Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-13

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Partly the statement is correct in saying that
they will open up for him, he will come to the fore and shoot and then they will dance again and then he will be in the middle so that part I think is correct but it is the last part that you put, the intention as you say was to protect - the crowd was trying to protect him when they brought him back - or I don't agree with that part.

MR PRETORIUS: Besides from observing the weapon, seeing that it is directed towards you, noticing that he fired, what else convinced you that he was firing in your direction?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: At some stage during the firing, dust would come down and chips of cement from the parapet.

MR PRETORIUS: That is while this person was firing with the AK47, correct?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: That is what I believe was firing and I mention in my evidence if you have read before Justice Nugent that I cannot be certain as to which point exactly he fired because as I say I was lying down.

MR PRETORIUS: You however testified before Judge Nugent that the shots struck underneath the balcony somewhere in the vicinity of your head, is that correct?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: That is not correct, I said on the side of the balcony.

MR PRETORIUS: Fine - at least it struck the balcony, correct?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: The parapet I mean, yes.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, you are now being proved by the ballistics to be totally incorrect.  Firstly, that you could not have seen a person with an AK47 firing in your direction because no shots were fired in your direction.  Do you accept that?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: The ballistics says that.

MR PRETORIUS: What do you say now, Mr Zuma.

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: That is why I say I concede I might have - my recollection of the day might be wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you suggesting that you may not have seen this man with an AK47 coming in front of the crowd and then shooting in your direction?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: Can you come again?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you suggesting that you may not have seen the man with an AK47 emerging from the crowd and shooting in your directions as you have testified?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: No I'm not suggesting that, I have seen the man, that I know, I have seen the man but I might be wrong in saying he was firing in our direction.

MR PRETORIUS: But Mr Zuma, can you assist me please.  You said that you saw him pointing the firearm in your direction and firing.  If that is what you saw and that is what you observed, what do you say about that now?  What is incorrect about that?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: You'll appreciate that there were some AK fired at that parapet at the corner of De Villiers and King George so I'm saying he might have been directing his AK somewhere else because I cannot really dispute the objective evidence before me.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, if he was directing his fire at the parapet at the guards on the corner of King George and De Villiers Street, the rifle or the AK47 would have been pointed to his left and upwards - it would have been pointed nowhere in your direction - then I'm asking you again if you testified and you said you saw that the rifle was pointed in your direction and he fired at you and that is now being proved incorrect, what do you say about that?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: It is for that reason that I say I might - my recollection of the event might not be one hundred percent correct in that instance - in the instance that I'm saying he shot in our direction, but the fact that I saw the AK, I saw the barrel and everything, it's still a fact.  But the AK will jerk and the people, you must also appreciate that it was a matter of seconds, it's easier when you talk and sit here and talk you know, because it seems as if it was a longer period where I could really ascertain what, who is doing what and so forth.  It was a question of seconds and this thing happened very fast and the AK, I saw it, this man was pointing it but it might have shot a different direction.  If I point a gun at you that does not mean I'm going to shoot you, I can shoot somewhere else.  I know that it happens at the shooting range, where you go to the shooting range and many people point their guns at the target but they shoot somewhere else, so it's not a new thing that's just happened that day.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, let's take this step by step.  Firstly in so far as your explanation now that things happened very quickly, I want to read to you from the record of the proceedings in front of Judge Nugent - I read from page 3186.
"Yes and you saw him firing again the second time, that is now placing it in position, this same man with the AK47" which was then said - it was put to you that, that you say you saw him firing for the second time. 
	 Your reply is "Yes". 
	 It was then put to you "but won't it be correct to say that you did not see anybody firing but that you rather got the impression that someone was firing from the furthest corner away from you, the corner of King George and De Villiers Street?"
	 Your reply - "I am not mad."
	 "Yes, but you see that is in fact what Mr Kruser testified and that is on page 2749 of the record.  He was specifically asked by his Lordship what caused him to give the order to fire warning shots.  He was asked, the question posed by his Lordship in that was from line 24.  Do I understand you to be saying you heard shots but that you did not see anyone firing from the crowd?"
	  His answer was "I could not see directly, we just got the impression it was coming from somewhere."
	And then more importantly "Yes but you heard shots, you did not see anyone in the crowd firing?"
	"No my Lord."  That was all with reference to Mr Kruser's evidence that was put to you.
	You then testified "Yes but you are talking about Kruser but I saw this person." 
	 You were very sure of exactly what you saw to the extent that when it was put to you that maybe you got the wrong impression you said to the person, Mr Ferreira, one of my colleagues - your reply to him was "I am not mad."  Do you understand that Mr Zuma?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: You know I am maintaining now that my recollection of the event is that I saw the person.  The only thing that I'm conceding is that he might have not been shooting in our direction - so he was saying if you read there carefully - he is saying there Mr Kruser said he did not see the person but he heard the shots.  I am saying to you now that I saw the person, I said to you then that I saw the person and there is nothing that differs now, it's only - the only thing that differs is that I'm conceding the fact that he might have been shooting somewhere else but the fact that he was there is a fact.

MR PRETORIUS: Mr Zuma, when a person pointing a firearm in your direction and he fires with a rifle pointed in your direction it is impossible for him to hit something that is ninety degrees away from him and up into the air about five metres, do you agree with that?

BETHUEL MONDLI ZUMA: You see you are talking about a person, people will differ.  I'll tell you that I know of a person who was pointing a firearm at his target and he shot right next to where he was standing.  Those things happen and ninety degrees is a very small angle, he can do that, a person can easily do that depending whether he's excited or he's shaken or he doesn't know how to handle the firearm properly so people do various things which you can't have a specific norm where you can apply to everyone as a general norm to say if you are carrying a firearm in this direction, definitely you must shoot in this angle.