BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR RAMAWELE: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Nofomela - Chairperson, the person the application of Mr Nofomela, you see it on page 23 of bundle 1 until page 28 but particularly for this application the relevant page will be page 28.
Mr Nofomela, do you confirm the contents of your application which I've just mentioned to the Committee?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I do.
MR RAMAWELE: Do you also confirm the political objectives as stated in your application?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: As well as your particulars?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: On this particular day you were actually based at Moolman, just before you came to Amsterdam?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: Can you tell the Committee then with whom did you go to Amsterdam, to the place where this incident occurred?
MR NOFOMELA: Chairperson, I was with Mr Paul van Dyk, Badenhorst, Willemse, Mogadi and myself.
MR RAMAWELE: Can you further tell the Committee as to what was the purpose for your going to the place where this incident occurred?
MR NOFOMELA: I and together with the persons I've just mentioned were given instructions in Mr Pienaar's office. The instructions were that we were to proceed to the Nerston border gate where there would be people coming from Swaziland proceeding towards Amsterdam. Mr de Kock informed us that these were ANC cadres and we were instructed not to shoot them on their way but we will wait until they return from Swaziland upon which time I would then shoot them.
MR RAMAWELE: Was that the instruction?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes that is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: I see on page 29 of your application you say that Major de Kock at one stage informed you that - or you and the others that didn't have time for court proceedings and that these people should simply be shot. Do you confirm that?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR RAMAWELE: So you then went to the place where you were supposed to go?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: Can you explain to the Committee then how you arrived there and what happened?
MR NOFOMELA: We then arrived at that spot which was about 500 metres from the Nerston border gate. Mr de Kock informed us that I, Badenhorst, Willemse who were instructed to wait alongside the road and as per the instruction we were not supposed to do anything whilst they were on their way to Swaziland but on their return we would then shoot, kill them.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you do nothing while they were on their way to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes, on our way to Swaziland we were not supposed to do anything to them at that point. We would only attack them on their return.
MR RAMAWELE: I think let Mr Nofomela repeat slowly and interpreters just listen to what he says?
MR NOFOMELA: The instruction was that on their way to Amsterdam we would not do anything to them but on their return towards Nerston we would then shoot them.
MR RAMAWELE: Thank you. Any question of arrest?
MR NOFOMELA: That was not mentioned by Mr de Kock when he issued those instructions.
MR RAMAWELE: You had a firearm at the time when you were at the T-junction, Amsterdam T-junction?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I had a 9 mm which was fitted with a silencer.
MR RAMAWELE: Personally, yourself, what were you supposed to do?
MR NOFOMELA: I would shoot at those people who were from Amsterdam towards Nerston.
MR RAMAWELE: And you said where was Paul van Dyk and Mogadi?
MR NOFOMELA: Mr van Dyk and Mr Mogadi went down the road and were placed at a different spot. I cannot recall the exact spot because I was not familiar with the area and it was also dark.
MR RAMAWELE: Now as you were lying there or staying there, what happened?
MR NOFOMELA: We lay waiting for them and we saw them as they were passing. I think there were about six when they went past and they had luggage. I saw one having a rifle and I was satisfied that it was an AK-47. After they had left towards Amsterdam there was a car that came from the direction of Lother towards Amsterdam. After a while two people approached. At that time we were closer towards the road because when they approached we went closer towards the road and as they approached us we started firing.
MR RAMAWELE: What did you do before you shot them?
MR NOFOMELA: They did not do anything. They were just walking towards the direction of Nerston and as they came close to us we started shooting.
MR RAMAWELE: You heard the evidence of the other applicants relating to the torch, etc etc, what is your evidence relating to the torch, whether he had a torch or not?
MR NOFOMELA: The only torch that I saw was one that was one that was brought by Mr van Dyk as a big spotlight that was used by the police at the time. He brought that torch after the shooting, that is at the time when we were looking for the one who had fled.
MR RAMAWELE: Yourself, did you have a torch?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I did not.
MR RAMAWELE: What about Mr Willemse or Mr Badenhorst?
MR NOFOMELA: If they had had them in their possession I would have seen them using them. If they did have them then they did use them.
MR RAMAWELE: After the shooting what happened?
MR NOFOMELA: A short while after the shooting Mr van Dyk and Mogadi arrived. One person between Badenhorst or Willemse informed that that some person had fled and then he shone a torch on the person who was deceased to check whether he was indeed dead. He then instructed us to go look for the person who had fled. I cannot recall whether Mogadi or Willemse remained with the dead person but the three of us went into the forest to look for that person. So he shone the torch there and we were able to see the blood trail. After a while Mr van Zyl said we would not be able to locate him because it was dark so we decided to turn back.
MR RAMAWELE: You also shot several times at the two people when they came back from Amsterdam?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: After shooting did you realise that one of them had escaped or was running away?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: Did any of you chase him or what was the position?
MR NOFOMELA: Not at that time. We did realise that he was fleeing but we did not pursue him at that time. At that time we were looking for Mr Mogadi.
MR RAMAWELE: You came back after Mr van Dyk had indicated that he will not be able to locate the person who had run away. And then what happened?
MR NOFOMELA: On our arrival there to that spot we realised that the deceased person had been removed. We saw a group of people in a van, in fact it was a couple of dead persons in a police van, I'm not sure whether it was from the Amsterdam or Nerston side.
MR RAMAWELE: Before the shooting were you ever at a place Amsterdam where Mr de Kock and the others were?
MR NOFOMELA: Please repeat that question?
MR RAMAWELE: Just before the shooting at the two people who were coming back from Amsterdam, were you ever, before that stage, were you ever with Mr de Kock and the others at the place where they were as indicated in Exhibit B? That is at Amsterdam Road? Where were you?
MR NOFOMELA: I was not with them.
And is it true that you apply for amnesty for the murder of the person who was killed at the time when you and the others shot several times and the two people who were coming back from Amsterdam going to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: And the attempted murder of Mr Sindane?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: Now in your application you indicated that five people died. How many people died?
MR NOFOMELA: I am not certain up to this day because when I wrote five I thought that was the correct number because this incident happened at night and I was not certain but I
can accept if given another amount.
MR RAMAWELE: You heard the evidence of Mr van Dyk that you were placed not with him at the T-junction because somehow you had to be protected because of a case which was pending against you, the Brits case which was pending against you at that time? You heard that evidence?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I did hear that.
MR RAMAWELE: Now, can you just tell the Committee as to when was the Brits criminal case, when was that offence committed, do you still remember?
MR NOFOMELA: It was on the 11 September 1986.
MR RAMAWELE: So you are saying that it was actually committed after the post-mortem, after this incident?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: At the time when this incident occurred, it had not yet taken place?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR RAMAWELE: You also heard the evidence of several of the applicants relating to the fact that the people who were going to come back to the Nerston border gate were supposed to be arrested? Where you were seated or placed at the T-junction, what is your comment relating to arrest? If you were supposed to arrest, what is your opinion, what would have happened if you look back at the situation?
MR NOFOMELA: As far as I know, Sir, if you are going to arrest somebody you must inform them that you are a police officer. The situation in which we were and our location did not give an impression that was what we were supposed to do and also for the fact that we were awaiting trained cadres and also people were not supposed to be in this country who were here illegally. It was not to be expected that you could inform such persons and tell them to stop and they do exactly that where else they are heavily armed. I do not think that would have made sense.
MR RAMAWELE: Effectively what you are saying is that if you were to effect an arrest you would have had to jump the fence to go to them?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR LAX: Sorry, what do you mean jump the fence to go to them?
MR RAMAWELE: Or to go through the fence.
MR LAX: What fence, sorry? We haven't heard anything about a fence here.
MR NOFOMELA: There was a fence and we were on the other side of the fence and they were on the other side and we were shooting at them through that fence. If we had intended to arrest them we should have gone over the fence and effected an arrest.
MR RAMAWELE: That is our application, Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAMAWELE
MR LAX: Can you just clarify what fence this was please? Was this the border fence you're talking about or is it a farm fence?
MR NOFOMELA: As is apparent in the sketch, that line is a fence. We were on that spot and we had jumped over that fence to lie and wait for them and that is the fence I'm referring to.
MR LAX: This is a line of inverted L shapes that runs along the north and west of that intersection, is that what you're referring to?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Thank you Chairperson, Hattingh on record.
Mr Nofomela, did I understand you say that when you saw these people walking past you on their way from Swaziland in the direction of the Amsterdam, you observed one of them had an AK rifle?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Was he carrying it quite openly, he didn't try to conceal it in any way?
MR NOFOMELA: I saw him as he was passing, I just saw the back of the rifle and he was carrying it.
MR HATTINGH: But you were able to see it was an AK assault rifle, is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I was certain.
MR HATTINGH: Was it only one person that you saw carrying a firearm of any sort?
MR NOFOMELA: I saw just one person with a rifle, others carried bags.
MR HATTINGH: Because on page 29 of your application you states as follows
"We waited in a plantation for the terrorists to arrive and after some time we saw about six men passing us with bags on their bags. Some of them were carrying weapons. What were you referring to there?
MR NOFOMELA: I said so because I was just assuming that perhaps that bags may have contained firearms.
MR HATTINGH: Very well, then on their way back to Swaziland two people came past or approached you, is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: And could you see that one of them was carrying a firearm?
MR NOFOMELA: No I did not see.
MR HATTINGH: Did you see him throw a firearm away when you started shooting at him?
MR NOFOMELA: No I did not see it, I only heard about it later when one of our White colleagues carried the firearm, that's when I learnt of it.
MR HATTINGH: Right, so when you say in your application once again on page 29
"When the group came closer on their return to the border we started shooting at them. One member of the group ran away dropping his firearm."
You didn't actually observe that, you merely drew an inference from what you were told later?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Now could you see the bakkie that the other people climbed into from where you were?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I could see the bakkie although I could not see the occupants inside.
MR HATTINGH: Yes but did you actually observe them boarding the vehicle?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I did not.
MR HATTINGH: Could you see whether the driver of the vehicle got out of the vehicle when these people arrived at the vehicle?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I did not see.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I've got not further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Nofomela, when you first saw the men walking past you, that is now from the direction of Swaziland. How many of them were there?
MR NOFOMELA: As already stated there were more or less six of them who were going towards Amsterdam.
MR LAMEY: And who was with you at that stage?
MR NOFOMELA: Mr Badenhorst and Mr Willemse.
MR LAMEY: And how far were they from you when they were passing you?
MR NOFOMELA: I am not certain but I estimate distance to be from where I am towards the interpreter cubicles.
MR LAMEY: So it is approximately four to five paces?
MR NOFOMELA: Please repeat that?
MR LAMEY: Is it approximately four to five paces?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes, it's possible.
MR LAMEY: I beg your pardon, Chairperson. I changed to Afrikaans, I'll continue in English.
Now you said that your instructions were to eliminate the group, is that correct? On the return back to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR LAMEY: Did you know how many would return back to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: I did not know how many there would be but there were only two who did.
MR LAMEY: Did you know who brought the MK people through? Was it a guide or another MK person or who would bring them through from Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not have knowledge thereof.
MR LAMEY: Now, what I want to ask you is that when they passed you the first time you said it was four to five metres. You could have eliminated them by shooting them right there and there? Why did you have to wait if your instructions were to eliminate them?
MR NOFOMELA: I did not understand your question.
MR LAMEY: The approximately six men who passed you from Swaziland, you said that they passed you plus minus four to five metres from you and you had instructions to eliminate them. Why did you not eliminate them immediately while they were coming from Swaziland? Why did you have to wait for some of them to return?
MR NOFOMELA: Firstly, I did not know, I do not have independent information that those were coming. I was in front and instructed by Mr de Kock that people would be coming and he also instructed me on when to shoot at them so I could not do anything of my own.
MR LAMEY: Yes, but Mr de Kock was not there on the scene to give you any instructions?
MR NOFOMELA: For me to be on the scene it was on his instruction. He instructed me that I should shoot at them when they return.
MR LAMEY: Who was in charge of you and Willemse and Badenhorst?
MR NOFOMELA: No one was supposed to be in charge. It was Mr van Dyk who was in charge of the operatives then.
MR LAMEY: Mr Nofomela, isn't it not probable and something that you perhaps are not aware of, but that it was anticipated that a guide would bring the people through and that one of the - or the purpose was there, from you and the other members at that junction to establish the route that these people were brought through?
MR NOFOMELA: As I've already mentioned, Chairperson, I was not instructed to take on which route these people were on, I was just instructed to shoot them on their return.
MR LAMEY: And to shoot them when they return back to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR LAMEY: Now how did you know that anyone would return back to Swaziland?
MR NOFOMELA: I was not informed who would return but I was only told of those who return, I would shoot them.
MR LAMEY: But did he know of anybody who would return?
MR NOFOMELA: From the instruction that I received I expected that some person or persons would return.
MR LAMEY: Right, I just want to put it to you that Mr Fourie's understanding was that the purpose of the members at that point was to determine the route that the MK's would be using and it was expected that they would make use of a guide. Can you rule that out?
MR NOFOMELA: That is his own knowledge, I bear no knowledge to it.
MR LAMEY: Alright, so you don't have personal knowledge of that but you don't rule out that it could have happened like that or it could have been the position?
MR NOFOMELA: That would not have been so because Mr de Kock would not have given different instructions on one mission, why what reason did we have to shoot at those people and why did he also shoot at them.
MR LAMEY: Who are you talking to now?
MR NOFOMELA: I'm referring to the people I was with.
MR LAMEY: Well, you say you don't have personal knowledge of the establishment of a route or a guide that would bring them through, is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not quite understand your question.
MR LAMEY: You don't have any personal knowledge of a guide that would bring the MK members through?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I do not.
MR LAMEY: But you can't rule that out as a possibility?
CHAIRPERSON: He has explained to us that because he was ordered to shoot them by De Kock, the commanding officer, he does rule it out.
MR LAX: On the basis that he wouldn't have received contradictory instructions, one lot to be shot, the other lot to locate a route, just didn't - the two aren't consistent with each other.
MR LAMEY: Yes but Chairperson, that's precisely what I'm trying to get at, I'm trying to ascertain whether his reasoning whether he's making it out as a reason or whether he has got personal knowledge of this. But I'll leave the question there, Chairperson, I won't ...(intervention)
MR LAX: Maybe I can help you. Do you know what instructions Mr Fourie got?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I do not.
MR LAMEY: I've got no further questions, thank you Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nofomela, just a couple of very short questions.
Did you know or were you ever told about a person who would be waiting in Swaziland with a bakkie for the people who would return?
MR NOFOMELA: No, I was not told about that, Chairperson.
MR ROSSOUW: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I've no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROSSOUW
MR PRINSLOO: Chairperson, Prinsloo, no questions thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, when your legal representative led your evidence he asked you with regard to the arrest of persons and you explained that the circumstances were of such a nature that no arrest could be made, is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not quite get the question?
MS VAN DER WALT: When your evidence was led by your legal representative, it was asked of you whether or not there was ever any talk of an arrest and you the stated that the circumstances dictated that it was not possible to make an arrest because you went further by explaining that the police had to identify themselves as the police and you were on the other side of a fence. Do you recall your evidence?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I recall that.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, if you would look at Exhibit K, do you have that before you? The point which Mr van Dyk has indicated from where he and you would have been, can you see that? It would be if one has the sketch with north-facing to the top and east-facing to the right, he has indicated a point near the T-junction. That would be on the right side on the corner. Do you agree with that, is that the place where you were?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not quite understand.
MS VAN DER WALT: What is it that you don't understand? I'm trying to indicate the point to you on the map, do you have the map before you with east to the right and north-facing to the top section of the map. It would appear to me as if you are holding the map correctly. You then have the T-junction of the Amsterdam Road which forms a T-junction with the Lother/Nerston Road. Do you have that?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I do.
MS VAN DER WALT: Then in the corner on the right side of the Amsterdam Road, Mr Paul van Dyk has indicated a point where he, according to his recollection, you and Willemse would have been. Do you have that?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I do see it.
MS VAN DER WALT: Now I want to ask you, is that the place where you were on that particular evening?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes I was.
MS VAN DER WALT: And do you also see on the map still as you are holding it, there are certain marks, little lines with points and I want to put it to you that this is on the Nerston Road, the Nerston/Lother Road and then those very same marks are on the Amsterdam Road. Would that be the wire fence to which you have referred?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. Then according to you, where was Mr van Dyk?
MR NOFOMELA: He was further down towards the border gate but I cannot be certain of his exact position.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well. Then I want to put it to you that Mr van Dyk's evidence was very clear regarding the arrest of the persons there. He still made use of the words that one could refer to it as an arrest, an abduction or a capture, but his evidence is very clear that those persons who had entered and were returning to Swaziland had to be taken so that they could identify the vehicle which was driven by Dlamini and then all the persons there, including those who had returned to Swaziland would be shot dead. Did you hear that evidence?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes, I did hear it.
MS VAN DER WALT: You see, it was never his evidence that they wanted to execute a legal arrest in order to take those persons into custody and place them in police detention. Do you wish to comment on that?
MR NOFOMELA: I hear you but what I know is the instruction I received was to shoot and kill those people and that is what happened, except for the one who fled.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, that is also Mr van Dyk's evidence, that he was in command of that specific group which was positioned near the T-junction and that the persons were shot there because the circumstances turned out differently. Do you agree with that?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not quite understand you. Please repeat that question?
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr van Dyk testified that he had discretion. He received the instruction from Mr de Kock to take up position there but he also had the discretion that if on ground level he had to take another decision, he was permitted to do so and that shots were fired at those persons at that time because the situation turned out differently. He saw the gun in the person's hands and a shooting ensued. Do you wish to comment on that?
MR NOFOMELA: What puzzles me is if he had received such discretionary powers by Mr de Kock, why would the rest of us be given different instructions or not be told complete instructions what we were supposed to do this before we do that because all we received was the instruction from Mr de Kock and Mr van Dyk did not inform us of any other instruction, he just left us there on the spot.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, you are the only person who differs with regard to the persons who had to return over the Swaziland border?
MR NOFOMELA: It must be that I'm the only person who was instructed to kill those people alone.
MS VAN DER WALT: Very well, you have already responded to a question from Mr Willemse's attorney and you said that you did not know about the vehicle which would have been on the other side of the border, is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela. You have testified that Mr van Dyk was not with you at all. How do you explain this then if you say that he was further away towards the Nerston border post that he could have told the Honourable Committee that he saw the bakkie stopping approximately a hundred metres away on the Amsterdam Road and furthermore that he saw persons moving along the back section of the bakkie and that the bakkie departed thereafter. How would he have seen this if he was away from you towards the Nerston border post?
MR NOFOMELA: He may just be saying that, constructing it from what he heard from the people who were there.
MS VAN DER WALT: But Mr Nofomela, you had not even testified yet and according to your application it is the case indeed that the bakkie stopped there. Do you wish to comment on that?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not quite understand.
MS VAN DER WALT: Now you have testified, you have only testified just now, how would he have been able to alter his evidence regarding the bakkie which stopped approximately 100 metres away from that point?
MR RAMAWELE: Chairperson, I don't understand the question because what Mr Nofomela is saying, his answer was he could have heard it from the people who were there. Now I don't understand what my colleague is saying, I don't understand the question. He's not saying he could have heard it from me, he's saying he could have heard it from the people who were there.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, may I proceed? In his evidence, Mr van Dyk stated clearly that he saw a person with a firearm, that there was a shooting, that one person escaped. Furthermore he testifies that he threw down his weapon, that would be the person who escaped, that he attempted to follow or pursue that person but because he had to go through or over a fence, the person had already crossed the road and had disappeared into the darkness. From where would he have obtained that information if he himself had not been present there?
MR NOFOMELA: As I've already stated, it is possible that he could have heard it from the people who were present and put it as such but I reiterate that he was not with me.
MR LAX: Can I just clarify something? Sorry, Ms van der Walt, to interrupt.
You did say though in your testimony that at the time you went looking for those people he was present and you followed blood marks on the ground, you spoke about all of that? And he instructed you that there was no point going any further because clearly in the dark at this juncture?
MR NOFOMELA: That is correct.
MR LAX: Yes so at which point did he become present there because are you saying he wasn't present there at all or are you saying he joined at a certain time or what are you saying? It's not clear.
MR NOFOMELA: I said he was not present when these people were shot.
MR LAX: Okay.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, if Mr van Dyk had subsequently obtained these facts, he has also testified to in such fine detail to the extent that he had to pursue the person who ran away through a wire fence and you have also testified about the wire fence which you also had to cross or climb over, how would he have been able to obtain such fine details regarding the scene in order to be able to testify about it today? Do you have a response to that?
MR NOFOMELA: I do not know how else to respond to your question because I've just told you that that does not alter my stand. I maintain that he was not there at the spot, he may have obtained it from the other people.
MS VAN DER WALT: You see, Mr Nofomela, Mr van Dyk testified that this person dropped his firearm and then ran away and Mr Hattingh examined you about this and it is very clear in your application in the middle of page 29
"One member of the group ran away, dropping his firearm."
From your application it appears very clear that it was your observation. You are not saying that it's something that you heard about subsequently. Do you have any response to that?
MR NOFOMELA: It does not mean that if he puts the facts as they are he was present, he may have heard about it.
MS VAN DER WALT: But I'm referring to you? You have made precisely the same allegation in your application. I know that you've attempted to explain it now but you have made precisely the same application in your application and it is very clear that
"One member of the group ran away, dropping his firearm"?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes it is written that way.
MS VAN DER WALT: From your application it is clear that you saw this as well?
MR NOFOMELA: I did not see it, I assumed that is what he did and that is how I concluded it but I did not see him as I explained earlier on.
MS VAN DER WALT: So you assumed this but Mr van Dyk testified that he saw it. Do you have any comment?
MR NOFOMELA: I've already responded about Mr van Dyk's presence at the spot and I maintained that he was not there. Whatever he says happened is his own knowledge but he was not present.
MS VAN DER WALT: So Mr van Dyk is applying for amnesty for a person who was shot dead and whom he alleges he shot or at least one of you shot the person but he was never present? Is that correct, Mr Nofomela?
MR NOFOMELA: I've already stated it.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, there is just a singular aspect which I do not understand about your evidence. Perhaps I made an incorrect note but according to me you said that Mr Willemse and Mr Mogadi came to say that one person had escaped.
MR NOFOMELA: Please repeat that?
MS VAN DER WALT: According to your evidence, your evidence that you stated today, you said that Mr Willemse and Mr Mogadi came to tell you that one person had escaped.
MR NOFOMELA: I do not recall saying that.
MR LAX: Just for the record, my note says
"A short while after the shooting, Mogadi and Van Dyk arrived. We told them that the person had fled."
Then there was a story about the big torch and following trails of blood and so on.
MS VAN DER WALT: I can leave it at that, I think it was somewhat earlier but it won't make that much difference.
CHAIRPERSON: I have a note, which could be incorrect, is
"After the shooting Badenhorst or Willemse said one had fled."
MR LAMEY: I have that same note, Mr Chairperson.
MS VAN DER WALT: Thank you Chairperson.
You have just heard that according to your evidence you said that either Badenhorst or Willemse said that one person had escaped. Is that correct?
MR NOFOMELA: Yes.
MS VAN DER WALT: Didn't you say that? Didn't you see one person escaping?
MR NOFOMELA: I did see him.
MS VAN DER WALT: Mr Nofomela, you have heard the evidence of Mr Paul van Dyk. I will not repeat it, I just want to put it to you that Mr Paul van Dyk was indeed at the place, that he indicated on Exhibit K and that he shot the person.
No further questions, thank you Chairperson.
MR NOFOMELA: I do not know about that.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT
CHAIRPERSON: How long do you think you'll be?
MR NTHAI: Mr Chairperson, it's better that we adjourn now.
CHAIRPERSON: What time would suit you gentlemen and ladies tomorrow? Are any of you coming from outside Pretoria?
9 or 9.30?
MR HATTINGH: Sorry, personally I would prefer 9.30 Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we trust that everything will be working and that we can start at 9.30 tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
