Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN: Yes.  Did you write the statement in your cell or in the presence of the police?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: As far as I remember, Mr Chairman, it was in my cell.

UNKNOWN: In your cell and is this in your usual handwriting?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well, it is a bit larger than my usual handwriting.

UNKNOWN: I beg your pardon?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: It is a bit larger than my usual handwriting.

UNKNOWN: A bit larger?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

UNKNOWN: Oh, is that, you wrote it a lot more largely so that it can be more clearly read?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I do not know, Mr Chairman, but it is larger.

UNKNOWN: I see.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Yes.

UNKNOWN: But, would you agree, as you look at it, that it looks to be a neat and legible handwriting without any, well, certainly, it does not look as if it was written by a man who was exhausted and did not know what he was writing?  Let us come directly to the point.  It does not look like a statement written by a person who has been ill-treated, who has, who is exhausted and who was under pressure to write it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, I am not qualified to ...

UNKNOWN: Oh, yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... state how a statement looks made by somebody who is under duress and who, how a statement does not look.

UNKNOWN: If we have a look at ordinary writing of yours can we expect any material differences which would indicate to the Committee that you were under duress when you wrote this statement out?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Well, Mr Chairman, if you look at page three, excuse me, there are at least three scratchings out.

UNKNOWN: Yes, well, that is on one ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And ...

UNKNOWN: ... page and I ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And ...

UNKNOWN: ... think there may be one or two other pages where there are scratching outs.  Is that, ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is ...

UNKNOWN: ... you are saying that that does not happen with people who are comfortable, who have written a statement as long as this and there are a small number of alterations?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I am, you asked me if there is anything to indicate that this was under duress.  If I was taking my time I would not have made mistakes that needed to be scratched out, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Oh, I see, yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: And altered and some even ...

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... accentuated to make it clearer on page ...

UNKNOWN: Well, I put ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: 31.

UNKNOWN: ... to you what we are going to argue.  I want to give you an opportunity to deal with it and you have.
MR PRINSLOO OBJECTS

MR PRINSLOO: Mr Chairman, before my learned friend proceeds, I am referring to page 340, R4 continued, paragraph 40, statement of Captain Deetliefs, where he states,
"On Friday, 23 April 1993 during the course of the day, I visited Clive Derby-Lewis in his cell.  I handed over to him folio paper as requested on Tuesday 20 April.".
Not, it was not given to him on the 20th of April as put to the applicant by Mr Derby-Lewis.  It is incorrect, Mr Chairman.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Bizos.

MR PRINSLOO: By Mr Bizos, I beg your pardon.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is why, in fact, I queried when I started, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: It may be, yes, but I will, I just want to get the date.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Page 340.

MR PRINSLOO: It is page 340, Mr Chairman, paragraph 40.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, we want to see the date.  Anyway, be that as it may, you say that you ...

JUDGE WILSON: There is the 23rd of April at the beginning and end of the paragraph concerned.

UNKNOWN: I beg your pardon.  I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON: Paragraph 40 refers to the date at the beginning of that paragraph as being 23rd of April 1993.

UNKNOWN: Yes, well, be that as it may, it, I appreciate that it is a point that has to be dealt with and we are indebted to our learned friends for drawing attention to it, but you had an opportunity to write the statement in the cell.  What I want to ask you is this, were the police interested in you signing the document purporting to be the truth?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That was the agreement with, which ...

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... produced this statement, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: That was the agreement, yes, and you say that you signed this and merely to indicate whether there were alterations on a page or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: On this particular statement?

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct, Mr Chairman, that was what Captain Deetliefs asked me to do.

UNKNOWN: He asked you ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: He said he did not want a signature, he did not want to, to commit, me to commit myself at this stage, I must just go through this, check that there are no mistakes or alterations and if there are, sign them and otherwise certify there are no alterations.

UNKNOWN: I am going to put to you that you signed it, because you wanted to indicate that you agreed with the contents and in order that there may not be suggestions that you, that anything was altered in your statement, you added no alterations or alterations.  What would have been the value of a statement to Mr Deetliefs or to anyone else without you signing that you spoke the truth in it?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, I explained why this word, these words "no alterations" were included on every page.  If I had wanted to say "contents correct" I would have written exactly that, Mr Chairman, "contacts correct, "contents correct" and signed it.  Why would I talk about alterations if I was going to confirm the contents?

UNKNOWN: So, you actually are telling us that whoever received your statement was satisfied with a signature only certifying whether there were alterations or not ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is ...

UNKNOWN: ... on a particular page ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is ...

UNKNOWN: ... and was not interested whether you had told them the truth or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: That is correct, Mr Chairman.  Why would I initial the alterations where they were?

UNKNOWN: Well, I have put to you why you did it and I am going to put to you that this suggestion that they were not interested for you to certify by your signature that it was the truth, is an answer which is, borders on your having lost sight of reality, Mr Derby-Lewis.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Mr Chairman, why then would they produce another nicely typed statement with a space for me to sign and then allow my attorney to come in, to ensure that the thing is signed as a confession before a magistrate, if they were happy with this one?

UNKNOWN: The question is whether you purported to write the truth or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: No, Mr Chairman, that is not the question.  The question was ...

UNKNOWN: The question was ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... regarding the validity of this statement.

UNKNOWN: I am asking you whether you purported to have written the truth in this statement or not?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I explained, Mr Chairman, ...

UNKNOWN: Did you ...

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... that I, Mr Chairman, I have already made a statement regarding this statement in its typed form wherein I stated that the circumstances around the list I included, because I wanted to protect my wife and the fact that the police accepted it as the final statement, is an indication that they were satisfied with that as well.  In fact, they, to me that confirmed that they did not really believe that my wife was involved and that is why they did not press the matter.

UNKNOWN: Did you purport to write truth in this statement?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I said I did, Mr Chairman, with that exception.

UNKNOWN: Right.  You purported to right the truth with an exception, did you say?  What was that exception or exceptions?

MR DERBY-LEWIS: I refer here to the typed version of this, Mr Chairman, ...

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: ... which is on page 65, regarding the list of names.

UNKNOWN: Yes.

MR DERBY-LEWIS: Paragraph 44.

UNKNOWN: You deliberately lied in your written statement, in your own handwriting in relation to that whilst you were being coerced by the police?