MR LAMEY: The applicant's home language is Tswana, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koole, I understand that you prefer to use the Tswana language.
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you any objections to the taking of the oath?
JOHANNES KOOLE: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: Please be seated.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, just before I begin, in the bundle from page 14 onwards there is a supplementary bundle which is dated the 19th of December 1996, and this refers to a statement in the hands of the Attorney-General. I don't know if I should address the Committee very briefly regarding the background and how this came to be, whether it would be necessary to lead evidence on this and just move ahead to the supplementary affidavit which contains the necessary information which we can find from page 19 onwards and which was also then submitted before the prescribed cutoff date. I know that there has been evidence led about this aspect by this applicant previously, I don't know whether or not it is necessary, whether the Committee will deem it necessary for me to address the Committee very briefly on the particulars pertaining to this matter.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, you can proceed, there's no need to argue.
EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chair.
Mr Koole, I will begin on page 19. Is it correct that after you obtained legal representation initially an amnesty application was submitted where the Attorney-General's office assisted you and after that you obtained legal representation and a supplementary affidavit was submitted which can be found on page 19 of the bundle before the Committee, with reference then to this particular incident, the abduction of Glory Sedibe, up to page 31, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Furthermore, on page 24 and 26 there is a brief background pertaining to you, including the details of how you joined the South African Police, how you were transferred to the Vlakplaas unit and how you were applied within that context, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: And then to proceed immediately, you also request amnesty for your involvement in the abduction of September Sedibe from Swaziland, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: And in paragraph 1 of the bundle you have stated that it was during approximately 1985/1986, are you prepared to accept, based upon the other evidence, that this was in 1986?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Is it also correct that before the abduction of Sedibe, you were working with a group from Vlakplaas in the Piet Retief vicinity where you were fulfilling your regular duties?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Very well. Can we then proceed to how it came about that you became involved and went to Swaziland. Could you tell us briefly what the background to that would be?
INTERPRETER: May you please repeat the question, Sir.
MR LAMEY: I beg you pardon, do you want me to repeat the question? Mr Koole, would you briefly explain to the Committee how it came about that you went to Swaziland and from whom you received the instruction to go there.
MR KOOLE: I don't remember the date, but we were working around Piet Retief. I was called together with Nofomela and Mngade and then we were asked as to whether we have our passports.
MR LAMEY: When you refer to "they", who are these people that you refer to?
MR KOOLE: That is Mr de Kock who asked us as to whether we have our passports or not, then he told us to prepare ourselves because at that night we would be going to Swaziland to do a certain operation.
MR LAMEY: Did you then accompany a group to Swaziland?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Can you recall who accompanied you in that group?
MR KOOLE: I remember Mr Mngade, van Dyk and Mr de Kock and Mr Pienaar, but I am not able to remember others who accompanied us. I did not recall that Mr Mngade was there, but I recalled later that he was present.
CHAIRPERSON: You heard Mr de Kock's evidence.
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything with which you would disagree?
MR KOOLE: There is nothing which I am in disagreement with in his statement.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm that what he said as regards what happened there on that trip is correct?
MR KOOLE: There are other parts where I don't agree with him, but generally I do agree with what he has said.
CHAIRPERSON: Well maybe Mr Lamey, you can lead him on those parts that he doesn't agree with.
MR LAMEY: Could I then ask you immediately, Mr Koole, now that we have clarity, what are the aspects regarding which you disagree with Mr de Kock?
MR KOOLE: The first point is we were issued with guns, with firearms. I did not have a firearm on my person.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MR LAMEY: Very well. Mr de Kock maintains that not everybody had firearms, what you are saying is that you yourself did not have a weapon when you entered Swaziland.
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Very well. Did you notice any firearms with any of the other persons, for example at the police station when you went in there? - that you can recall.
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, from our group I did not see a firearm, except the firearm I saw in Swaziland. From our side ...(intervention)
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Lamey, shouldn't you probably just lead Mr Koole, you should be able to be aware of which aspects of Mr de Kock's evidence he is not in agreement with. For instance, how the instruction that he received from Mr de Kock to gain access into Mankanyane Police Station and what happened subsequently thereafter. Maybe if you actually lead him in respect of those aspects he does not agree with, with Mr de Kock's evidence.
MR LAMEY: As it pleases you, Chairperson.
Mr Koole, I am going to lead you as the Honourable Committee Member has indicated. Just to come to the point before you went to the police station, is it correct that you were approached by Mr de Kock and requested to go and knock at the police station to determine whether or not there were guards inside the cells, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: You state here - did you do this then? Or did you tell Mr de Kock something?
MR KOOLE: I did that, then thereafter I informed him that there was no person to where he instructed me to knock.
MR LAMEY: Did you first tell him that you were not very fluent in Zulu or Swazi and that he should select somebody else, but he informed you that it was your operation and that this was your task and that this was what you were supposed to do, and you went ahead and did it?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, I told him like that, but thereafter he instructed me to go there. Then thereafter I gave him a report.
MR LAMEY: And you reported that you didn't see anybody, is that correct? Did you subsequently go with Mr de Kock back to the police station?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: And is it also correct that you obtained access to the police station by means of a window?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: And then once inside the police station, can you tell us briefly what you recall of what occurred there.
MR KOOLE: In short, Chairperson, after we gained access in the police station, whilst we were at the passage I saw Mr de Kock using a torch. There was a certain person there who had a gun pointed at us.
MR LAMEY: And what did Mr de Kock then do?
MR KOOLE: Mr de Kock instructed him to drop the gun otherwise he'll kill him, then that person threw the firearm on the ground.
MR LAMEY: Very well. And then if we could just proceed. Did the other members also enter the police station?
MR KOOLE: When I looked I saw other members whom we left behind inside the police station. I don't know how they gained access inside the police station, but I saw them inside.
MR LAMEY: Were the keys to the police station then obtained?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I don't recall as to whether the keys were found from whom, but I saw Mr de Kock having the keys with him.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You do agree with that aspect of Mr de Kock's evidence?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Lamey, let's proceed with those aspects that he does not agree with. Or if he does not agree also with the evidence given by Mr Pienaar.
MR LAMEY: Could you look at paragraph 5 of your statement, you state that you recall that Mr Pienaar peeped through the keyhole and saw one of the cells in which the prisoners were being detained and he said "That's him, I know him". Can you comment on that, is that correct? What do you recall?
MR KOOLE: That's what I recall, Chairperson, that when we stand next to the door of the cell where the detainees were, Mr Pienaar peeped through the keyhole, then stated that "He is there, I know him". That is why Mr de Kock opened that door.
MR LAMEY: Very well. And when the cell door was unlocked, what is your recollection immediately thereafter? What was said or what happened?
MR KOOLE: Myself and Mr van Dyk grabbed Mr Sedibe and then we went with him through the door which was locked when we entered, then we left the other members inside. Then other members were left inside and then we went outside.
MR LAMEY: Paragraph 6 of your statement where you say that
"After the cell door was unlocked, Pienaar went to the cell and told Glory 'Yes, Glory, you thought I would not find you but now today the boere have you'"
Those words, was it said? Are you sure that it was said during that time, what is your recollection of it?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I don't remember as to whether those words were said when they joined us inside the police station or at the car, but those words were stated.
MR LAMEY: So you are not sure of the exact place, but you do recall it was said.
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Were you involved in the physical removal of Sedibe from the police cell to outside?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Very well. You have heard the evidence, I would just like to specifically lead your evidence as to what your role was. The evidence was that Mr Sedibe resisted, do you agree?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, he went with us when we left the door, but where it was dark or where we parked our van, that is where he started to struggle. So it's then that he was not prepared to go with us. That is how it was stated by other applicants.
MR LAMEY: What happened there, did you assault him there to bring him under control? What was your role therein?
MR KOOLE: It was a struggle. I'm not able to state what I did, but I took part in that struggle.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you assault him?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, I assaulted him.
CHAIRPERSON: There was evidence about something that was pulled over his neck, what do you know about that?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: What do you know about it?
MR KOOLE: It was myself and Mr van Dyk who were struggling with Mr Sedibe. I thought it was a tie, not a scarf, but it was put around his neck and then Mr van Dyk hit him on the lower part of the body, then after that we were able to control him and then we were joined by other members there.
MR LAMEY: Do you agree that the purpose of the scarf or the tie as you describe it, around his neck was not to strangle him to death but it was to bring him under control and to curb his resistance?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, it was like that. As I've already stated that he was holding Mr van Dyk on his private part, therefore that scarf was used so that we'd be able to control him.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Koole, what was your particular role in his assault, did you punch him, did you use your feet to kick him, what exactly did you do?
MR KOOLE: When you are in such a struggle you'd use any form of force, you would kick, you would use your fists or your open hand, but I assaulted, then again I kicked him.
CHAIRPERSON: We're in the new South Africa now, the question is very clear, answer it like a new South African policeman would do, clearly please. What did you do in assaulting him?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, that is where I used my fists, that is where I used my legs in kicking.
MNR LAMEY: "Weet u of mnr Sedibe as gevolg van hierdie worsteling en strewing en die aanranding op hom, het hy beserings opgedoen wat u opgemerk het, op enige
stadium?"
TSWANA INTERPRETER: Please repeat your question because it was not translated from Afrikaans to English.
MR LAMEY: Did you at any stage where the struggle had taken place or later, did you see any injuries to Mr Sedibe which emanated from this assault?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, there were some injuries, it was on his forehead, he had bruises on his forehead and then in-between the nose and the eyes he was bleeding, but on other sides it was just bruises.
MR LAMEY: I accept along - somehow you managed to get him into the car and from there you drove back with the vehicle to the RSA border, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Can you recall whether at any stage there was a struggle in the vehicle?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, there was a struggle inside the car. When we left there, Mr Mngade said Mr Sedibe was trying to throw himself outside the car, then the struggle began.
MR LAMEY: May I just ask you how did you return to the RSA, did you go through a border post or which method did you use to get back to the RSA?
MR KOOLE: We did not go through the border post but we crossed the fence.
MR LAMEY: There where you crossed the fence, do you know whether it was close to the border post?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I'm not able to estimate the distance, but we were able to - the lights of the border post were a little bit further.
MR LAMEY: Can you recall whether after you arrived on the RSA side through the border, whether you saw any other police officer or met with a police officer?
MR KOOLE: I'm not able to recall as to whether we met any member of the police force after we have crossed the border.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Why don't you become specific Mr Lamey, whether he did meet Mr Visser at all after having gone past the border.
MR LAMEY: You have had the opportunity to see Brig Visser here, here at these proceedings of the Amnesty Committee, can you independently recollect whether that evening after you went over the border post or border, whether you had seen him on the RSA side?
MR KOOLE: I'm not able to recall, Chairperson, as to whether we met him or I saw his face.
MR LAMEY: What is your further recollection, where was Sedibe taken to?
MR KOOLE: As other applicants have testified, he was taken to a house, but I don't know the location of that house.
MR LAMEY: Was it on a farm?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Close to Piet Retief, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, but I don't know that area, but I think it's nearer Piet Retief.
MR LAMEY: May I just ask you to be quite quick here, I do not think this is in dispute, but is it correct that Mr Sedibe was held in a room on this farm and was cuffed to a bed?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, there was a bed inside that room, then he was tied on that bed where he was sleeping.
MR LAMEY: Did you have to perform any function after he was tied to the bed? Did you have to guard him, what is your recollection?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, after he was tied on the bed the white members talked with him, then after he was tied on the bed then they instructed me to stay with him there, they will be coming back. Then he slept on that bed, then I slept on a chair. He was tied - one hand was tied on the bed and the other hand was loose.
MR LAMEY: Then I would like to ask you, is it correct that Mr Sedibe afterwards came to work as an askari at Vlakplaas?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Are you able to say more-or-less how long after his abduction this had taken place?
MR KOOLE: I'm not able to recall, Chairperson, but I think it's after a few months, but I'm not able to state exactly after how long.
MR LAMEY: And you have heard the evidence that Mr Sedibe's spouse and child were brought to the RSA, can you briefly ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, what has that to do with the price of eggs? I earlier thought of what value is that to this hearing.
MR LAMEY: As it pleases you. I will then depart from that point.
Very well then. Mr Koole, you furthermore confirm what is in paragraph 9, 10 and 11, this was about Sedibe and his wife went to stay at Letlabile, that Mr de Kock like him very much and you heard that Mr Sedibe was to go to Mozambique to visit some family and that approximately a week after he came back from Mozambique he became ill and died, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Did you get to know Mr Sedibe well while he was at Vlakplaas and you worked at Vlakplaas?
MR KOOLE: He was my best friend, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Mr Koole, is it correct that you apply for amnesty for your part in the abduction of Mr Sedibe, the assault on him and then any other offence or delict which might emanate from your participation in this incident?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, I will during argument stage just perhaps be more specific, if it pleases you.
And then the political objective as you saw it, you say that you understood that he was an important person in the ANC and you understood that the purpose of the abduction was to gleam information from him about the activities of the ANC in Swaziland as well as the - specifically the infiltration of ANC cadres into South Africa, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Did you yourself participate in any questioning of Mr Sedibe?
MR KOOLE: No, Chairperson, I did not interrogate him.
MR LAMEY: And your conduct emanates from instructions which you receive from Mr de Kock, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Mr Koole, are you entirely certain of the fact that Mr de Kock initially requested you to go to the police station and knock on the front door?
MR KOOLE: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
MR HUGO: Very well then, I will put it to you, I don't think there is much about this, Mr de Kock's version is that he right from the beginning went along with you and that you went to the window and opened the window. Is it not possible that that is the correct version?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, he requested me to go and to see as to whether is there any other person around there, then I informed him that I don't know Zulu or Swazi, the right person who would enquire there is Mr Mngade because he was well versed in Swazi and Zulu. Then he told me that it doesn't matter, I should go there because he's instructed me to go there. Then I went there.
ADV BOSMAN: May I just interpose here for a moment.
Mr Koole, what happened to Mr Mngade, do you know? Is he still around?
MR KOOLE: I don't know his whereabouts, Chairperson.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Mr Hugo.
MR HUGO: Mr Koole, Mr de Kock's recollection is quite clear that during the incident in the police station he called the name of September loudly and he then answered and that is how he was identified, is that not possible? And that you have an incorrect recollection of Mr Pienaar's conduct there.
MR KOOLE: I did not hear as to whether any person called the name September.
MR HUGO: I've got no further questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prinsloo.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Koole, the question that Mr Hugo just put to you and that is from the evidence of Mr Pienaar, he denies that he looked through the keyhole and identified Mr Sedibe in this manner. Any comment on that?
MR KOOLE: My comment is that he looked through the keyhole, then he informed us that he is able to see him, that is why the door was opened.
MR PRINSLOO: And you say that Mr Sedibe was a good friend of yours and he was at Vlakplaas along with you and that he was an askari, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR PRINSLOO: Did Mr Sedibe during that time move around freely, he was not guarded by anyone, he moved around on his own?
MR KOOLE: He was able to walk freely or independently without any restrictions.
MR PRINSLOO: Did you gain the impression from him at any stage that he was dissatisfied working as an askari?
MR KOOLE: When I was with him he was happy that he has come home and that he was secured. He was happy to be home and that he was employed.
MR PRINSLOO: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO
MS VAN DER WALT: No question, thank you Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LEOPENG: Thank you, Chairman, just one question.
Mr Koole, is it your evidence that you did not - let me repeat my question. Is it your evidence that you did not see Brig Visser next to the border post or at the border post on your arrival in the Republic of South Africa, just at the border post or after you left the border post ?
MR KOOLE: I did not see him at all, I don't remember seeing him there.
MR LEOPENG: No further questions, Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LEOPENG
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel, any questions?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Yes, thank you Honourable Chairperson.
Mr Koole, as part of your political motivation, in a sense you've stated your motivation appears to be what the other applicants have stated to us already, that the abduction was done with the view to obtaining information that could then be used against the ANC, what was your political motivation, or political affiliation at the time of this incident?
MR KOOLE: I was never affiliated to any political organisation, I was a policeman then.
MS PATEL: Did you believe that the ANC's aims and objectives, did you feel that those objectives were unacceptable to you?
MR KOOLE: That was what I was taught. I was told that the aims and the objectives of the ANC was to render the country ungovernable.
MS PATEL: And you believed that that wasn't right.
MR KOOLE: Yes, at that time I believed that was wrong because I was employed by that government.
MS PATEL: And as you were growing up as a young person what were your political affiliations then?
MR KOOLE: During my early days I was never involved in politics. I joined the police force in 1966 and never belonged to any political organisation before then.
CHAIRPERSON: But you belonged to the Security Police.
MR KOOLE: That's correct, Chairperson ..(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) a political leaning?
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I'm not sure about that, I was just doing the job that I was given by the then government. I did not know their political lenience at that time.
MS PATEL: So you really were following orders, you had no political motivation for participating in this, not so?
MR KOOLE: I was just following my instructions as I was given them.
MS PATEL: You were not an askari, is that correct?
MR KOOLE: I have never been an askari, that's correct.
MS PATEL: Alright. I have no further questions for you except merely to state to you, Sir, that it almost defies logic for me that you didn't have a political understanding at that time. Thank you.
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I did not belong to any political organisation, I was just working for that government.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
MR LAMEY: I've got no further questions, thank you.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Koole, do you remember whether Mr Sedibe was taken out of this vehicle at any time before he was delivered to the safehouse in Piet Retief?
MR KOOLE: Well I don't remember that happening.
ADV BOSMAN: Is it possible that he was taken out once before you delivered him to Piet Retief?
MR KOOLE: Well I don't remember that happening because I was always with him in the car. We were together in that car.
ADV BOSMAN: And tell me, did you at time before this hearing meet or get to know Mr Visser? Or was it the first time that you saw him?
MR KOOLE: It is the first time that I see him today.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Mr Koole, just as a follow-up to what has been asked of you by my colleague. How long did you look after Mr Sedibe in this house in Piet Retief?
MR KOOLE: I don't remember well, but I think it could have been between 15 to 20 minutes, but I'm not certain about that, it's just an estimation.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You only looked after him for a day.
MR KOOLE: It is not even a day, it's just a few minutes like I've stated.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So you still stand by the version you gave on page 29 at paragraph 8, where you state that the following day Mr de Kock and Mr Pienaar came to collect Mr Sedibe and that was the last time you saw him? - immediately after his abduction.
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MS PATEL: You have also earlier on stated that Mr Sedibe put up some kind of resistance when he was inside the station-wagon, immediately after being removed from Mankanyane Police Station. Now my question to you is, how was he contained? And by that question I want you to give me details as to whether any force was used on him whilst he was inside the car and if such force was used, by whom it was so used.
MR KOOLE: While we were in the vehicle there was a struggle between ourselves and he was hit by Mr Mngade. I heard Mr Sedibe complaining that he's being killed, but I don't remember what happened thereafter.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: How far were you seated in relation to where Mr Sedibe was seated?
MR KOOLE: It was dark inside, we were in the same room, but I don't remember what he used to hit him - we were together in the vehicle, but it was dark inside.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You were occupying the same seat with Mr Sedibe?
MR KOOLE: There were no seats, there were only seats in the front and in the middle and then at the back there were no seats, that's where we were seated.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Were you seated next to Mr Sedibe?
MR KOOLE: I was not seated next to him, but we were not far apart from each other.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Do you know if Mr de Kock was seated next to Mr Sedibe?
MR KOOLE: I don't remember. The only thing that I remember is that Mr de Kock was seated on the second seat from the front, if I'm not mistaken.
CHAIRPERSON: You know Mr Koole, the Act demands that you make full disclosure of all the relevant factors pertaining to your application, your amnesia doesn't do your case very much good. I suggest you think carefully and answer that question properly.
MR LAMEY: Sorry Chairperson, may I just come in here. Is that the question relating to the seating of Mr de Kock?
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Yes.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, with respect, his answer was as far as he can recall Mr de Kock was seated on the second seat from the front.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: He wasn't specific. Maybe we should get Mr Koole to respond to the question again, maybe we didn't understand him.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, I heard that translation that he says he's not sure, but he thinks he was on the second seat from the front. That's what I heard.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Is that so, Mr Koole?
MR KOOLE: If I'm not mistaken that is correct, Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And where was Mr Mngade seated in relation to Mr Sedibe?
MR KOOLE: He was in the middle if I recall well, but I'm not sure about my recollection.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: When you say "we had put him in the middle", are you referring to Mr Mngade or are you referring to Mr Sedibe? That's how I understand you to be ...(intervention)
MR KOOLE: I am referring to Mr Sedibe and Mr Mngade was on the other side, I was also on the other side. Mr Sedibe was in the middle.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So Mr Sedibe was actually sitting in the middle and you were on the one side and Mr Mngade was on the other side.
MR KOOLE: That's my recollection, Chairperson.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So how did Mr Mngade hit Mr Sedibe whilst you were inside the car?
MR KOOLE: Like I have already said, it was dark inside this vehicle, I don't know what he used to hit him, I only heard the scream from Mr Sedibe that he has been injured.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Notwithstanding the fact that you were in close proximity to both Mr Mngade and Mr Sedibe.
MR KOOLE: Well I wasn't aware and I wasn't expecting that to happen. He just hit him once or twice.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You don't recollect facts because you expected them to happen, you recollect facts because they happened, not because of your initial expectation, Mr Koole.
MR KOOLE: Chairperson, I'm trying to explain. This happened a long time ago and we didn't think that one day we would be expected to recall what happened, that is why I'm saying that I don't have a clear recollection. I'm just trying to recollect what happened.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You have been able to recollect the usage of a scarf or a tie as you have alleged in your written application, by Mr van Dyk, have you not?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson.
MS PATEL: So what would be the difference of the facts that you are being asked to recollect now from those that you've been able to recollect?
MR KOOLE: You will be able to remember certain facts, that you are able to remember, but other facts you won't be able to remember.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: You are not trying to minimise your role in what happened inside that vehicle, are you not?
MR KOOLE: No, I'm trying to explain this before this Committee as it happened that day.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: So you had no role in the assault of Mr Sedibe once he was inside the vehicle?
MR KOOLE: That is correct, Chairperson, I did not assault him inside the vehicle.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Even though you were seated just next to him and you state he was a heavy man and he was giving you a struggle? He was putting up the struggle as in your evidence you've stated as war, you did nothing and allowed only Mr Mngade to contain him.
MR KOOLE: The fight started when we were trying to put him inside the vehicle, but inside the vehicle there was no more fight, the fight had already stopped then.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: I thought your earlier evidence was that he put up some kind of resistance whilst he was inside the car because he wanted to throw himself out of the car. That's what you earlier on stated.
CHAIRPERSON: And that he was beaten once or twice.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: And as a result of that resistance he was then beaten up.
MR KOOLE: What I remember is that Mr Mngade indicated that Mr Sedibe wanted to throw himself out of the car. That is what I said.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: But why should you hear from Mr Mngade when you were sitting next to Mr Sedibe yourself? Surely you would have been able to observe if he wanted to throw himself out of the car, you were seated next to him.
MR KOOLE: I did not see him trying to throw himself out of the vehicle.
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: Thank you, Chair, I have no further questions for Mr Koole.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. ...(indistinct - no microphone)
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: May I just ask a question in re-examination, follow this.
Mr Koole, are you saying that in the vehicle Mr Mngade explained that Mr Sedibe wanted to throw himself out the vehicle? Do I understand your evidence correctly?
MR KOOLE: Yes, that is what he said.
MR LAMEY: Was there then a scuffle which ensued on that moment, that you can recall?
MR KOOLE: That is the only thing we heard from Mr Mngade, that he wanted to throw himself out of the moving car.
MR LAMEY: But was there - what I want ...(intervention)
JUDGE KHAMPEPE: What your counsel wants to know is was there any struggle that ensued, either prior to Mr Mngade telling you that Mr Sedibe wanted to throw himself out of the vehicle, or immediately after you had been told by Mr Mngade.
MR LAMEY: Ja, a struggle or some sort of scuffling or movement. That is what I'm trying to ascertain.
MR KOOLE: After we have entered the vehicle there was a struggle inside the vehicle, but it was not the same as the previous fight outside the vehicle.
MR LAMEY: Were you aware of that scuffling?
MR KOOLE: Yes, I did, but I did not pay much attention to that.
MR LAMEY: What I want to ask you is, if you talk about the comparison of that inside the vehicle to what happened before he was taken into the vehicle, how did those two compare with each other? - in terms of the duration and so forth.
MR KOOLE: I would say it was continuous because after we have put him inside the vehicle the same struggle ensued and continued, but it was minimal compared to outside.
MR LAMEY: So if you compare it to outside it was much less than before?
MR KOOLE: That's correct, Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Thank you, Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you're excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lamey, have you got a witness, or anybody got a witness that's shorter than this one, that's going to take less time?
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, yes, I think Mr Bosch is going to be very short. We can start with him.
CHAIRPERSON: Let's carry on then.
MR LAMEY: I think Mr Bosch is inside, Chairperson, I don't know whether someone can just call him.
