CHAIRPERSON: That being so, how do you propose to proceed, do you want to call your next witness?
MR NYOKA: Yes, please.
I call Mr Lindile Stemele, Honourable Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stemele, are you prepared to take an oath?
LINDILE STEMELE: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, Mr Nyoka.
EXAMINATION BY MR NYOKA: Thank you, Honourable Chair.
Mr Stemele, on page 24 of the bundle an affidavit of your statement is contained, do you confirm the contents of this affidavit?
MR STEMELE: Yes.
MR NYOKA: May it be marked Exhibit C, Honourable Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)
MR NYOKA: Yes, okay.
Mr Stemele, relating to this incident, can you tell us about Sammy Xagwana, what the two of you discussed relating to this incident and when?
MR STEMELE: Sammy Xagwana was my relative. We were working together in P J Animals. Whilst we were working together we would discuss and we talked about the salaries we were receiving, it was very low.
As we were still discussing this issue about the farm appeared and he told me that he was working at a certain farm. I asked him for how long he worked in this farm. He told me that he didn't make the - he was not employed there for a long time but he knew the house in this farm. I then asked him whether we can find money in that house. He said there was money in the house. I asked him what else was available in the house. He told me that there are weapons in the house, there are guns there.
After getting that information from him, knowing that we were looking for weapons or firearms, I then went to Xholani who was training me. I told him about this. After discussing this with Xholani he told me to bring Sammy with. I did that and he spoke to him. He told him about this. After that he asked him to take us and show us this place. We did got to Addo to look for this place, to look at his place. We went inside. We cut the fence, we went in. We looked around the house and he told us the time when the owner returns, it was about 7 o'clock. He told us that he's returning home at about 7 o'clock.
We then wanted to wait and see for ourselves that really he is returning home at that time. We waited and he indeed came back home at that time. We saw him going inside the house. He went in the garage. We then returned back. Nothing was done on that particular day.
It happened in that month when we went to this place, it was on a Monday, he came to me with Kenneth and Mr Mali. We went to Addo on that day. We took a taxi and it was near to the farm of oranges. We then walked 30 kilometres and we arrived in that house. ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Can I interrupt, Mr Stemele. What time did you go to this farm?
MR STEMELE: It was about 5 o'clock when we left Port Elizabeth.
CHAIRPERSON: What time did you reach the Addo house?
MR STEMELE: If I remember well, it was around 6 o'clock but it was winter so it was dark at that time.
CHAIRPERSON: What time did you expect Mr de Villiers to arrive?
MR STEMELE: We expected to arrive at about 7 o'clock because we saw him when we first went there arriving at seven.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you have to be an hour early? If you expected him to arrive at seven, why were you there at 6 o'clock?
MR STEMELE: We didn't arrive there exactly at six.
CHAIRPERSON: What time did you arrive at the Addo house? I thought you said you arrived at about 6 o'clock.
MR STEMELE: Not exactly 6 o'clock.
CHAIRPERSON: What time then?
MR STEMELE: I can say it was after six or half past six.
CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed.
MR STEMELE: We went in through the hole, as we have cut the fence.
CHAIRPERSON: When had you cut the hole through the fence?
MR STEMELE: When we went there for the first time, when we went to inspect the place.
CHAIRPERSON: And was that three days before the incident?
MR STEMELE: I can say so.
CHAIRPERSON: We want your evidence, was it three days before the incident took place?
MR STEMELE: We cut the fence a month before.
CHAIRPERSON: A month before. When did you reconnoitre this place?
MR STEMELE: If I remember well it was in July.
CHAIRPERSON: With whom were you when you did the reconnaissance?
MR STEMELE: ...(no English translation)
CHAIRPERSON: Who was with you when you did this reconnaissance?
MR STEMELE: It was myself, Xholani and Sammy Xagwana.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may proceed. So you went through the hole that you had cut previously in July and what happened?
MR STEMELE: We went through the hole, we waited and we waited until seven. He didn't arrive. We waited and after a while we saw a van coming in through the gate. After that it parked in a driveway near the door. After the bakkie had switched off the lights we went out of that hiding place and we surrounded the van. Kenneth was sitting on the, was on the passenger's side, on the other side where the passenger sits. Myself and Xholani and Tamsanqa, we were on the driver's side.
CHAIRPERSON: This Tamsanqa, would that be Mr Mali?
MR STEMELE: It's Mr Mali. We pointed him with a gun. We were not aware that there was someone else at the back of the bakkie. Someone came out unexpectedly. We didn't know that there was someone there. He went out of the bakkie and ran away. Kenneth tried to follow, chase this person, unfortunately he couldn't' find him or he couldn't catch him.
He fired by mistake. The person ran into the house and the door closed behind him. ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: If you say Kenneth followed this person who ran out of the bakkie and he couldn't catch him, what do you mean, do you mean that he couldn't catch him as he was running, or maybe he couldn't catch him while he was running away? Is it a question of not catching him or a question of not being able to locate him, after running after the man from the bakkie? May I be assisted by the translator?
INTERPRETER: I don't get it clearly also, the applicant is listening to channel two.
MR STEMELE: The person ran with a high speed, he ran into the house. Kenneth couldn't catch him, couldn't find him, couldn't catch him because he ran very fast.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it "catch" or "not find him"? That is the difficulty I'm experiencing. I seem to understand him to be saying: "Kenneth could not find him."
INTERPRETER: The problem is that the applicant is listening to channel 2, so I can't get it clearly from him even if I try to communicate with him through channel 3.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh, can somebody assist the applicant to change to the channel which will enable the translator to connect him in so that we can get clarity of that type of evidence? Can we get some technical assistance?
TECHNICIAN ASSISTS WITH CHANNELS
CHAIRPERSON: Madam Translator, can you then just try and get clarity from the applicant, what he means when he says that, whether he actually, whether Kenneth could not catch up with him or whether Kenneth could not locate him?
INTERPRETER: He couldn't catch him, or he couldn't catch up with him because the gentleman ran away in such a speed that he couldn't catch him. ...(Xhosa) "catch him", that's what he says.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Ma'm.
ADV BOSMAN: May I just ask for some clarity here, what do you mean by saying: "He fired by mistake"?
MR STEMELE: I mean that the firearm that he was using had a problem with the trigger. The firearm that he had had a problem with the trigger.
CHAIRPERSON: If you say the person ran at such a speed that Kenneth couldn't catch up with him or couldn't catch him, do you mean that he ran straight to the house?
MR STEMELE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Did this person open the door?
MR STEMELE: If I'm not mistaken I think the door was slightly open, so he ran and he got inside the house and the door closed quickly thereafter.
CHAIRPERSON: The door that he used, how far was the door from the garage?
MR STEMELE: There's one garage door and that door was used by the people and the cars. There was only one garage door.
CHAIRPERSON: If you say he ran into the house, do you mean that he went ...
MR STEMELE: Yes, he went through the garage door, he went through the garage and got into the house.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you see him when he was getting into the house?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I saw him.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you see him running into the garage and you saw him running into the house?
MR STEMELE: I saw him getting in, using the garage door. That was all.
CHAIRPERSON: You only saw him getting into the garage, what I want to know is, because you keep on referring to a house, did you see him getting into the garage and inside the house?
MR STEMELE: To try and clarify that, the garage door was in the house and I think it looks like you get in through the garage door and to the house.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Mr Nyoka?
MR NYOKA: Thank you.
Mr Stemele, what happened after that?
MR STEMELE: I heard a sound, I heard a gunfire, I heard a gunshot that was Xholani's position. While he was shooting I heard a - I heard him shooting the farmer.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you hear him or did you see him?
MR STEMELE: I just heard the gunshot. It was directed to the - I heard the gunshot directed to the window of the car. After that we saw people at the window.
ADV MOTATA: Just there, Mr Stemele, I'm confused. You say you heard a gunshot directed at the window. It is confusing to me, were you looking at the person who was shooting at the car?
MR STEMELE: I only paid attention to the person who was in the car. I was paying attention to the person in the car at the time. I heard that gunshot and that was, I realised that that was Xholani's firearm and shooting Mr de Villiers.
ADV MOTATA: You never paid attention to the gentleman who ran into the house through the garage door, did you?
MR STEMELE: I never paid attention thereafter.
ADV MOTATA: You directly took your attention to the guy who was next to the driver of the bakkie, is that what I'm understanding?
MR STEMELE: I was looking at the driver, that is so.
ADV MOTATA: Thank you, Mr Nyoka, that is all.
MR NYOKA: Proceed, what happened?
MR STEMELE: After that gunshot it looked like the people in the house heard that and they looked through the window. Xholani pointed the gun to them and he fired. I don't know how many times but he fired at them and we ran away thereafter.
We used the same route that we used when we were coming in but we, not completely. We later decided to take another route that went through the forest until we reached a certain township called Zwelitsha.
We saw a kombi there, a parked kombi there at Zwelitsha. I went straight to the driver of the kombi and I requested him to give us, to provide us with transport to go to Port Elizabeth. He agreed, he brought us to Port Elizabeth. He left us at Motherwell. We spent a night there at Kenneth's place.
MR NYOKA: Mr Stemele, one of the very first things that you said was that your discussions with Mr Sammy Xagwana were about your situation at work as far as income is concerned and you immediately said there was a place where you could get money, how far did those discussions about money go?
MR STEMELE: Those discussions, we were planning to go and rob this farm but he didn't know what was to be robbed there and I told him a lie, I told him that we were going to rob money in that farm.
MR NYOKA: Were there discussions before about robbing the farm for arms?
MR STEMELE: As I was trained by Xholani, he used to tell me that we did not have firearms. When I heard from Sammy, saying that there were firearms in that farm, I went to Xholani to tell him about the news.
MR NYOKA: And why was ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: May I interpose, Mr Nyoka, just to get clarity on Mr Stemele's evidence.
You are saying that the discussion you had with Sammy was because of the grievance you had about the low salaries you both were getting at where you were both employed, yes?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that came in our discussion, as we were chatting that came out. It was not a very serious discussion but we were working and chatting at the same time and the subject came.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but the subject that was discussed then was how you would be able to supplement the income, is that not how I understood your earlier evidence? And that is how Sammy came to identify the house of Mr de Villiers.
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct, Ma'm.
CHAIRPERSON: And that it was subsequent to that discussion which had centred around the money that you were told that, well there are also firearms?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: But central to your discussion was how you could supplement your income?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR NYOKA: Did the money subject ever emerge after that?
MR STEMELE: No, it was never mentioned.
MR NYOKA: If it was central in your discussions, why did it not emerge after that?
MR STEMELE: We never discussed anything about wages because my intentions were to go there to that farm and get the firearms. I told him a lie and said we were looking for money, we were going to rob money. In his intention he thought that we were going to rob money on that farm.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm completely lost, don't confuse me, Mr Stemele. At what stage did you lie to Sammy Xagwana about your intention to want to go and rob for whatever reason? At what stage did you proffer this line?
MR STEMELE: As we were chatting together with Sammy, I told him then, I told him a lie.
CHAIRPERSON: So he tells you about a house where you can get money to supplement your income and then you tell him a lie about your interest in going to rob that house for purposes of money, is that the lie you are referring to in this instance?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR NYOKA: And why did Sammy not accompany you to the farm if you had discussions with him about the farm?
MR STEMELE: We did not want him to know that we went there to get the firearms.
MR NYOKA: Is that the reason why he didn't accompany you?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is the reason, Sir.
MR NYOKA: Your co-applicant, Mr Mali, did you ever tell him about the discussions relating to money, even though you were lying? Did you tell him about the money discussions, your co-applicant, Mr Mali?
MR STEMELE: No, he was told by Xholani that there is a place where we could get firearms.
MR NYOKA: Whilst you were in prison up to this day, did you tell him that you were going to say what you said today about money? Can you answer please?
MR STEMELE: Mr Mali only knows that we went there to get firearms but Sammy knows that we went there to rob money. Mr Mali knows nothing about the money. I'm the only one who mentioned that to Sammy.
MR NYOKA: Did you tell your legal representative, myself, about the discussions with Mr Xagwana about the money issue, except for now?
MR STEMELE: No, I did not mentioned that, Sir.
MR NYOKA: Why not? We are here to tell the whole truth, why did you not tell me?
MR STEMELE: Sir, I'm telling the truth now.
MR NYOKA: Why did you not tell me?
MR STEMELE: If my memory serves me well, Sir, I even lied in front of the police.
MR NYOKA: Okay. Let me put it like this, is there anything that you have lied to me about that you want to tell me so that I know that we are clear about lies? Is there anything that you'd lied to me that you've not told me?
MR STEMELE: No, there is nothing else, Sir.
MR NYOKA: I am very relieved about that. Finally, were you a member of any organisation at the time that this incident or offence was committed or occurred, were you a member of an organisation?
MR STEMELE: I was an ANC supporter.
MR NYOKA: From when until when?
MR STEMELE: From 1995, Sir.
MR NYOKA: No further questions ...(intervention)
MR STEMELE: From 1985, sorry.
MR NYOKA: Were you ever told of any meeting where the late Mr Hani was present?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I was once told by Xholani but he didn't tell me about the details.
MR NYOKA: You are applying for amnesty for murder, first count, the second count being 2 attempted murders and the third count being robbery, did you associate yourself with the actions of those who actually fired the shots, regarding murder and attempted murder?
MR STEMELE: Yes, Sir, I associate myself because I was part in that process.
MR NYOKA: And did you testify in the High Court case of 1993?
MR STEMELE: I never testified.
MR NYOKA: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NYOKA
CHAIRPERSON: Just on a point of clarification. Mr Stemele, was Xholani aware of the discussion you had had with Sammy Xagwana about money?
MR STEMELE: Xholani had no knowledge about that.
CHAIRPERSON: In the discussion that Xholani had with Sammy Xagwana, did Sammy Xagwana not disclose to Xholani about the money that would be found in Mr de Villiers' house?
MR STEMELE: Xholani was together with Sammy and on that particular day I left him there, I did not go into the house, I left. I did not hear anything about the discussion that was taking place inside the house.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you present when Sammy Xagwana had a discussion with Xholani wherein he gave details about the location of the de Villiers' house in Addo?
MR STEMELE: I brought Sammy to Xholani and I left the two of them there. I was not present when they were discussing.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Mr Schubart?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
Mr Stemele, on how many occasions did you go to Mr de Villiers' house?
MR STEMELE: We went there for the first time to look at the house, to check or inspect the house.
MR SCHUBART: And was the second occasion when the incident occurred?
MR STEMELE: On that day of the incident it was our second time there.
MR SCHUBART: And you said there was about a month in between the first visit and the second visit.
MR STEMELE: Yes, Sir.
MR SCHUBART: Now when you went to the house the second time, that's the day of the incident, did your group have - you had two firearms with you, is that right?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Where did you get those firearms from?
MR STEMELE: The firearms were brought by Xholani.
MR SCHUBART: Do you know where he got the firearms from?
MR STEMELE: I do not know where the firearms were coming from.
MR SCHUBART: Before you went on this incident, did you know that there were going to be firearms that were going to be taken with you?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I knew, Sir.
MR SCHUBART: When did you know about the firearms?
MR STEMELE: I only saw the firearm on that day of the incident.
MR SCHUBART: Was it in fact when you were on your way to the farm that you saw the firearm for the first time?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Before that you didn't know that there were going to be firearms that were going to be taken with you, is that correct?
MR STEMELE: I knew that there would be firearms that would be taken with us.
MR SCHUBART: How did you know that?
MR STEMELE: I knew very well that we wouldn't go to that place without firearms.
MR SCHUBART: And why not?
MR STEMELE: It is because we didn't know the situation there, we didn't know what was there, what would the situation would be like when we get there.
MR SCHUBART: So did you just assume that there would be firearms taken along, and then you in fact saw them just before you got to the farm?
MR STEMELE: I knew that we wouldn't go there without firearms.
MR SCHUBART: Was it easy for you to get, to obtain firearms?
MR STEMELE: No, it was not easy.
MR SCHUBART: Well did you not concern yourself about the plans that would be made to get firearms before you went to the farm?
MR STEMELE: As a person that was trained by Xholani, it is him who would go and look for firearms.
MR SCHUBART: Did you know that he would be able to obtain firearms?
MR STEMELE: Yes, Sir.
MR SCHUBART: And for someone in his position, would it be fairly easy to get firearms?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: So if he'd wanted to be involved in any previous robberies to get arms he would have been able to get firearms to take with him, is that correct?
MR STEMELE: I'm not sure about that, Sir.
MR SCHUBART: At the time of this incident, were you an MK member?
MR STEMELE: No, I was not a member.
MR SCHUBART: Do you remember that there was a criminal trial?
MR STEMELE: Yes, Sir.
MR SCHUBART: After you were arrested did you in fact assist the police to quite an extent with their investigations?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Did you in fact take them to Addo to point Sammy out to them?
MR STEMELE: They took - yes, they took me to Addo. The police took me to Addo.
MR SCHUBART: Did they also take you there so that you could show them who Sammy was?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: And did you in fact say to the police that you'd been tricked about this whole incident?
INTERPRETER: Can the speaker please repeat the question?
MR SCHUBART: Did you say to the police that with regard to this whole incident that you were tricked into taking part in it?
MR STEMELE: I was not tricked, Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that to the police, yes or no?
MR STEMELE: No, I never mentioned that.
MR SCHUBART: Did you say to the police that you were forced to take part in this incident?
MR STEMELE: I was never forced to be on that mission and I never mentioned that to the police.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that to the police? Did you tell the police that you were forced to participate in this?
MR STEMELE: I did not tell that to the police.
MR SCHUBART: Did you tell the police that you had gone on this incident in order to try and obtain money from the farmer?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I told them that but I was lying.
MR SCHUBART: Did you tell them that you'd gone there to get firearms?
MR STEMELE: No, I never mentioned that.
MR SCHUBART: Because I just want to put it to you that the evidence of the investigating officer, Mr Treitsman, and this is on the criminal record at pages 260 to 261, his evidence which wasn't contested was that you told him that you were tricked to do this thing. And I presume that means to take part in this incident. Did you not say that to him?
MR STEMELE: I did not say that because the evidence that I gave I gave to a person who was speaking Afrikaans and I didn't even understand what he was saying and what he was writing also.
MR SCHUBART: Now can you tell us the first time that you went to the house, that was in the July of 1992, on that occasion did you have firearms with you?
CHAIRPERSON: You mean at the time when they were going to do the reconnaissance, Mr Schubart?
MR SCHUBART: Yes, ...(indistinct) Sorry.
Yes, on that occasion when you went to reconnoitre the area.
MR STEMELE: I don't remember us carrying any firearms.
MR SCHUBART: And that includes the people who were with you as well?
MR STEMELE: I don't remember seeing anyone with a firearm.
MR SCHUBART: On that occasion, that was now the first time when you went to reconnoitre, did you on that occasion intend to rob the farmer of anything?
MR STEMELE: We never had intentions to rob but we went there to look, to reconnoitre the house, to check the house, to look at it.
MR SCHUBART: Because as I understand the statement that you made, and this appears at page 84 of the papers, that according to your statement you said that you'd gone to that farm to rob the farm. And this was on the first occasion that you went to the farm, not the occasion of the incident itself. Is that not correct?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stemele, Mr Schubart is in fact referring to the confession that you made in 1993. I don't know whether you have had an occasion to have sight of that confession. If you have not, I would like you to indicate to the Committee so that we can give you an opportunity to quickly have sight of that confession. We would not expect you to comment on the content of a confession which was made approximately five to six years ago.
So if you would like to have time to have sight of your confession which you made in 1993, we will gladly accord you and afford you that opportunity. Has your lawyer shown you the confession that you are being referred to now and being questioned upon by Mr Schubart?
Mr Nyoka, you can come to our assistance here.
MR NYOKA: Thank you, Honourable Chair. The confession was read and understood by the applicant. He is fully conversant with the contents.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
Mr Stemele, now that I've been told that you are fully aware of the confession, you may proceed to answer Mr Schubart's question.
Will you repeat your question again, Mr Schubart?
MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
In the confession you indicated that on the first occasion you went to this farm, that you went there with the purpose of robbing, is that correct or not correct?
MR STEMELE: The evidence that I gave in Court was a lie.
MR SCHUBART: Further in this confession, also on page 84 of the papers, it indicated that it was the intention of yourself and Sammy to catch the lady of the farm when she arrived but that you were unable to do that, is that correct?
MR STEMELE: That is not true.
CHAIRPERSON: Xholani was also there, Mr Schubart, maybe he will remember if you include Xholani.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
Xholani was also present, it was the three of you who were there on the first occasion that you went. Was it the intention of the three of you to catch firstly the lady of the farm?
MR STEMELE: As we went there before we went there and looked at this farm. There was nothing else thereafter. We left the place. There's nothing else that we did.
MR SCHUBART: Can you perhaps explain to us why it would have been contained in this confession that on that first occasion that you went there, that you hid yourselves and that you tried to catch the lady of the farm and thereafter the farmer himself? Do you know how it came about that this came into the confession?
MR STEMELE: I don't know anything about that.
CHAIRPERSON: Now you made the confession, Mr Stemele. When you told the police what is contained in your confession, were you telling the truth or were you lying? You can't say you have no knowledge thereof because this confession was made by you.
MR STEMELE: As I've already said before, everything that I said in front of the police was a lie.
ADV MOTATA: Was it also a lie that at the first time in July when you went there you were in the company of Sammy and Xholani, was it a lie as well?
MR STEMELE: That is true.
MR SCHUBART: Why would you tell the police this lie, what was the purpose of telling them that you tried to catch first the lady and then the farmer, if it wasn't true?
MR STEMELE: I don't know anything about that, Sir, that statement, the one that you've just mentioned.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stemele, either you are able to explain why you gave that statement, this is your confession, you can't say you have no knowledge. Are you saying that you are not the author of this confession? Are you making a disclaimer of this confession or are you saying that you lied, the content of your confession contains lies? And if so, Mr Schubart would like to know why you lied. Let's get to things. Do you agree that this document represents the confession you made?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I agree that I made a statement but I disagree with the fact that we ...
CHAIRPERSON: Now in that confession you've stated that you went to the farm because you wanted to rob, in fact you were unsuccessful because the lady of the farm - you were unable to get hold of the lady of the farm. I mean your arrangements went into disarray but your original intention was to go and rob the lady of the farm. That is what is contained in your confession, did you say that to the police?
MR STEMELE: What I told the police was this: we went there to the house, to the farm and we reconnoitred the farm. I did not tell them that our intention was to go there and rob.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stemele, answer a very simple question. Are you saying what is contained in your confession did not come from you, you did not say this? What does it that you are saying, this does not reflect the truth of what you told the police? I mean lying is something else but are you saying that you never said what you said here at all?
MR STEMELE: I will agree.
CHAIRPERSON: With what are you agreeing? That you said what is contained in this confession?
MR STEMELE: Perhaps I cannot remember well.
CHAIRPERSON: Your legal representative has just confirmed to us that you are fully aware of the contents of your confession, what is it that you don't remember? You also agreed and conceded that you are fully conversant with the contents of your confession. We just want to have time. We really need to get on with this application and finalise it. We are not going to be stuck into a situation where you are dilly-dallying. You are here to give evidence in the most honest manner that you can.
If you don't understand something, we are happy to clarify issues for you but we wouldn't want you to be dilly-dallying. So what is it that you are agreeing to, that you made this confession to the police, to one Capt G G McClaren on the 23rd of August 1992?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I made that confession.
CHAIRPERSON: Now why did you lie to him? That is the question posed by Mr Schubart. Why did you lie to him that you had gone to Mr de Villiers' house and tried to rob the lady there when you were in the company of Xholani and Sammy?
MR STEMELE: Let me say this directly. I never mentioned that we went there to rob the lady. I did that - I made a confession statement in front of the police but I never mentioned the fact that when we went there, we intended to rob a lady.
CHAIRPERSON: You know I don't know what you are saying now. You have just admitted to having made this confession. Now you are saying you didn't make this confession.
What is it that we - which version are we then to take from you? Did you or did you not make this confession? Did you or did you not say to the police that you tried to rob the lady of the house when you were in the company of Sammy and Xholani?
MR STEMELE: I never mentioned that our intention was to go there and rob the lady. We went there with Xholani and Sammy to inspect the place, but we did not go there to rob a lady.
CHAIRPERSON: Now did you not say, and I quote at page 34
"We arrived at the farm and Sammy showed us the place where we can hide ourselves under the trees. We hid ourselves until such time that the mother of the farm arrived. Unfortunately she was too quick to get into the garage, so we did not get a chance to grab her. Sammy said that we must wait for the owner of the farm since we could not get the mother of the farm. We waited until the owner of the farm arrived but he was also too quick to get into the garage, so we could not get him. We then left to Sammy's place in Addo where we slept."
Did you not say that to the police?
MR STEMELE: The only thing that I mentioned was that the owner of the farm came quickly and went quickly inside the garage. We never got a chance to grab him or catch him. We left. I never mentioned anything about robbing the lady of that farm.
CHAIRPERSON: But then the point is, you had earlier on went with Xholani and Sammy to try and rob this farm. Do you at least agree to that?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I agree.
CHAIRPERSON: And do you agree that happened in July 1992?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I agree.
CHAIRPERSON: At least we are making a start. Please proceed, Mr Schubart.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you. And on that occasion, this is now during July where you were with Xholani and Sammy and you wanted to rob the farmer on that occasion, you say none of you had firearms? So you were going to rob him without having firearms, is that correct?
MR STEMELE: We went there to have a look at the farm. We did not go there to rob.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you say in your confession that you went there to rob the farm in July 1992? Why did you say that?
MR STEMELE: We only went to rob the farm later, when we were going there for the second time.
CHAIRPERSON: I know, but why did you in your confession state that you went there in July '92 to go and - in fact your confession does not indicate the month in which you went there. It's you who has just told us that it was July. Now in your confession you say that you went there with Sammy and Xholani to rob the farmer.
We understand that it was not your intention to rob what you have termed in your confession: "the mother of the farm" but that your intention was to rob the farmer. Why did you say that if it was never your intention to rob the farmer? We merely need an explanation why you lied then and your version is different today from that which is contained from the evidence contained in your confession.
MR STEMELE: Let me agree. It might happen that I forgot. I apologise for that.
CHAIRPERSON: I accept your apology even though I don't think we really, you have anything to apologise for. All that I need to know is that in your confession you stated that you went with Sammy and Xholani to rob the farmer, whereas in your evidence today you say that the reason why you went there was to conduct a reconnaissance.
Now if we are to understand the version that you are putting up today, the intention of going there with Sammy and Xholani was to conduct a reconnaissance and not to rob. What explanation do you give for having stated in your confession that you went there to rob? Am I making myself simpler?
MR STEMELE: I have nothing to say about that.
CHAIRPERSON: Let's proceed, Mr Schubart.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
You've read your confession and without telling me whether what is stated in it is true or not true, can you perhaps tell us, the rest of your confession, does it contain what you in fact told the police? Whether it's a lie or not but is that what you told the police, what is contained in this confession?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Schubart, I think from what we can gather from Mr Stemele we would take the whole day if we were to phrase questions in that fashion. Let's be specific. Maybe if you can just give an indication what he said in his confession which you want him to admit, whether it was the truth or not.
MR SCHUBART: Very well, thank you.
In your confession on page 85 towards the bottom of the page, it appears there that when you went to the farm on the occasion of the incident itself, that on your way there you asked both of them, and this would have been Xholani and Kenneth, why they had firearms as your plan was to use knives? That is what is contained in your confession, do you have any comment about that?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I did ask that question.
MR SCHUBART: Why did you ask the question, did you not expect them to have firearms?
MR STEMELE: First of all the reason for me to ask that question is solely because we were not going to use the firearms, we were just going to threaten the people.
MR SCHUBART: Were you going to threaten them, with what were you going to threaten them?
MR STEMELE: We were going to threaten them with knives, using knives.
MR SCHUBART: So you in fact were surprised to see that there were firearms as well?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I was surprised.
CHAIRPERSON: How is that so, Mr Stemele, if you have just given evidence when you were questioned by Mr Schubart as to whether you were aware that firearms were going to be used, and your unequivocal response was "yes" you were aware.
And you were asked at what stage you became aware that firearms were going to be used. You then said you became aware en route to Mr de Villiers' house, but your response to the earlier question was you knew you were going to use firearms even before you went there because you wouldn't be able to go to such a place without firearms as you didn't know what the situation would be like when you got there. That is your evidence. Now what made you to be so surprised?
MR SCHUBART: If you see the firearm for the very first time it's a frightening situation. I was seeing a firearm for the very first time.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you really expect us to believe that evidence?
MR STEMELE: You were trained by Mr Xholani.
MR STEMELE: There were no firearms involved in that training, it was just physical training.
CHAIRPERSON: And the reason why you went to rob was to enable your unit and other units to be armed, using the firearms that you would have stolen from the farms.
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm at a loss. And you have just stated and confirmed that you knew you were going to use firearms, you knew before the operation got underway, during the planning, that you were going to use firearms. By your own admission you couldn't have undertaken a mission of this nature without having to use firearms, they were a necessary weapon. For your mission to succeed you had to rely on them, is that not so?
MR STEMELE: Yes, I said so.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you, I'll carry on with a different aspect.
On the day of the incident it's common cause that the farmer, Mr de Villiers was shot, you remember that he was shot hey?
MR STEMELE: Yes.
MR SCHUBART: Was it necessary to shoot him?
MR STEMELE: Yes, it was necessary because the mission had failed and he was shot at because we did not want him to pursue us.
MR SCHUBART: That was the only reason why you shot him?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Now the same sort of question that were put to Mr Mali, why was it necessary to shoot him to the extent that he died? Why not, as the Honourable Chairperson put to Mr Mali, shoot him in the foot and then you can't ran after you.
MR STEMELE: The intention was not to shoot to kill but we just wanted him not to be able to chase us.
MR SCHUBART: Yes, but the result was that he died. Why not shoot him for instance in the foot so that he can't chase you and also that he doesn't die? Then you'd be able to cover both intentions.
MR STEMELE: The way the bullet was fired, it looked like it hit him somewhere.
MR SCHUBART: But why was he not shot merely in a manner so that he would not be able to chase you instead of in a manner that he would die from the shot? Can you explain that?
MR STEMELE: I do not have a response to that question.
MR SCHUBART: And when you realised that the mission had failed, why not merely demobilise the vehicle that he was in as opposed to him himself?
MR STEMELE: As I've already mentioned that if we left him there maybe he would rush into the house and alert the people and the people would chase us. Maybe we would be shot at or be arrested on that scene. That is why we had to shoot him, so that he couldn't even move, he couldn't even chase us.
ADV MOTATA: Mr Schubart, may I come in here with your permission?
Mr Stemele, when did you people realise the mission had failed?
MR STEMELE: We realised that the mission had failed after Kenneth had misfired.
ADV MOTATA: Just take us through, misfired what and aiming at what? We were not there, I mean we are asking you to assist us. I don't know.
MR STEMELE: When the gentleman who was at the back of the bakkie ran quickly out of the bakkie and that led to Kenneth pulling his trigger by mistake.
CHAIRPERSON: How do you know that Kenneth pulled the trigger by mistake? Did he tell you that?
MR STEMELE: The firearm that he had, the trigger was not working properly. That is why I'm saying he fired by mistake.
CHAIRPERSON: But how do you know that he fired by mistake? Your evidence seems to suggest one thing and one thing to me, that Kenneth was flying at a fleeing person to stop that person from getting into the house and probably alerting the occupants therein.
MR STEMELE: That is my perception.
CHAIRPERSON: So it is in fact speculation, it is not a fact that Kenneth's firearm misfired or that Kenneth fired erroneously, as your papers would suggest and as your evidence would suggest?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is what I think, I think that Kenneth fired by mistake.
CHAIRPERSON: But didn't you have an occasion to discuss this matter with Kenneth?
MR STEMELE: It was later discussed, after that incident.
CHAIRPERSON: And what did he tell you about what you speculate to have been an error on his part caused by a defective machine he was using?
MR STEMELE: He also said that it was a mistake because the trigger was loose.
ADV MOTATA: Now it is making sense because you cannot say to us for instance, that "it was not our intention to kill him but to demobilise him", because you knew of that fact after the event. At the scene you did not know this, why can't you just be forthright and tell us: we subsequently discussed this and we realised why he shot at Mr de Villiers? Is it difficult to say so? Or wouldn't I be right that everything was discussed after you had left the scene of the crime and that's when everybody said why he did what he did at the scene of the crime?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
ADV MOTATA: You may proceed, Mr Schubart.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
At the incident itself, you gave us evidence that the people from the house looked out of the window and shots were fired at them as well, is that correct?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Now when the shots were fired at them, were you in the process of running away at that stage or were you still standing there at the scene?
MR STEMELE: I was already running away at the time.
MR SCHUBART: And had Mr de Villiers already been shot before the shots were fired towards the house and at the people at the house?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Because the impression I had from your affidavit on page 26 was that you first fired shots at the people in the house and then Mr de Villiers was shot.
CHAIRPERSON: That wouldn't be correct, Mr Schubart. I have also had the same difficulty you had except that you see the word "and" does not seem to indicate which event happened first, it's simply an indication that both happened. I initially read it in that fashion.
MR SCHUBART: Sorry, yes, it is perhaps ambiguous in that regard. Why were shots fired at the people who were in the house while you were running away?
MR STEMELE: We did not want the people there to see our faces.
MR SCHUBART: But while you were running away they wouldn't be able to see your faces in any event, even if you didn't fire the shots, so why fire the shots?
MR STEMELE: We wanted them to remain in the house. We did not want them to see us.
MR SCHUBART: Yes, but you've told us that you fired shots so that they wouldn't see your faces, now how would the firing of the shots prevent them from seeing your faces while you were running away?
MR STEMELE: The reason was this, there was a big light on the driveway and that was on. It would be easier for them to see our faces.
MR SCHUBART: Even while you were running away?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
MR SCHUBART: Can you tell us, why did you lie to your friend Sammy, when you told him that you were going to the house to rob for money?
MR STEMELE: The reason to tell Sammy a lie is I did not want Sammy to know that we were going there to get the firearms. I did not want to tell him that I was a member of the SDUs and that is why I lied to him.
MR SCHUBART: Since when had you been a member of the SDU?
MR STEMELE: I started in 1991.
MR SCHUBART: But you didn't become a member of the MK, is that right?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: May I interpose there, Mr Schubart?
Why didn't you want to tell him that you were a member of the SDU? That was no offence to be a member of the SDU.
MR STEMELE: I was told that I must never ever mention to anyone that I was a member of the SDU. That's what I was told.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you not think of recruiting Sammy who seems to have had valuable information when it comes to providing resources that you so dearly needed as a unit? Did you not think of recruiting him into your unit?
MR STEMELE: That did not occur to me.
ADV MOTATA: Were you told that the SDU is secret and that you shouldn't tell anybody that you are a member, was it a secret organisation?
MR STEMELE: I was told not to tell anyone, not to tell just anybody who would go on and tell people about the SDUs.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you know what political party Sammy supported?
MR STEMELE: No.
ADV BOSMAN: But if you only told Sammy that you were interested in money and that you were going to rob money, how did it come about that he told you about the firearms?
MR STEMELE: The reason for him to mention the firearms, he knew the house well inside. He used to see everything in the house because he used to work there.
ADV BOSMAN: Yes, but if you were talking money, why would he mention the firearms, how did that come about? Did you ask him whether the farmer had firearms or did he just mention it out of the blue? That is what I find peculiar.
MR STEMELE: He made mention of that and I also asked him.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Stemele, at the time when this information was given to you by Sammy, you were both working in the same place.
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And Sammy had worked for the de Villiers' at some other time, yes?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And you trusted him to be able to share the grievance you had against your employer about the low wages or salaries that he was giving you.
MR STEMELE: I trusted him because he was my relative.
CHAIRPERSON: And further, Sammy was your cousin, is that not so?
MR STEMELE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Now do you want us to believe that you wouldn't have been able to disclose a simple fact that you were a member of the SDU, not even to both a friend and a relative?
MR STEMELE: As I was told by Xholani that I'm not supposed to disclose that information to anyone, I was acting in accordance with what I was told by Xholani.
CHAIRPERSON: We find it very difficult to believe that you would be unable to disclose that part to a person who is both a co-worker, a person that you've shared a grievance with about the conditions of employment in your workplace and more importantly a relative, unless you had cause to believe that Sammy would sell out the information and that belief was based on something that Sammy had earlier on done. Otherwise we just find it improbable.
Mr Schubart?
MR SCHUBART: Thank you.
When Sammy gave you this information, where was he employed at that stage?
MR STEMELE: He was working temporarily at P J Animals.
MR SCHUBART: And what has become of Sammy, where is he now?
MR STEMELE: I don't know anything about him. I don't know his whereabouts.
MR SCHUBART: Have you not seen him since this incident?
MR STEMELE: I last saw him during a parade at Le Grange. I saw him there for the very last time.
MR SCHUBART: When was this?
MR STEMELE: When we were arrested, when we got arrested.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry to interfere again. It had been brought to my attention that it is important for us to end our proceedings at 4 o'clock for logistical reasons. I don't that this wouldn't be an appropriate moment for us to adjourn and reconvene tomorrow morning. Are you still going to be long with your cross-examination on Mr Stemele?
MR SCHUBART: No, I won't be long now, I don't intend being more than one further question.
CHAIRPERSON: Which will be fairly short?
MR SCHUBART: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR SCHUBART: If you'd managed to be successful with your objective and got into the farmhouse, would you have taken money from the farmhouse as well?
MR STEMELE: That would depend on my commander.
MR SCHUBART: Thank you, I've no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR SCHUBART
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Mr Schubart.
Unfortunately we've got to bring these proceedings to a close for today. Because of logistical reasons we can't proceed further than 4 o'clock. This matter will proceed again tomorrow at half past eight, thank you.
MR SCHUBART: Sorry?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes?
MR SCHUBART: I do have a problem tomorrow. I did mention it to my learned friend previously. Initially this matter was going to be heard yesterday and today and we've set aside these two days for this matter. It was expected to hopefully finish yesterday but go on to today. I do have a problem tomorrow. I could perhaps be available tomorrow afternoon but tomorrow morning would be very, would probably be impossible for me.
CHAIRPERSON: We'll allow the matter to stand down until tomorrow afternoon. What time tomorrow afternoon?
MR SCHUBART: Would 2 o'clock be in order?
CHAIRPERSON: The matter will therefore stand down until tomorrow morning at 2 o'clock.
MR SCHUBART: I'm indebted to you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Until 2 o'clock tomorrow.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
