Amnesty Hearings — Cape Town — 1999-10-26

MR RILEY: Did you at any stage tell the police or any person but particularly the police that you had been pulled off on the road at 1st Avenue, Nyanga, where you wanted to turn in at Emms Drive and that you'd been pulled off the road there by two mini-buses and a green/beige, green or beige Opel Rekord station wagon.  Did you tell that to the police or anyone?

ANDILE JACK: No we were never pulled off by any cars.

MR RILEY: No, that is not the question.  The question is whether you had told that to the police after the incident had occurred?

ANDILE JACK: No, I never told the police that.

MR RILEY: And if someone said that that is in fact what you said to them, what would you say about that?

ANDILE JACK: Would you please repeat the question, sir?

MR RILEY: If someone, if a police officer said that you said that just after the incident had occurred, that you had reported that to him, what would you say about that?

ANDILE JACK: No, there's nothing like that, I never mentioned that.

MR RILEY: There is a statement in the police docket of the Johannes De Vries Vermeulen, he was a sergeant in the South African Police, Guguletu, at the time.  He says that after the incident you in fact made a report to him that you had been pulled off by two mini-buses.

MR JAMIE: Mr Chairperson, I'm going to object to this line of questioning.  This statement hasn't been proven, it's inaccurate in other respects as well, Mr Chairperson, unless Mr Riley intends calling Mr Vermeulen, the sergeant.

MR RILEY: Mr Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Riley, he seemed to have also responded to that he says he disputes that, it seems to be in dispute.

MR RILEY: Yes he does indeed, Mr Chairperson, I just felt that it was important that that particular issue be raised insofar as whether or not it's going to be proved or not, the cross-examination was conducted on statements of witnesses whose statements had not been proved in this tribunal yet.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR RILEY: So I would have countered that objection on that basis.  I just felt that it was important that that particular issue be raised because it is important that if there were different versions given of the events by this witness, whose evidence is clearly in direct conflict with the version that the applicant has given, then that is important to be heard.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  No, no, we accept and you have been allowed to put that question to the witness here, responded to that and he denies that.

MR RILEY: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know whether you want to take it any further whether anything turns on this now or not?

MR RILEY: No, I'll leave that particular issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR RILEY: Now you've already testified that in fact on the night in question, that there was a mist or what was it, a fog or whatever you call it, is that right?

ANDILE JACK: Yes that is correct.

MR RILEY: You also said that in fact you were unable to see clearly, is that right?

ANDILE JACK: Yes that is correct, I couldn't see the people's faces.

MR RILEY: In fact when Mr Jamie asked you earlier on you said that you saw three people there but you can't describe them as it was misty if I recall your words correctly?

ANDILE JACK: Yes that is correct, I saw three people.

MR RILEY: So is it fair to say then that as a result of the fact that it was misty, you couldn't describe the people that were there that you really can't tell this tribunal today, what and any time what in fact these persons were wearing?

ANDILE JACK: There were wearing coats.

MR RILEY: Is that it?

ANDILE JACK: And balaclavas on their heads.

MR RILEY: In fact you're not sure about that, is it because you testified today that they were wearing some things like balaclavas.  So it doesn't seem as if you're quite sure what these persons were wearing?

ANDILE JACK: I am sure about what I am saying, they had hats on and when I looked at those hats they looked more like balaclavas.

MR RILEY: Where you could see their faces it seems?

ANDILE JACK: I couldn't see their faces because it was misty and it was dark.

MR RILEY: But it was not that the balaclavas were hiding their faces or anything like that?

ANDILE JACK: They looked more like balaclavas to me.

MR RILEY: Now you were driving from the deceased's house when you say that the deceased made you aware of the fact that people were calling him?

ANDILE JACK: Yes some people called him.

MR RILEY: So you became aware of the fact that people were calling the deceased because of the fact that the deceased drew your attention to that?  If the deceased didn't tell you then you would not have been aware of that, is that correct?

ANDILE JACK: I also heard them calling and he told me again that there were people calling him.

MR RILEY: How did you manage to hear that?

ANDILE JACK: I heard the people calling, saying Nzonkwe and he had told me that the people were calling.

MR RILEY: You heard the applicant say that no one at any stage called Mr Jack's name there, you heard that?

ANDILE JACK: Yes I heard that and to me it's a surprise, it comes as a surprise because the people called his name.

MR RILEY: Do you not say that you in fact, that he was in fact called by these people because of the fact that he told you that he was being called by the people?

ANDILE JACK: No, I heard with my own ears and he later told me that the people were calling him.

MR RILEY: He later told you?  What do you mean by that?  In fact if I understood your evidence correctly, you testified
"We were going to take the Emms Drive road"
and then you continued to testify and you said:
"he told me there were people calling him."
That was your evidence.

ANDILE JACK: I do not understand your question, sir?

MR RILEY: What I'm trying to say to you sir is, is it not more likely that you yourself was not aware of anyone having called the deceased but that the deceased in fact would have told you about these people?

ANDILE JACK: I heard them with my own ears and he told me that there were people calling him.

MR RILEY: Well I must put it to you that as you've heard the applicant denies that at any stage anyone called Mr Pro Jack?

ANDILE JACK: I am saying his name was called.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, may I just ask something here?  Could you see where the people were calling him from?  Could you see the direction or could you ascertain the direction where these voices came from?

ANDILE JACK: These people who were calling him I saw them as the three people who were saying that because there was no other person in that vicinity except the three people who were standing there.

ADV SIGODI: Were they standing close to the road?

ANDILE JACK: No, they were not standing close to the road.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we just clarify this, Mr Jack?  When you heard the voices did you see anybody outside the car?

ANDILE JACK: No, I did not see any other person except these three people.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking about the stage when you heard the voices, when you heard those voices or the voice did you see anybody outside?

ANDILE JACK: I just saw these three people.

CHAIRPERSON: At the time when you heard the name of the deceased being called?

ANDILE JACK: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you still moving, was the car still moving at that time when you heard the voice or voices?

ANDILE JACK: The car was motion when he was called and he stopped at a stop sign and reversed because he wanted to pay attention to the people who were calling him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes now the question is, you say that you saw the three persons outside the car, you heard the voice or voices calling the name of the deceased, now could you determine from which direction the voice or voices was coming?

ANDILE JACK: It came, the voices came from the direction of the main road, under the trees.

CHAIRPERSON: The direction of the main road, under the trees?

ANDILE JACK: Yes that is correct.