CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Leopeng, the remaining matter, is that of Mr Ghotse, are you in a position to proceed with that one?
MR LEOPENG: Indeed I'm ready to proceed.
CHAIRPERSON: Will Mr Ghotse then come forward? Yes the next matter is that of Sebo Nicodemus Ghotse, the amnesty application of Mr Ghotse. Perhaps you can help us Ms Lockhat, what is the amnesty reference number of this case?
MS LOCKHAT: It is AM3445/96.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Lockhat.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes the Panel is constituted as already indicated on the record. The appearances are similar to the previous matter, that is Mr Leopeng appearing for the applicant and Ms Lockhat acting as the leader of evidence. Mr Leopeng, is there anything else that you want to draw to our attention or that you want to put on record before we hear the testimony of your client?
MR LEOPENG: Nothing except to put my name on record.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes we have noted that already. Mr Ghotse, can you hear the translation? Very well, won't you switch on your microphone and then stand?
SEBO NICODEMUS GHOTSE: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR LEOPENG: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Ghotse, you are the applicant herein, you are applying for the amnesty for the murder that you committed on the 25th December 1990, is that correct?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Is it further correct that during, before and during the time of the incident you were an ANC member and you were also the chairman of the street committee in Everton, Sebokeng, that is in Vereeniging?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Can you briefly explain to this Committee functions of the street committee, as you ...(indistinct)?
MR GHOTSE: At that time I was the chairman of the Street Committee handling people's complaints and the fighting amongst them and a member of the SDU, protecting the community against attackers who were against the ANC members especially the vigilante groups like the IFP.
MR LEOPENG: So if I understand you correctly you were also an SDU member?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Now just briefly turn to the incident which occurred on the 25th December, the same year. Can you remember what happened which resulted in the death of one Alfred Wielo?
MR GHOTSE: Alfred Wielo, having harassed ANC members on that day he killed Mr Shoping, a member of the ANC. From there I found that some supporters of the ANC have got to him and after arriving there where they had him Daniel Goale stated that Lester who was stabbed by Mr Wielo had died. From there including myself the community got very angry. As he had killed a person he must also be killed. Then I took a knopkierie and then I hit him very hard on the head. He therefore died. That also showed my disagreement with he did. He must not kill ANC members and the ANC members must be aware that we don't like this incident happening against ANC members. Thereafter, when he had died, I made statements that aggravated people to set Mr Wielo alight. There was a large crowd that set Mr Wielo alight but I was not involved. However I carry the blame of this incident that took place.
INTERPRETER: Chairperson, can we ask Mr Ghotse not to fiddle with the microphone as he gives us a feedback?
MR LEOPENG: You said that Mr Wielo the deceased killed one Lester Shoping. Did you know Lester Shoping before he met his death?
MR GHOTSE: He is well known to me, he was a member of the youth league, ANC Youth League. He took part in the ANC but he belonged to the ANC Youth League.
MR LEOPENG: Prior to the death of Alfred Wielo, did you know him?
MR GHOTSE: Are you referring to Mr Wielo?
MR LEOPENG: Yes, Mr Wielo.
MR GHOTSE: I knew him because he harassed members of the ANC and the ANC.
MR LEOPENG: Did you know to which political organisation did he belong or whether he belonged to any political organisation or he was just a member of a gangster or a vigilante group?
MR GHOTSE: The way he harassed members of the ANC I thought he was a member or he belonged to the IFP because he continuously or usually harassed members of the ANC.
ADV BOSMAN: How did he harass them?
MR GHOTSE: Usually when things happened, they would come to me, members of the ANC, and report that he would come to their houses and trouble them. They told me that he was against the ANC and it's membership.
MR LEOPENG: Other than the killing of Lester Shoping, do you know of any specific act that he committed in saying that he used to harass the ANC supporters or members?
MR GHOTSE: The last thing he did before killing Lester was to attack a member of the ANC into the member's house, trying to kill this person. However, a owner of the house, a lady, managed to escape.
MR LEOPENG: Is it your testimony before this Committee that you participated in killing Mr Wielo by assaulting him with a knopkierie on his head solely because he killed your ANC Youth League member by the name of Lester Shoping and also that he harassed some other members of the ANC?
MR GHOTSE: I started talking about this here at the Amnesty Committee but during the trials I did not disclose of this fact, I was very afraid to disclose that fact, I was afraid of going to jail.
MR LEOPENG: My question was did you kill him because he was harassing you, members of the ANC and also that he killed Lester Shoping?
MR GHOTSE: Yes that is the reason that caused me to kill him.
MR LEOPENG: Did you have any other objective that you sought to achieve in killing him? Other than that you were mentioning having killed a member of the ANC, a member of the ANC Youth League?
MR GHOTSE: I was sending out a message for those who wanted to kill ANC members so that they can see that we dislike or rather that I dislike what they are doing.
MR LEOPENG: After killing him or after having learnt that he has died and he has been burnt down to ashes, did you benefit anything either financially or having any benefit from any other person?
MR GHOTSE: There was nothing that I benefited out of that.
MR LEOPENG: After him being killed did you continue to serve - let me rephrase my question, I beg your pardon. After him having died and before your arrest, did you continue to serve as a member of the SDU and also as the Chairman of the street committee in Everton?
MR GHOTSE: Yes that is correct.
MR LEOPENG: Prior to your arrest did the attacks on the members of the ANC Youth League or members of the ANC stopped at Everton?
MR GHOTSE: In the area where I resided as far as my knowledge can take me, they stopped.
MR LEOPENG: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LEOPENG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Leopeng. Ms Lockhat have you got any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Yes thank you, Chairperson.
How long were you the chairperson of the street committee?
MR GHOTSE: It was for about a month but I could not extend it to a year.
MS LOCKHAT: You said you previously received a complaint by a certain lady regarding Mr Wielo. Can you tell the Committee how you dealt with that complaint? That was when he broke down the door of a certain house?
MR GHOTSE: This one regarding the lady, I addressed it in the morning when everybody woke up because he attacked her in the evening. I went there to talk to Mr Wielo and make him aware that what he is doing I dislike and his attack upon this lady I disliked. I tried to avoid a fight with him. It seemed as if he understood regarding the female lady and the attack that he carried upon her expect this one that he did of killing Lester Shoping.
MS LOCKHAT: Didn't you just reprimand him after you had a talk with him, is that correct?
MR GHOTSE: After having talked to him I never heard a thing concerning him than after having killed Lester.
MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, was there a relationship between the comrades and the street committee?
MR GHOTSE: Yes indeed because we are all ANCs. As comrades we ranked a bit higher than them.
MS LOCKHAT: Do you know about the altercation with certain accused two, three and four and five with Mr Wielo on the 25th December, that is the day that he died? Do you know about that altercation?
MR GHOTSE: I heard about that afterwards. I never noticed it.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you know what the altercation was about?
MR GHOTSE: I thought since Mr Wielo was against the community where I resided, I think that was the reason why he had that altercation with those people.
MS LOCKHAT: Didn't you hear after his death what the altercation was about?
MR GHOTSE: I did not follow it that much because I knew already that Mr Wielo was against the community amongst which I reside because I will hear that he is used to attacking these people.
MS LOCKHAT: I believe that on that specific day he did have an altercation with comrades, with accused two, three, four and five and then they pursued Mr Wielo to his house. Do you know about that?
MR GHOTSE: Those are things that I've heard but I did not see them personally.
MS LOCKHAT: And that Mr Lester who was thirteen years old at the time was with that group, do you know about that?
MR GHOTSE: Yes I heard he was there during the altercation.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you say 13 or 30?
MS LOGKHAT: 13. Was Lester a comrade?
MR GHOTSE: Lester was a comrade of the ANC Youth League.
MS LOCKHAT: Was he also a brother of accused number four, Radebe?
MR GHOTSE: He's a brother to Peter Shoping.
MS LOCKHAT: What do you think the comrades went to go and do and Mr Wielo's house?
MR GHOTSE: I believe if there's a conflict in a community, people would go to each other's houses and talk things over.
MS LOCKHAT: Did the comrades attempt to talk things over with Mr Wielo?
MR GHOTSE: The comrades would not talk to a person if there were conflicts but rather they would come to me as a chairperson.
MS LOCKHAT: And did they come to you in this instance?
MR GHOTSE: Actually there was no meeting held over this after we had heard about Lester's death.
MS LOCKHAT: Isn't it true that there was a period when Lester was taken to hospital and Mr Wielo was taken in by the comrades and it was told to Mr Wielo that he would die if Lester died and that Mr Wielo was held captive for a while until the news came that Lester did in fact die, isn't that correct?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: Were you with this group that held Mr Wielo?
MR GHOTSE: I was not in that group that held him captive.
MS LOCKHAT: Where were you at the time?
MR GHOTSE: There is somewhere where I had visited at the time when this thing started.
MS LOCKHAT: So when did you become involved with the killing of Mr Wielo?
MR GHOTSE: When I arrived after they have kept him captive at that place. I heard that he had stabbed Lester and they've since kept him captive there.
MS LOCKHAT: Did you attempt at any stage to talk to the comrades knowing that they had the deceased?
MR GHOTSE: Yes indeed I enquired what actually happened.
MS LOCKHAT: And then?
MR GHOTSE: They told me that this man has already started a gang and he has stabbed Lester with a knife.
MS LOCKHAT: And what was your response?
MR GHOTSE: I was deeply hurt and of course later on we heard that Lester passed away.
MS LOCKHAT: Why didn't you report the fact that Mr Wielo had killed Lester, why didn't you report it to the police rather?
MR GHOTSE: We did not have cooperation at all with the police. In fact the police disliked us as members of the ANC at that time.
MS LOCKHAT: But surely if you identified Mr Wielo and seeing that there were a number of the scene of this incident, it was easy to identify Mr Wielo as the person who had killed Lester and surely that shouldn't have been a problem to have him charged?
MR GHOTSE: You see, the situation at that time is not like the situation we have today. The violence at that time had actually confused us.
MS LOCKHAT: I believe the comrades, was it correct that it was about 30 persons that was involved with this?
MR GHOTSE: Yes although I did not read the number of the people there but it was a large community.
MS LOCKHAT: Was it only yourself and the other persons accused one, two, three, four and five that was involved in the killing of Mr Wielo?
MR GHOTSE: The community that was present that supported the ANC was there in large numbers. Everybody was angry and the community took part in that.
MS LOCKHAT: Why did you come onto the scene of the incident with a knopkierie?
MR GHOTSE: You must understand that I did not come there with this knopkierie. When I arrived there I did not have that but I found it amongst the crowd there.
MS LOCKHAT: So by this time the deceased was in a wheelbarrow, is that correct? The crowd had carted him in a wheelbarrow?
MR GHOTSE: After I have hit him with a knopkierie, the deceased was then thrown into the wheelbarrow.
MS LOCKHAT: And how many times did you hit him with a knopkierie?
MR GHOTSE: I only hit him once but it was a hard blow.
MS LOCKHAT: Was he assaulted at a stage by the other comrades already?
MR GHOTSE: Yes.
MS LOCKHAT: So your blow was the fatal blow, is that correct?
MR GHOTSE: Yes that is correct.
MS LOCKHAT: Do you think it was possible for you as a chairperson of the Street Committee to let the crowd actually release Mr Wielo and then you follow your own procedures that you had as a Street Committee by reprimanding him or reporting him to the police? Would you think that you had the capabilities of stopping the crowd?
MR GHOTSE: It was already late at that time, Mr Wielo not have a good timing, he did a wrong thing at the wrong time.
MS LOCKHAT: How did you know that Mr Wielo was an IFP supporter or are you just surmising?
MR GHOTSE: I suspected him through his actions. His actions told me that he might be an enemy to the ANC the way he troubled the community.
MS LOCKHAT: Do you think that Mr Wielo was acting in self-defence when the comrades stormed his house after he had the altercation with the comrade members?
MR GHOTSE: I will not be able to answer on that one because I did not see what happened there.
MS LOCKHAT: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Has anybody got any questions?
ADV DE JAGER: The first complaint about the harassing of the woman, you testified yourself that the deceased was drunk at that stage, that he opened the door but there was nothing serious, isn't that so?
MR GHOTSE: I do not understand your question, may you please repeat it?
ADV DE JAGER: At the first matter when Wielo kicked open a lady's door, can you remember that? You've told us about that one?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct.
ADV DE JAGER: There was no threat to kill this woman?
MR GHOTSE: The report that I received, the very woman came to my house, inside my house, told me the manner in which Mr Wielo attacked her in her house.
ADV DE JAGER: And you in fact gave him nails and told him to repair the house, the door, before the lady's husband could return, isn't that so?
MR GHOTSE: After having tried to show him to live in harmony with everybody.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes but he didn't threaten anybody, he was drunk and kicked open the door. Wasn't that the position?
MR GHOTSE: The woman, when she came to me in my house, she told me how Mr Wielo attacked her. That came from her mouth.
ADV DE JAGER: And the other thing, Wielo was staying with about I don't know how many shacks, all staying together on one erf, squatters staying together there. There was no division between political parties at all there?
MR GHOTSE: I'm the one knows what happened there. Mr Wielo was not in good cooperation with the community there.
ADV DE JAGER: That was Christmas day and people had been drinking, is that correct? Wielo himself had been drinking?
MR GHOTSE: Yes on Christmas day people would do as they wish.
ADV DE JAGER: And he had a confrontation with people at the porn shop, wasn't that so?
MR GHOTSE: I was not present at that time, I had visited a certain place.
ADV DE JAGER: And they chased him and he fled into shack number 11 and closed the door?
MR GHOTSE: That is the very thing that I've been saying that he did not live in cooperation with people in that community.
ADV DE JAGER: And what about, I think it was Mr Shabalala, wasn't he Mr Shabalala with him in that shack? No, Johannes Mkonye was with him in that shack? Is that right?
MR GHOTSE: I heard such matters but I was not present then.
ADV DE JAGER: Did Johannes live in peace with the other people there in the vicinity? Johannes Mkonye?
MR GHOTSE: Mkonye did not trouble people.
ADV DE JAGER: Why was he also dragged out of this hut and taken away?
MR GHOTSE: I believe when people are already fighting, when emotions are high, people would do things that are out of hand.
ADV DE JAGER: And is it correct that the people chasing the deceased kicked open this door of the shack number 11?
MR GHOTSE: I was not present at that time.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes but have you ascertained whether that's correct or not before you hit him with a knopkierie?
MR GHOTSE: What made me very angry of most of the things that he did is killing this comrade and the troubling ANC members. Lester Shoping was one of the important members in the ANC Youth League.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes but wasn't Lester at the forefront after this door was kicked open and were rushed into this house?
MR GHOTSE: When a fight ensues everybody would take any position. You might be in front and you do what's necessary.
ADV DE JAGER: And he had a knife too? Lester, in rushing into that house?
MR GHOTSE: I knew Lester not to be a knife carrier.
ADV DE JAGER: And why did they kick open this door and attack this man in this house, while he closed the door, he fled from them? He was not attacking anybody at that time?
MR GHOTSE: I do not believe that people just chase a person without having done anything, that is unfounded.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes, no, but he fled, he didn't attack anybody at that time? He was fleeing and he was pursued?
MR GHOTSE: May as he fled it was because he could see there were a lot of comrades, I don't know.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes but he fled because his life was in danger?
MR GHOTSE: Yes but when a fight has already started people are fighting. They were fighting.
ADV DE JAGER: And you don't know whether they fought about something that's been pawned at the pawnshop or about money or about liquor?
MR GHOTSE: If there were such things they would have reported to the Street Committee that he owed them money but what I mean, Mr Wielo troubled us and all ANC members, he had turned himself into an enemy.
ADV DE JAGER: What did they report to you, what had you done wrong that morning?
MR GHOTSE: On that day when this started I was not present than previously when things were reported to me.
ADV DE JAGER: There was only one report before that to you, isn't that so? One complaint?
MR GHOTSE: I received a lot of complaints about Mr Wielo. About this woman that he attacked was the last before he killed Lester.
ADV DE JAGER: So before he attacked this woman you had a lot of complaints about him?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct and his actions showed that he dislikes members of the ANC. You could tell that also in what he says.
ADV DE JAGER: But at that stage after this last complaint you thought it fit to give him nails to repair the door and do nothing to him?
MR GHOTSE: On the day I said to him he must fix that door, I was attempting to show him we dislike this thing, I thought he would see that he was committing a mistake in what he was doing.
ADV DE JAGER: Had you ever confronted him before that day?
MR GHOTSE: On the very day that I gave him nails I warned him again.
ADV DE JAGER: And before that, was there ever a meeting with him, ever a hearing?
MR GHOTSE: Before that I would tell his sister, Mavis, because his actions told me that he might cause me harm.
ADV DE JAGER: So you never spoke to him before that?
MR GHOTSE: Before this woman attacked through him, we had never talked eye to eye.
ADV DE JAGER: And you spoke to Mavis?
MR GHOTSE: That is correct, where he resided at his sister's place, the owner of the house.
ADV DE JAGER: And Mavis also on that day, the 25th, Christmas day, escaped through the window of that shack to get out of the house when the house was attacked by the other people?
MR GHOTSE: That may be the case because the situation was bad.
ADV DE JAGER: Wasn't he killed only because he was a bad bloke and he had nothing to do with politics?
MR GHOTSE: What I know is that he was against members of the ANC and the ANC.
ADV DE JAGER: But you're only speculating whether he was a member of the IFP. There's no evidence at all that he was a member?
MR GHOTSE: I think actions speaks louder than words. What he did showed us that he is against us. He can be a member of the IFP.
ADV DE JAGER: But he could have been an ordinary criminal harassing people too?
MR GHOTSE: You must understand that we were not free at all times, we were afraid that the IFP usually attacks ANC members. If a person shows dislike of ANC members we sometimes think that he might be a member of ANC but mostly his actions put a lot of people's lives in danger.
ADV DE JAGER: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: No re-examination.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Ghotse, you are excused, thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Have you any other evidence Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG: No other evidence to be called.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the applicant's case?
MR LEOPENG: That is the applicant's case.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Lockhat, have you got any evidence?
MS LOCKHAT: No, thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Leopeng have you got any submissions on the merits of this case?
MR LEOPENG: Yes Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, go ahead.
MR LEOPENG IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, it is not in dispute that the applicant before and as at the time of the commission of the offence he was a member of the Street Committee and a chairman thereof and also an SDU member. The applicant during his evidence-in-chief tewtified that one of the functions are to put it the other way around, functions of the SDUs among others was to protect the community of Everton against the attacks by the vigilante group inclusive of attacks by the opposite parties, that is the IFP.
It is submitted that it is true that during 1990 the situation in the Vaal Triangle was such that there was a very stressful tension which resulted in a lot of killings in the Vaal. It is further submitted that during the same period most people were influenced by the mob psychology. Some people even act Chairperson without verifying whether the victim was actually opposed to the change or opposed to any progress within a particular political organisation. In this case before this Committee it is also clear from the testimony of the applicant that he strongly believed that the deceased, Mr Wielo, could have belonged to the IFP because of his talks in the ANC and the attacks that he made specifically to the ANC members in Everton. During the cross-examination by my learned colleague on the applicant, he said that when he arrived on the day in question, the deceased Mr Wielo was already assaulted by the community and the community or the members as he called the comrades were so angry that there was nothing you could have done to save the life of Mr Wielo. He testified that and that was a full disclosure submitted. His blow to the head of Mr Wielo, that could have caused the death of Mr Wielo. However, it ...(indistinct) again that the learned Mr Justice Stegman also found that even if that blow could have not been inflicted on the deceased, the assault by the community could have also caused the death of the deceased. But before this Committee here there's evidence that the blow that he inflicted is believed to be the one which caused the death of the deceased. I submit that the offence was committed with the main objective to send a clear message to the attackers of the members of the ANC Youth League that they must stop harassing the ANC members and I also submit that that was committed as a result of the revenge of the killing of Lester Shoping.
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Leopeng, was there any other evidence of attacks in that area where the applicant lived, by the IFP? I don't recall any.
MR LEOPENG: Well before the evidence - I'm sorry, the applicant's testimony referred that there was attacks but never specific mention that there was attacks by the IFP. He just mentioned that the deceased, Mr Wielo, used to attack the members of the ANC.
ADV BOSMAN: Yes but you were referring now to attacks by - he was sending a clear message to the attackers of the ANC. From the evidence I gathered that the only attacks were attacks by Mr Wielo individual?
MR LEOPENG: Well my submission on that basis that for a possible - the way I understand this, that possible attacks that might come was sending a clear message that attacks on the ANC members never done, not allowed.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
MR LEOPENG: I submit Chairperson that the offence was committed with a political motive and that he strongly believed that as Mr Wielo attacked the ANC Youth League he was supposed to also suffered the same consequences and in the circumstances I beg the Committee to grant the applicant amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you Mr Leopeng. Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Chairperson.
The applicant states that the functions of the SDU and the Street Committee was to protect the community against attacks by vigilante groups. Now clearly Mr Wielo did not form any part of vigilante group, there's no evidence before us either that he was part of a vigilante group and also part of their function was to protect the community against the opposing party which was the IFP and on the evidence before us, there's no evidence before us that Mr Wielo was a member of the IFP and it seems that they lived in the same area and the applicant as the chairperson had dealings with Mr Wielo previously and it seemed that it was sorted out quite amicably but in this instance it seems as if it was the 25th December and it seems that it is probably that lots of people were celebrating, probably had too much to drink and the applicant did say that on that particular day emotions are generally very high and they do act out of normal behaviour and it seems as if the deceased was just in an unfortunate position that he had the altercation with the ANC members and it is not as if the deceased pursued them in a fight but it was the other way around where the ANC comrades actually pursued him and tried to attack him and also probably people that were in the house, also innocent people that they were willing to drag out of the house as well and it is just unfortunate that this 13 year old was in the mix with these people and he was the forefront just going in and everybody had knives and so forth and it was clear that Mr Wielo thought that his life was in danger and it is my submission that Mr Wielo was actually acting in self-defence there when he did grab and stab - I just can't get to the name of the deceased - yes that is correct, Lester.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes but isn't that pure speculation.
MS LOCKHAT: Well, to deter the attackers from coming to attack his house further he had to do something. That was one way of probably procuring that he wouldn't get hurt and that people would just probably run away.
CHAIRPERSON: So you kill a 13 year old in self-defence?
MS LOCKHAT: I think it was just - it wasn't a matter of killing a 13 year old, I think it was just that - Lester was at the forefront, he was the person in front of the whole group approaching the deceased.
ADV DE JAGER: He entered the door first?
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, so it could have been anybody, it was just unfortunate that this person was a 13 year old.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes but now how do you justify your submission that it was in self-defence? No matter where a thirteen year old is, whether he's in the middle, in the front or the back? How do you justify that submission? That's what I'm asking you, I mean it's possible?
MS LOCKHAT: Ja, just that - it's possible.
CHAIRPERSON: It's as speculative as anything else, it's as speculative as the suggestion that people drink on Christmas day? I don't know if the suggestion is that people in the townships drink on a Christmas day or what the basis of the suggestion is but I know a lot of people who don't drink on a Christmas day.
ADV DE JAGER: But there's evidence on record that he was drunk, Wielo, on Christmas day.
CHAIRPERSON: Well that might be but your submission that it was Christmas day and the sudden suggestion that on Christmas day people could have been drinking is speculative as the self-defence as I say, unless it is one's view that people in the townships drink on a Christmas day, that's what they do?
MS LOCKHAT: It has been noted, Chairperson, I take the point. I don't know whether the applicant was in a position to actually stop the crowd at the point where he got to the incident because by then they had the deceased in a wheelbarrow and carted him and they had attacked him by then already so whether the deceased, whether the applicant had delivered the final blow or not is really - the comrades would have probably killed him anyway.
The only other submission that I'd like to just present is that I don't know whether the applicant was in a position to actually stop the proceedings being the chairperson of the Street Committee but as there was a crowd already and attacking these persons, but the only other issue is that the applicant wasn't sure what the altercation was all about, he wasn't sure, they didn't come and report this incident to him as the chairperson but they just got him there anyway. But whether he was able to stop it, I doubt whether he would have been in that position and whether he would have been able to report this matter to higher authorities, to the police for instance, but as he said they didn't get much cooperation from the police anyway.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and besides on his version this thing had a long history?
MS LOCKHAT: That is correct, Chairperson. Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Lockhat. Have you got any response Mr Leopeng?
MR LEOPENG IN REPLY: Yes, in response to my learned colleague's last issue on whether to be able to stop the group which attacked the deceased, Mr Wielo, I respectfully submit that it is the evidence, the testimony of the applicant that when he arrived he was only told that Mr Wielo killed an ANC Youth League member and then he then took a knopkierie from one of the members and hit the deceased. He only learnt about the interaction between accused numbers 2, 3, 4 and 5 and the deceased afterwards so he strongly believed that he is acting on the basis that Mr Wielo killed and ANC Youth League member and that's all.
ADV BOSMAN: Mr Leopeng, if I may just ask, if you look at page 2 paragraph 10(b) in the application, the applicant states there
"I lost my temper and struck Mr Wielo with a knopkierie"
Now if he simply lost his temper does that not effect the whole concept or idea of a political objective? There in the middle of the paragraph.
MR LEOPENG: I will argue Mr Chairperson on the basis that he lost temper after hearing that - I mean Mr Wielo killed Lester, he was so angry that after learning of the death of Mr Lester, that's how I understand it. He got angry after learning the death of Mr Lester Shoping, that's how I understand the context of this.
ADV BOSMAN: But I'm trying to convey to you is in those circumstances would a person not say he had once again as an IFP member, as a political opponent, he had killed one of our members and I killed him because of that and not because I lost my temper?
MR LEOPENG: Well he most probably will say I killed him because he killed a member of our youth league, not because he lost his temper.
ADV BOSMAN: Lost his temper, that this is what is the question in my mind is that his primary motivation here is "I lost my temper."
MR LEOPENG: Yes but I submit and humbly submit and strongly believe that the motive of the killing was as a result of the killing of Mr Lester Shoping after learning about the death of Mr Lester Shoping.
ADV BOSMAN: No, no, no, that I accept but the driving force was that he lost his temper?
MR LEOPENG: Yes I see it, I agree with the understanding of the context herein, I'm just trying to explain that maybe the wording of the statement here, you know, but the context I understand it is because of the result of learning of the death of Mr Shoping, then I lost my temper and then I killed him.
CHAIRPERSON: Are those your further submissions?
MR LEOPENG: No further submissions, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Yes that takes care of the evidence for all the aspects of this application. The matter will be considered and a decision formulated and the parties notified as soon as that decision is available. So we will reserve the decision in this matter.
MR LEOPENG: I'm indebted to the Committee.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. I think that concludes our roll Ms Lockhat?
MS LOCKHAT: It does indeed conclude our roll, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you very much. Then we must thank you, Mr Leopeng, for your assistance and Ms Lockhat as well for your assistance in these matters that we've heard. We also wish to thank all those people that exerted themselves to make it possible for us have this hearing. We are always aware of these efforts and grateful for them and also to the members of the public who have taken the trouble to attend the proceedings. We're adjourned.
HEARING ADJOURNS
