circumstances if you want to neutralise this threat to shoot one shot with SSG which is - we know very-very lethal and see what the effect is and then shoot again if it's necessary. 
 Because after all look you were also firing in an urban area with a shotgun - shot that spreads out all over.  Didn't that occur to you.

MR STERRENBERG: Sir the reason why I fired continuously after I fired the first shot it was clear that he wasn't hit as he kept on running - and it was for that reason that I kept on firing  - not seeing that this person fell.  I also wasn't sure whether my shots were finding the target or not.

ADV POTGIETER: So you carried on firing several shots of SSG and then what happened to this person?

MR STERRENBERG: Eventually he fell as I already indicated he fell in NY1 between the fence and the tree in NY1.

ADV POTGIETER: Now are you a fair shot?

MR STERRENBERG: I am - I fire shots yes sir - I wouldn't say fair or expert, perhaps novice.

ADV POTGIETER: But you know - you know how to use a firearm?

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: And you were taking aim and you were serious to - to hit the person, to hit your target.

MR STERRENBERG: That is correct sir.

ADV POTGIETER: And you were using this lethal shot so one could assume that you  must have hit him with one of those seven shots.

MR STERRENBERG: As I say Your Worship it is possible - it's also possible that I missed him completely.

ADV POTGIETER: With seven shots a person running diagonally across your view, with a shotgun.

MR STERRENBERG: It is possible Your Worship.

ADV POTGIETER: Would you miss him completely?

MR STERRENBERG: It is possible sir.

ADV POTGIETER: These were dangerous in those days.

MR STERRENBERG: As I say it is possible sir.

ADV POTGIETER: Possible that you missed him totally.