Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-04-12

S F MANQELE: It was by mistake that she got shot.
I am saying it was not my intention to shoot her.

MS THABETE: No, what I am asking is what do you mean
"She was shot by mistake"
Did the gun fire by mistake, what mistake are you talking about?

S F MANQELE: No, the gun did not go off by itself, but a shot went off because I made the gun to fire.

MS THABETE: So my question remains.  Was it necessary for you really to shoot her, considering the fact that there were four of you, armed men, the victim was a woman, unarmed, was it really necessary for you to shoot her?

S F MANQELE: No, it was not necessary.

MS THABETE: So why did you do it?

S F MANQELE: I, too, cannot even explain how this happened.  I also got a shock when the police told me that we had shot a person but at the time when this was happening and when this gun went off, it did not occur to me that I was the one who was shooting.  That is why I am saying that what happened was not within my intentions.  It is for this reason that I am asking for forgiveness from the family of the deceased, because it was not my intention to shoot the deceased.

MS THABETE: My last question to you.  I understand what you are saying, that it was a mistake, you did not intend to kill her, did not plan to kill her, she was killed nevertheless.  How do you justify that politically?  What would you say is your justification politically?

S F MANQELE: The political motive is that I found myself in that situation because we had gone there to try and get some money for the IFP.

MS THABETE: Who told you that the IFP did not have money?

S F MANQELE: ...(no English interpretation)

MS THABETE: Where do you get that from?  I mean, the IFP has a leader, Chief Mangasutho Buthelezi, it would hold rallies, where did you get the idea that the IFP did not have money?

S F MANQELE: I got this from the death of members of the IFP because in the event of a member of the IFP dying, we would be informed at the hostel that a member had passed away and we would have to contribute so that the corpse could be transferred back home where it should be buried.

MS THABETE: Surely there were people who were IFP members at the hostel who were working and who would make such contributions, is that not so?

S F MANQELE: That is correct.

MS THABETE: So why was it necessary to go and rob for that?

S F MANQELE: It was important and necessary because we did not have money to contribute at the time in the event of monies being required to be contributed towards the meeting of the transportation of the corpse to be buried at home.

MS THABETE: In other words, you wanted to get this money in order that you were able to contribute money if it is called for, to transport or to pay for transport for people to be taken back home, is this what you are telling us?

S F MANQELE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, any more questions?
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Claassen have you got any?

MR CLAASSEN: No questions, thank you Mr Chairperson.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR CLAASSEN

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you go first.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know why Wiseman was not at the scene of the robbery?

S F MANQELE: Yes, I know.

ADV SIGODI: Why did he not go?

S F MANQELE: He told me that it would not be appropriate because he was known in that area.

ADV SIGODI: He was also known by the victim, is that not so?

S F MANQELE: Yes, and many others who used to work with him in that area.

ADV SIGODI: I've got a statement here on page 16, the typed statement.  It is not signed, but your written version of it is on pages 13, 14 and 15.  That is the statement which you say is not true.  However, you mentioned that - sorry, I cannot seem to find that statement, but there is a statement where you said Mr Kanyele was bearing a grudge against this lady particularly because she was responsible for his retrenchment at work, do you remember that?  Do you know anything about that?

S F MANQELE: ...(no English interpretation)

ADV SIGODI: Okay, I'll just get it now.  Oh, yes, it's the typed statement on page 16.  Well, I get the impression that you were accompanying Mr Kanyele here to Parktown to collect his money for his retrenchment but then you go on to say
"... we then saw two people approaching us and he told me those were also employed by the company and told me that the woman who was with the white man is the one there that he be retrenched from work because she hated black men, especially members of Inkatha Freedom Party.  She used to say we are hard to crack(?) because we haven't got understanding."
Do you know anything about that, do you remember that statement?

S F MANQELE: Which statement are you talking about?

ADV SIGODI: I have referred to page 16, if you can help me.

S F MANQELE: Yes, now I can see the statement.  Yes I can answer.  My legal representative asked me about this statement earlier.  I will repeat what I said to my legal representative, that this letter of indemnity did not, on arrival at the prison, or should I say the situation was such that I did not have anybody coming to me to explain to me as to how I should go about filling it in and the people who were assisting me in filling it in were people who were arrested.

ADV SIGODI: Mr Manqele, that is not the issue here.  What I am trying to find out is, is there some truth in this statement?  Is it not true that Mr Kanyele was retrenched whilst he had been working at the place or with the people that he instructed you to rob?

S F MANQELE: This statement is not correct.

ADV SIGODI: Alright, let's take it step by step.  Is it not true that Mr Kanyele was working at the place where these people that you robbed were working?

S F MANQELE: Yes, it is true that he was working at the same place where these two people who were robbed were employed.

ADV SIGODI: Alright, is it not true that he is the one who went to show you who the targets would be?

S F MANQELE: Yes, he took me along to show me as to who or which people were to be robbed.

ADV SIGODI: Yes, and he showed you Miss Govender and the white man, is that not true?

S F MANQELE: He showed me a car.

ADV SIGODI: Didn't he show you the two people?

S F MANQELE: No.

ADV SIGODI: How did you identify them on the day that they were going to - on the day that you robbed them, how did you manage to identify them?

S F MANQELE: I knew them because they had come out of the same vehicle which he pointed out to me.

ADV SIGODI: How did you know that they were the right people?

S F MANQELE: I knew because of the identity of the vehicle which they were using.

ADV SIGODI: But you knew that it would be a woman that you would have to rob?

S F MANQELE: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: So where did you get this information that you supplied in your indemnity statement?  Did you just pick it up out of the blue?

S F MANQELE: The information contained here is information that is such that it is information part of which was concocted between myself and my co-inmates.  Some of this is a lie.

ADV SIGODI: And some of it is not a lie?

S F MANQELE: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Is it true that Wiseman Kanyele had been retrenched?

S F MANQELE: According to his explanation he indicated that he was employed there but when he later on told me that we had to go and get his money, he was no longer working at that place.

ADV SIGODI: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that lady involved in his losing his job?

S F MANQELE: That is a lie.

CHAIRPERSON: That's all.  Doctor?  Yes, thank you, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all the evidence you have got Mr Claassen?

MR CLAASSEN: Thank you Mr Chair that is indeed all the evidence that I have.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any witnesses that you would like to call?