Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-08

JAN LOURENS: No, no, Mr Vally, you know I know that people have been badly harmed, hurt and killed, maimed by letter-bomb mechanisms that have been - you know, what I've read in newspapers and what I've read subsequently.  I was never told beforehand that - I was not involved in the manufacture of letter-bombs at all, I was just the custodian, if you want, of that parcel.

MR VALLY: And do you remember when this was given to you?

JAN LOURENS: Early 90's.  No, I can be more specific, I left Protechnic in March 1993, and it would have been just before, late '92 early '93.

MR VALLY: Okay.  Let's just talk about some of the items that you were aware of that Mr Phil Morgan manufactured.  We've got the screwdrivers, both the stabbing mechanism as well as with the needle mechanism.

JAN LOURENS: Yes.

MR VALLY: You've mentioned a bicycle pump.

JAN LOURENS: Yes.

MR VALLY: Which contained a needle unit?

JAN LOURENS: Yes.

MR VALLY: You've talked about in the early stages rings with a coin,

JAN LOURENS: Yes.

MR VALLY: Which I assume conceal a secret compartment in which poison was put?

JAN LOURENS: Yes and it would be manufactured primarily for a powder substance, not a liquid.

MR VALLY: Were there any other items that you can recall?

JAN LOURENS: Walking sticks.

MR VALLY: And what were the walking sticks used for?

JAN LOURENS: There was two models, the one model was a walking stick that concealed a needled unit in the front, and the last model that Phil worked on was a walking stick that would shoot a little ball, it's a polycarbonate ball, and this ball had a number of holes drilled through it, so you would be able to pack your toxic substance into this little ball and at close proximity, the idea was to be able to shoot the person in the back of his leg, and the ball would penetrate the person's body and the chemical substance would dissolve into the body of course, and kill the individual.  The ball was small, so it was sufficiently small not to draw a hell of a lot of attention in the sense that the person being shot would experience something like a bee sting, and the reason why polycarbonate was suggested, was it's a hard substance, and secondly, it was a substance that was very difficult to pick up under x-rays.

CHAIRPERSON: Excuse me, Mr Vally, we are at 15h55, and I just wanted to have a sense of how long you think you are still going to be with this witness, given that there will be cross-examination and ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: A conservative would be about half an hour, on my part, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: You see, because we didn't start at 09h00, there are witnesses who were supposed to be testifying today.  We have to have a sense of who we should hold over, who will be called, who can be called, who will not be called.

MR VALLY: I will discuss with my colleagues, and maybe we can arrange to move at least one of the witnesses over to tomorrow, but I would ask that we sit a bit late, if possible.

CHAIRPERSON: How late?

MR VALLY: We can take a break.  Well, if our presents are anything to go by, at least until 18h00.

CHAIRPERSON: I see, do you want us to go on, or do you want a small adjournment?

MR VALLY: I will not object to a small adjournment then I can ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I think we need to get a sense, maybe if we take the adjournment now, and know that when we resume we will run until 18h00.  You need to confer with your learned friends and to get a sense of how long the cross-examination is likely to be so that we can pace ourselves.  I don't want to limit cross-examination, especially when we have not limited your examination in chief, but it seems to me that you are not unaware of precedence where we had to impose time limits in order to get through with the schedule, and we may have to revert to that sort of formula, but I can't just spring it on the other legal representatives.  I think it should be clear now, now that we know that we are going to be sitting, and in this sort of fashion that we need to have arrangements which will be announced ahead of time for all legal representatives as what sort of limit we place on the examination and cross-examination of each witness.

MR VALLY: I hear you, Mr Chair and maybe we can discuss it during the adjournment, but there will be some witnesses who will be very quick and some witnesses, like Dr Lourens, who cover a whole period, and the knowledge is such we'll take longer.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's take an adjournment now and let's resume at 16h10.  There's one question that ...(intervention)

MR CILLIERS: Dr Lourens, can I just ask one question, all these mechanisms that you've mentioned, and the ones that we see in front of us, are these prototypes that we're seeing, and how many of these were actually manufactured?  Was it just in special situations that you were asked to produce a ring and Mr Phil Morgan would then produce it for you ...(intervention)

JAN LOURENS: Yes.

MR CILLIERS: Or would you actually manufacture several ...(intervention)

JAN LOURENS: No, we never manufactured several.  The only units that we manufactured several of was the screwdrivers.  You know, when I decided to testify on this issue I had a long discussion with him, and my recall and his recall of numbers had in actual fact been very different, for example, the rings I can clearly recall that we made a few, two, three, four, five, he says one maybe two, but it was never a mass volume production at all.  On the screwdrivers there was quite a number manufactured.  It may have even been twenty, but I could be out by five either way, but we never manufactured hundred.

MR CURRIN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we take the adjournment now and resume at 16h15.
HEARING ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: We are about to resume if you could all be seated.  Dr Lourens.  Mr Vally?

MR VALLY: (cont.)

JAN LOURENS: (s.u.o)

MR VALLY: Thank you, Mr Chair.  Dr Lourens, we were just going through the weapons that you were aware of that you were aware of that were manufactured.  You talked about rings with coin on top, screwdrivers with syringe-like mechanism, you talked about a bicycle pump.  I believe we were talking about the umbrellas and the walking sticks.  Could you just briefly  tell us again how these ...(intervention)

JAN LOURENS: The - both the umbrellas and the walking sticks we had two variations.  The one variation was the needled unit, so it would be a normal umbrella that would have a protection cover, if you want, and then the needle, a normal needle cylinder that could project the chemical, and then the last model that we worked on, that Phil made was the umbrella and the walking stick that could shoot this little projectile that could carry the toxin or the toxic substance.

MR VALLY: In terms of the projectile, I just want to know, since you did make some chemical products at your plant for purposes of testing your equipment, did you ever pack it there as well?

JAN LOURENS: Never.  The sort of substances that we manufactured were the conventional chemical warfare substances so it was mustard gas, nerve gas and this type of substance.  No, the - your application of those substances on such a small volume would not render - would not have the ability to kill the human-being.  No, it was never packed.

MR VALLY: Why did you use polycarbon balls?

JAN LOURENS: For two reasons, number one, it's a hard ball, and the second reason was that I was advised by either James or Dr Immelman that says that this is the type of substance that you would not be able to pick up on an X-ray.  Now, if I say I was advised by Andre or James, I cannot actively recall the discussion, but those had been the people I had interface with.

MR VALLY: Who would normally give you specifications, for example the umbrellas or the walking sticks?  Who would tell you I'm looking for an item of this kind?