CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody or good afternoon now. I apologise for the late start of this hearing. The reason why we’re starting late was because some of the applicants that were due to appear today were only brought here late so the delay was for reasons beyond our control but I apologise for any inconvenience occasioned thereby. Because of the late start we’ve arranged that we’ll take the lunch adjournment at 2 o’clock just for half an hour and we’ll now start with the matter of the application of Mr W L Snoek and Mr T A Tshikila.
Before I start I would like to just introduce the panel. On my far right is Mr Elan Lax, an attorney from Petermaritzburg, on my immediate right is Advocate Bosman who is from Cape Town, on my left is Dr Tsotsi who is an attorney from Port Elizabeth and I am Selwyn Miller, a judge from the Transkei Division of the High Court. I like the representatives please to place themselves on record.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, my name is Lungelo Mbandazayo, I’m representing the applicants in this matter, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo.
MS PATEL: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I am Ramula Patel Leader of Evidence for the Amnesty Committee.
CHAIRPERSON: And Ms Patel just for the record, the victims, are they not represented by their own representative?
MS PATEL: Honourable Chairperson I confirm that notices were in fact sent to them and they’ve given us an indication that they will not be opposing application or coming to the hearing.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Patel.
CHAIPERSON EXPLAINS INTERPRETATION EQUIPMENT
MR A MALLETT: Mr Mbandazayo would you then like to commence?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson. My first applicant is Willy Snoek, may he be sworn in Mr Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Snoek do you wish to be sworn in or do you wish to make an affirmation?
WILLY LITHO SNOEK: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Snoek, the affidavit which is in front of you is also before the Honourable Committee. Do you confirm that the affidavit which is before the Committee was made by yourself and that you abide by its contents.
MR SNOEK: That is correct
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo I think it will be convenient then if we mark this affidavit Exhibit A.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Chairperson subject to the correction of the Committee, normally I don't know if the Committee would like me to go through the full affidavit or ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I think perhaps for the purposes of record it is not a very long affidavit, I think we can go through it Mr Mbandazayo.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I'll do that. The affidavit reads thus
"I, the undersigned, William Litho Snoek do hereby make an oath and states that I am the applicant in this matter. The facts to which I depose are true and correct and within my personal knowledge unless the context states otherwise.
I was born on the 4th April 1962, Steytlerville, Eastern Cape. I left school at standard 7 in 1978 due to financial problems.
In 1979 I worked at Enterprise in Uitenhage and in 1980 I was arrested for dealing in dagga and I was convicted and sentenced to two years nine months imprisonment. I was released in 1983.
In May 1983 I was employed as a labourer by a building contractor until 1984. On the 11th of February 1984 I was convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and I was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and I was released in January 1985.
In June and July 1986 I was convicted of dealing in dagga and sentenced to two and a half and three and a half years respectively and I was released in February 1988. In April 1988 I was arrested and sentenced for using a car without the owner's consent and I was sentenced to two years imprisonment and I was released in January 1990. I joined PAC in 1965 to AZANYO. I was recruited to PAC by Timothy Janje, though I did not join immediately and I joined after I visited Transkei and I met Waters Tobuti. I did my basic military training in Manfre under the command of Wesile Nxolo. I came back before completing my training as I wanted to leave the country. I then participated in the activities of the PAC in Uitenhage under the leadership of Timothy Janje. At the time there was a political conflict in Uitenhage between the PAC and ANC.
One day I was approached by Tamsagqa Arthus Shikila who told me that they needed weapons to protect themselves in the conflict; I promised to organise something for him. I then approached Mr Janje and told him about this and he told me to approach Mandla Nkonki as he is the person who deals with matters of security. I met Mandla Nkonki and also told him a place where we can get arms; he instructed me to go ahead.
I then one day approached Tamsagqa and asked him to accompany me to a place where we can get weapons. I asked Matthews Bosani to drop us in Steytlerville; we then went to Gert's Kraal Farm which was owned by Felix Sharp; we arrived at the farm about 12 midnight. We entered the first farm and there were no people and managed to get one firearm. We then proceeded to the second farm of Mr Sharp with the purpose of getting a motor vehicle to take us to Uitenhage. We broke into the garage and pushed the car out of the garage. We tried to start it but in vain. We decided to wait until the morning for Mr Sharp to come out but his wife came out first. I pointed at her with the firearm and she screamed. I threw her on the ground and closed her mouth and also assaulted her with the firearm. We tied her and instructed Tamsangqa to guard her. I went to Sharp's house and met him in the kitchen and assaulted him and also tied him. We then searched for other firearms and whatever of value we could lay our hands on. We found ammunition, watches, sheets, blankets etc which we took away. We left the farm in Mr Sharp's 4X4 bakkie which we abandoned after being chased by a police van and helicopter.
We managed to escape; we went to Onobluhe Township and thereafter I went to Transkei where I was arrested after seven days. I was convicted and sentenced to 36½ years imprisonment. As APLA operative my general instruction from the APLA command was to prosecute the armed struggle with all means against the then racist minority regime which was undemocratic and oppressive. The said armed struggle was in essence a guerrilla warfare during which we as APLA cadres had to seek and attack the bastions and minions of the then aforesaid regime.
The ultimate objective of PAC and APLA was not only to talk to the then racist minority regime but to eventually return the land to the majority of the African people. The bastions and the minions of the then erstwhile regime were in terms of the APLA perspective, the members of the South African Defence Force, the members of the South African Police and the reservists in general, the farmers as they belonged to commando structures over and above the fact that they occupied the farms which we had to drive them away from so as to widen our territorial operational base which was aimed at eventually consolidating the liberated and repossessed land, the white homes which were garrisons of apartheid.
My general instruction was to seek, identify the enemy who was seen in the context of the above bastions and minions of the regime and also to train other cadres and command them in whatever operation that is being embarked upon. I respectfully submit that my application complies with the requirements of the Act and that I have made full and proper disclosure of my involvement in this operation".
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you. Mr Chairperson, since I've read the affidavit, just to facilitate I wouldn't like to dwell much, at this stage I left it to the Committee for questioning, I'll put it as the applicant's case at the present moment. That's the evidence of the applicant.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. I'll ask Ms Patel if she has any questions to put to the applicant.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MBANDAZAYO
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: I do thank you Honourable Chairperson.
Mr Snoek can you please explain, whilst you were operating here did you operate in terms of a unit or was there a particular structure that was set up or what was the position?
MR SNOEK: Where exactly?
MR SNOEK: ...(indistinct)
MS PATEL: After you had your training, did you work as a unit?
MR SNOEK: Yes we were working as a unit.
MS PATEL: Can you just explain how many members there were in this unit?
MR SNOEK: I didn't hear your question exactly but whilst we were working in Uitenhage we were meeting in halls discussing what we want to do in our organisation, that's why I was saying we were a unity.
MS PATEL: What was the unit doing?
MR LAX: Sorry there's a misunderstanding here.
CHAIRPERSON: I was just going to say Ms Patel, it seems it seems that the applicant hasn't quite understood your first question. I'm sure that were asking whether he operated as part of a fixed unit, if he was a member of a unit, and it's clear from his answer that although he said yes, but he understands the unit to be that he used to attend meetings in a hall of the party and there was unity. So I think you better clear it up before going off track on the unit and being at cross-purposes with Mr Snoek.
MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson.
Sir let's assume that you decided to embark on an operation, how would you go about doing this? How would you function, would you work alone, would you work with other people, how were plans put into place?
MR SNOEK: As I've already said in my affidavit, I was the one who approached Mr Mandla Nkonki but I first chatted to Timothy Janje and I told him about what Tamsangqa Arthur Tshikila told me about the conflict that was happening in Uitenhage in Qwanobushe. Mr Timothy Janje sent me to Mr Mandla Nkonki because he was the one who was responsible for security. I told Mandla Nkonki what I heard from Comrade Tamsangqa Nachegela; he the told me to go and get weapons if I knew where to find them.
MS PATEL: So do I understand you correctly, if you wanted to embark on an operation you needed clearance from comrade Nkonki, is that right?
MR SNOEK: Yes you had to get an instruction because you can't do something on your own without talking to your leadership.
MS PATEL: Would you be the only person that could authorise an operation or were there other people in the region where you operated that you could get the same authorisation from?
MR SNOEK: No. In our branch he was the one who was supposed to give us instructions or authorisation.
MS PATEL: Could you not get authorisation from Mr Toboti?
MR SNOEK: Mr Toboti told me that he was not responsible for security, he was on the political side so he referred me to Comrade Mandla Nkonki.
MS PATEL: Oh are you saying that Mr Toboti referred you to Mr Nkonki or is Mr Janje who referred you to Mr Nkonki?
MR SNOEK: Mr Timothy told me to go to Mandla Nkonki, Comrade Timothy.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry just while we're on this issue Ms Patel, I notice Mr Snoek in your application on page 5 of the papers there's a statement by yourself which has been attached to your application, on page 5 the very last sentence of that statement you say
"I feel that this application should succeed because even though I did not get instructions to rob arms, I always reported to Mr Toboti."
Now you said that you got instructions and you always got instructions before an operation from Mr Nkonki, yet here you say you didn't get an instruction, can you explain the difference between those two statements?
MR SNOEK: The last paragraph in this statement, I didn't say what is written here. If I remember well Comrade Lulama Mtanga came and he asked me a question of why I needed amnesty or why I needed to be forgiven. What he wrote here, I didn't say it.
MS PATEL: Mr Snoek, Comrade Mtanga that you referred to a man or a woman?
SNOEK: It's a man. There he is.
MS PATEL: Alright, then it seems you've made a mistake with the name. The person sitting next to me is not Lulanga Mtanga, Lulanga Mtanga is a woman who works in our offices. This is an investigating officer who took the statement from you.
MR SNOEK: Maybe I made a mistake with the name but he is the one who came and made a statement.
MS PATEL: Are you denying that you told him that you always reported to Mr Toboti?
MR SNOEK: No I didn't tell him. Mr Toboti was not in South Africa at that time, how can I report to someone who I knew that he was in Zimbabwe?
MS PATEL: Are you saying that this is a fabrication?
MR SNOEK: The last paragraph of this statement, I didn't say what is written here.
MS PATEL: The plan that was hatched to go to the farm, whose idea was it?
MR SNOEK: There was a discussion between myself and comrade Tshikila, I was the one who went to Mr Timothy Janje and because of what was happening in Uitenhage at that time and I approached Mr Timothy Janje and I told him about what we discussed with Comrade Tshikila and in that time I was desperate, I wanted arms or weapons and Mr Timothy Janje said that he was not responsible for that, I should go to Mandla Nkonki who was responsible for security.
MS PATEL: The question Mr Snoek is, I accept that you say that Mr Nkonki said that you must go ahead. My question is regarding the plan as to who was going to do what, what the target would be, those details, who made those decisions? Were those decisions made by yourself or did you discuss it with your co-applicant or did you discuss it with Mr Nkonki as well, how did that come about, who made those decisions?
MR SNOEK: I made those decisions where we should attack. I'm the person who identified the target.
MS PATEL: What information did you have at your disposal before you identified the target or in order to identify that specific target?
MR SNOEK: There is a comrade who gave me information about weapons that were there on Phillipus Sharp's farm. That is why I just said I'm the person who decided where the target should be because I already had information about this place that had weapons.
MS PATEL: Okay and what exactly did - the person who informed you that there were weapons, what exactly did this person say to you, what was the extent of the information given over to you?
MR SNOEK: He told me that there are R4 and R1 rifles even 303's as well available that Mr Sharp's got.
MS PATEL: Is that all he said to you?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: He didn't tell you where the weapons were exactly?
MR SNOEK: No not exactly, he didn't tell me exactly where the weapons are.
MS PATEL: Did you ask him how he knew that there were weapons on the farm?
MR SNOEK: I didn't ask this person, I just believed him because he was a foreman on that farm. Simply because he was an employee for a long period there so I assumed that he is telling the truth.
MS PATEL: Before you went to the farm did you know the lay-out of the farm?
MR SNOEK: No I knew nothing.
MS PATEL: You went to the farm in order to get the weapons, you didn't know exactly where to go or where to start looking?
MR SNOEK: No I didn't know exactly where to find the weapons hree in the house but what I knew is that as soon as I arrived there I will attack somebody, keep that person in possession and take the weapons.
MS PATEL: So are you saying that it is part of the initial plan that somebody would be attacked?
MR SNOEK: No we didn't plan to attack really, we planned to get weapons there, not to attack.
MS PATEL: You planned to take only weapons?
MR SNOEK: Yes the plan was to take the weapons only.
MS PATEL: This person who gave you the information, was he somebody who bought dagga from you at some stage?
MR SNOEK: Not, he wasn't buying the dagga from me, but he came to the township to buy dagga. He came to me to show me where he can get one.
MS PATEL: Get one what?
MR SNOEK: This person didn't come to me directly to buy dagga, he was coming to the location because he was a coloured person but an African. When he is in the location I would accompany him and help him to find the dagga.
MS PATEL: Is he the Mr Hermanus that is referred to in your statement?
MR SNOEK: Yes that's him.
MS PATEL: Okay and you say he was the foreman on this farm?
MR SNOEK: Yes he was the foreman on this farm at some time but not during that period.
MS PATEL: Did you know whether there were vehicles on the farm at that time?
MR SNOEK: According to the information that I have, there were cars. As far as I know anyone who has a farm cannot be without a car.
MS PATEL: Why did you arrange for Matthews Vusani to only drop you off and not wait for you?
MR SNOEK: That is because I was sure that there is transport there.
MS PATEL: So the plan then would not be only to go and steal weapons, it would be to steal a vehicles as well, that was part of the original plan, wouldn't you say?
MR SNOEK: When Matthews left us there I knew that I would take the vehicle of the owner because every Boer who owned a farm had transport or a car. I knew that I would get a car there.
MS PATEL: Would you agree that you knew that you would find a car there and you would be able to steal it, so that was part of your original plan that you would go there to steal both the firearms and the car?
MR SNOEK: Don't say we were going to steal, we went there to repossess the arms.
MS PATEL: Perhaps thee interpretation was - I heard you say the arms, did you say that you went there to repossess the vehicles as well? The interpretation only came across that you say you went there to repossess arms, could you please just clarify?
MR SNOEK: Matthews, I didn't want to wait for us because I didn't want him to know about our mission, so I told him to drop me there and I wouldn't go on foot from Steytlerville to the Transkei. So when I went to that farm having this information about this farm I knew that there were cars on that farm and I knew that each and every farmer had a car. It's not that we went there to steal his cars and his weapons, we were there to repossess them.
MR LAX: The question Mr Snoek was really a simple one, it does not require a long answer, was it part of your plan or not, from what you say it's clear that it was part of your plan? Isn't that correct? Just give me a simple yes or a no, thank you.
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: Thank you. You say you needed the vehicle to go to Transkei, is that correct?
MR SNOEK: When we got the weapons there I wouldn't go on foot to Transkei with these weapons, I had to take a car.
CHAIRPERSON: You must please listen to the questions, the question was simple, is it correct that you needed the vehicle to go to Transkei, that was the question, did you need the vehicle, did you take the vehicle in order to go to Transkei, that is the question, it's very simple, we don't need to know that you can't walk there on foot.
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: Okay. The area that your co-applicant Mr Tshikila came from where was the conflict, which area was that?
MR SNOEK: In Khayelitsha in kwaNunguse, Uitenhage.
MS PATEL: So why did you need to go to Transkei if the weapons that were needed was for Mr Tshikila to protect himself in a different area?
MR SNOEK: If Comrade Tshikila got a weapon that he wanted I would then go to the Transkei.
MS PATEL: For what purpose?
MR SNOEK: In Transkei - I needed a weapon to go to the Transkei because there was also conflict in the Transkei, the IFP went to kill the Xhosas in Transkei.
MS PATEL: Now I don't understand. I thought the plan initially was that you were approached by Mr Tshikila, he needed weapons because there was conflict in the area where he stayed and that was the motivation for the robbery, that you needed weapons for him. Now are you saying that you needed weapons for yourself because there was conflict in Transkei?
MR SNOEK: These weapons, it's not that I wanted them for myself, I wanted them for the organisation.
MS PATEL: And did you discuss this with Mr Nkonki as well, that there was a reason besides Mr Tshikila's needs for the robbery to take place?
MR SNOEK: There were a lot of reasons because the conflict in Uitenhage and the conflict in the Transkei, let me put it this way, all over the country there was a conflict. So when we didn't have a weapon at that time that would be very difficult for you, things would be difficult for you if you didn't have a weapon at that time.
MS PATEL: The question is very simple Mr Snoek, did you discuss this with Mr Nkonki when he authorised you to assist Mr Tshikila?
MR SNOEK: That I'm going to go to the Transkei?
MS PATEL: That you were going to get a weapon so that you could go to Transkei as well, yes.
MR SNOEK: No I didn't tell him that.
MS PATEL: Why not?
MR SNOEK: Because I didn't see it as necessary for me to tell him.
MS PATEL: You said at the start Mr Snoek that before you embarked on any operation you needed Mr Nkonki's authorisation because he was the head of security. Why are you saying now that you didn't deem it necessary to discuss this with him? Are you saying that you were entitled to embark on operations out of your own without it being authorised by anybody else?
MR SNOEK: If I came back from that farm with weapons I would tell Mr Nkonki everything but after all this I wanted to go back to the Transkei. That is why I didn't feel that there was a need for me to tell him that I would go to the Transkei.
MS PATEL: Are you saying then that you were entitled to embark on operations on your own decisions without any authorisation?
MR SNOEK: Regarding permission to go to the Transkei, I didn't think that I had to get that I had to get or be authorised to go to the Transkei. If I had finished the mission I would go to him as the person who gave me permission to go for this operation, and then after reporting to him I would then go to the Transkei.
MS PATEL: I'm sorry I don't understand, could you repeat that please?
MR SNOEK: What I'm saying Ma'am is when you're asking me this question that I had an authorisation or I would be able to do things on my own, if I succeeded getting these arms I would go back to Uitenhage and hand them to Mr Nkonki. After that I would on my own go to the Transkei.
MS PATEL: So you weren't intending to leave from the farm straight to the Transkei, you were intending to come back and report back to Mr Nkonki what had transpired and then leave to Transkei?
MR SNOEK: Exactly.
MS PATEL: And so you needed to take a car from the farm so that you could go to Transkei after this operation was completed for something else.
MR SNOEK: Yes I would say so. If I had succeeded and come back to Uitenhage I would then proceed to Transkei, no matter if even I would have to leave this vehicle of this farmer but I for one I would go to Transkei.
MS PATEL: Sorry did you just say that you would have left the vehicle of the farmer but you still would have proceeded to Transkei?
MR SNOEK: That would depend whether I'm leaving the car or taking it with but what I'm exactly saying, after I have finished my mission and came back and reported to Mr Nkonki, I personally, I had intentions to go to Transkei.
MS PATEL: So in order to get the weapons from the farm it wasn't necessary for you to steal the car because the purpose of stealing the car would be for you to transport yourself to Transkei and that had nothing to do with Mr Tshikila's request to you or the order that you had received from Mr Nkonki?
MR SNOEK: An order to rob the weapons, I for one under the circumstances that I knew, if you are repossessing something from whites you just take anything and then with the valuable things that you can donate in your organisations, you take them as well.
MS PATEL: ...(indistinct) plan then as you said is not correct, you said at the start that the plan was only to get firearms, now you are you are saying that it encompassed taking whatever was of value wherever you found it. That's not what you said at the start, it's not part of the initial plan or am I misunderstanding you, I don't know, explain please?
MR SNOEK: Your Honour, when you are going to rob according to the instructions I will say so, when you are arriving at your destination, done the repossessing, I for one, I've decided to take any item that is valuable from that place so that I can be able to donate to the organisation. Under the circumstances that I knew.
CHAIRPERSON: I was just going to ask you, it's clear from the record that besides a firearm you took a whole lot of other goods, there's a whole list of them, did you donate those to the organisation and if so, when and whom?
MR SNOEK: We were going to take the valuables to the organisation, unfortunately we came across a road block.
MS PATEL: You didn't receive prior authorisation from Mr Nkonki to take whatever was of value there, did you?
MR SNOEK: No I didn't get an order or an instruction to do that, I only got an instruction to take weapons only.
MR LAX: If I could come in here. Sorry, just to go back to an unanswered question which was, so your original plan was only to take weapons as you already told us, is that right?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MR LAX: And you obviously changed that plan along the way but your early evidence to that effect is correct?
MR SNOEK: Yes that's correct.
ADV BOSMAN: May I just come in here? Mr Snoek at what stage did you decide that you were going to take a car?
MR SNOEK: I only decided when I noticed it's about to be in the early hours of the morning.
MR LAX: You see why did you then send Matthews away if you had no transport, if it wasn't part of your plan?
MR SNOEK: Sir as I've already said before in each and every farm there is transport, so when I went to that farm I knew that I would get transport from that farm, that is why I sent Matthews back. I just told him to go and drop me there because I knew I would get transport there.
MR LAX: Well then the answer you've just given to my colleague is not right because you said you decided to take the car when it was late and you were on the farm, and in fact that's not true. What is in fact true is that you decided to take the car knowing that there would be a vehicle on the farm because as you say, most white farmers have vehicles on their farms, so it was part of your original plan to take the vehicle and the firearms, and the answer that you gave is not right. Isn't this right, isn't this correct?
MR SNOEK: Yes I knew from the beginning that I would take transport in that farm.
MS PATEL: Can I just to go back Mr Snoek confirm that the reason for taking the vehicle, that that didn't relate necessarily to the taking of firearms.
MR SNOEK: Yes I do confirm that taking a car had nothing to do with taking firearms but as I've already said before, when I went to that farm I knew that I was going to get transport there.
MS PATEL: But you could have left with the firearms ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I think we can move off the question about the vehicle Ms Patel, we've got a fair picture and he said it a number of times. I think what you're going to be putting to him I think can be put up in argument.
MS PATEL: When you went to the farm there were two farmhouses on this farm, how did you know which one to go to?
MR SNOEK: There were not two houses, there was one house on this farm.
MR LAX: So are you saying the place you found the firearms was in the farmhouse of that farm, and there was only one farmhouse on that farm? Is that what you're saying?
MR SNOEK: There were two farms there, one on the other side and then the other on the other side. We went to the first farm, that's where I got weapons.
MS PATEL: Did the farms not belong to the same person?
MR SNOEK: Yes they belonged to the same person according to my knowledge, they belonged to the same person.
MS PATEL: When Mr Hermanus told you that there were firearms on the farm, did he then not specify, given that you now say there's more than one farm, did he not specify which farm?
MR SNOEK: Comrade Hermanus told me that in both farms there are weapons.
MS PATEL: That wasn't your - you didn't tell us that earlier on, you didn't mention farms when you testified earlier, was that just a mistake or did you forget?
MR SNOEK: You didn't ask me that.
MR LAX: You see it's not about us asking you, it's about you telling us what happened. We don't know, we weren't there, you're supposed to be helping us understand the facts, so it's not whether she asked you a question or not. You spoke of a farm, he told you to go to a particular farm and that on that farm you would find guns. You didn't say that he said there were two farms and there were guns on both those farms. That's what you're being asked. Do you understand what you're being asked?
MR SNOEK: Yes I do understand what I am being asked, my answer to that is I was not asked what kind of information Mr Hermanus gave me. You didn't ask me what kind of information he gave me, that is why I didn't tell her.
MS PATEL: Perhaps I should leave this point to argument, it's clear. When you went to, as you say, the first farm, how did you gain access to the premises, to the farmhouse itself?
MR SNOEK: I knocked at the door, I knew that I was going to knock at the door.
MS PATEL: In the middle of the night you were going to knock on the door?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: And then what.
MR SNOEK: But when I arrived there I knocked at the door but I found out that there was nobody inside the house.
MS PATEL: Okay so how did you get into the house?
MR SNOEK: I found an open window, I then went through the window of the house.
MS PATEL: You didn't gain access by breaking the lock to the door?
MR SNOEK: No I didn't break the door or the lock of the door.
MS PATEL: And Mr Tshikila was present with you at that time?
MR SNOEK: Yes he was there.
MS PATEL: So he will confirm this, that you went through a window.
MR SNOEK: Yes I'm sure that he will confirm that I went through the window.
MS PATEL: If you'll bear with me a moment Mr Chairperson. Okay if I can just refer you to a statement by Mr Tshikila on page 15 of the bundle. Mr Tshikila says that 'we got an iron rod and broke open the door open the door and we both got in, is that not right, what is your comment on that?
MR SNOEK: Not on the first farm, this one happened on the next farm, the second one.
MR LAX: In the statement he is talking about the first farm, he's not talking about the second farm. Just listen to the question before you speak, let me finish. He's talking about getting into the safe and taking out a 303 rifle as well as some cash of about R1 000. So it's clear he's talking about the first farm and he contextualises it by referring to things that happened on the first farm, not the second farm. So you think he's just making a mistake?
MR SNOEK: I think he is making a mistake because the statement that he is giving now it is about the robbery on the second farm.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that getting to the second farm you took an iron rod and broke the lock?
MR SNOEK: Yes that's what happened on the second farm, I broke the garage door.
MS PATEL: When you both went into the house, who searched the house, did you search it together or did you do it alone?
CHAIRPERSON: Are you talking of the first house?
MS PATEL: Yes yes I am.
MR SNOEK: I cannot clearly remember.
MS PATEL: Can you recall where the firearm was found that you took?
MR SNOEK: In the safe.
MS PATEL: Did you take any money from the safe, was there money there?
MR SNOEK: Yes there was money but I don't know the amount, I cannot clearly remember.
MS PATEL: Did you take the money?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: Why did you not say that in your affidavit, the affidavit that was handed in this morning, why did you not say that you took money, was that an oversight? If I can refer you to paragraph 8 of your affidavit, all you say is that
"We entered the first farm, there were no people and we managed to get one firearm, we then proceeded to the second farm".
MR SNOEK: So Ma'am what do you clearly want to know here? Can you please repeat your question for me?
MS PATEL: The question is, given that you've admitted now that you took money from the safe, my question is why was this not stated in your affidavit that was tendered this morning? The only thing you say in your affidavit that you took from the first farm was the firearm.
MR SNOEK: What I've said here are the items we had taken, maybe I forgot about this money thing.
MS PATEL: And you say you can't remember how much it was?
MR SNOEK: No.
MS PATEL: Would you dispute it if I put to you that it was about R1 000?
MR SNOEK: I don't want to argue with you or I don't want to disagree with you, as I said before I really cannot remember the amount so I will not disagree with you, I really don't know the amount whether it was ten thousand or not, I cannot remember.
MS PATEL: Mr Tshikila says it was about a thousand rand.
MR SNOEK: Maybe he's telling the truth, as I said I don't know the amount.
MS PATEL: It's enough money to transport you to Transkei without having to take a car, don't you agree?
MR SNOEK: Are you saying to take weapons with? Are you asking me about taking one thousand and weapons? I cannot clearly hear you or understand you?
MS PATEL: The question was very simple.
CHAIRPERSON: I think it's also basically a point that can be raised, I mean he's just asking for an opinion here.
MS PATEL: You'd never been inside the house before, the first one, the first farmhouse?
MR SNOEK: I was in the house before.
MS PATEL: When was this?
MR SNOEK: The very same year.
MS PATEL: What were you doing there?
MR SNOEK: I came there to search for the weapons.
MS PATEL: Earlier on in the same year?
CHAIRPERSON: That's what he said.
MR SNOEK: I cannot remember exactly when, but what I can tell you it was not the first time for me to get arms there.
MS PATEL: How many times were you there to get arms before this incident?
MR SNOEK: It was the second time.
MS PATEL: You say you got the rifle from the safe, how did you open the safe?
MR SNOEK: I found a bundle of keys in that house. I also noticed that there was a safe key there as well and then I went to the room where the safe was. I tested this key and it opened.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Snoek, sorry just on this point, I'm just reading from my notes what you said earlier and I just want you to explain if you think there's a contradiction to explain it. When you were asked earlier, you were talking about Mr Hermanus giving you information. You said "I got information about weapons on Sharp's farm. I was told that there were R4's and R5's and 303 rifles there, I didn't ask how he knew the weapons were on the farm, he was an employee of the farm". Then the question was
"Did you know the layout of the farm"?
And you said:
"No I knew nothing".
Now you're saying that this wasn't the first time you got there, what is the correct position then?
MR SNOEK: I'm not lying when I'm saying it was not the first time. Mr Hermanus gave me information long before about getting arms there.
CHAIRPERSON: Before the first time that you went, are you talking about?
MR SNOEK: Yes. I got this information before the first time I went to that farm. When I went there for the first time I already had this information.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Patel?
MS PATEL: Did you know where to find the keys to the safe?
MR SNOEK: The keys of the safe? No I didn't know where I was going to get them.
MS PATEL: You see Mr Tshikila states in his statement that after you both got in, he says that after switching on the lights he, meaning you, fetched the keys to the safe and we then opened the safe. Now when I read that, it appears as if you knew where the keys were, you knew where the safe was and that there was no searching being done for these keys.
MR SNOEK: What I know is that when I went to that house through the window, I searched in the bedroom of the owner, I looked in the drawers, I found a bundle of keys, I then checked those keys and then I found a safe key. I then went looking for a room with this safe, I found the safe and then I opened it with this key.
MR LAX: Hang on a second, you knew where the safe was, you'd already taken firearms from there before, you didn't have to go looking for the safe, you knew exactly where it was.
MR SNOEK: I knew where the safe is.
MR LAX: Why were you looking for it if you knew where it was?
MR SNOEK: That was a big house with a lot of rooms, so if I went to that house the previous year I wouldn't think that that safe would be in the same place.
MR LAX: But you weren't there the previous year you were there the same year.
MR SNOEK: Yes I'm just making an example.
MR LAX: Yes but you hadn't been there very long before that, it wasn't so long ago between the first time and the second time, isn't that correct?
MR SNOEK: That is correct.
MR LAX: So it's got nothing to do with the passing of time. Anyway carry on Ms Patel.
MS PATEL: Thank you. Did you also knew what type of vehicles there were on the farm?
MR SNOEK: There is only one car I knew on that farm, it was a bakkie.
MS PATEL: How did you know this?
MR SNOEK: I saw it when I was there for the first time.
MS PATEL: Was it parked at the same farm as the first farm? Did you see ...(indistinct)
MR SNOEK: Yes I saw it parked there.
MS PATEL: Sorry, just give me a momment. Why did you decide to go to the second farm?
MR SNOEK: It is because the weapons that I found there it only one rifle and there was no transport on that first farm.
MS PATEL: Were there no cars at all on the first farm, no vehicles?
MR SNOEK: Not at all.
MS PATEL: Did you not try to start a vehicle at the first farm that you had problems with and then because that didn't start you went to the second farmhouse?
MR SNOEK: On the first farm we didn't find any car.
MS PATEL: So my recollection is that, I just can't find the reference for it, is that you found a car at the first farm but had problems with it and then left it and that was the reason that you moved to the second farm.
ADV BOSMAN: If you look at page 15 Ms Patel, third paragarph, it's Tshikila's statement ...(indistinct) a van not a car.
MS PATEL: Yes it's in fact your co-applicant mentioned this. He says you tried to drive it, it was a van, it says: "We tried to drive it but the engine would not run. It was then that Willy said we must go to the other farmhouse to get the 4X4 Isuzu belonging to the farm owner". So is Mr Tshikila wrong when he says this?
MR SNOEK: He is making a mistake Ma'am because in the first farm we didn't find any transport at all.
MS PATEL: Okay so then you decided to go to the second farm.
MR SNOEK: Yes I took that decision that we should go to the second farm.
MS PATEL: And you broke the lock to the garage door, is that correct?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: And then what was the problem with the car that you found there, why couldn't you take it?
MR SNOEK: It didn't want to start, we couldn't start it.
MS PATEL: And so you decided that you needed the van's keys for it?
MR SNOEK: We decided to go back to the van in the garage. I tried to open the door of the second one but I couldn't open it and it was sunrise at that time.
MS PATEL: Had you ever been to the second farm before this time?
MR SNOEK: No, I was never there before, the second farm.
MS PATEL: Did you have any idea who would be in the farmhouse?
MR SNOEK: No I didn't know who we were going to find there.
MS PATEL: If anyone at all? You didn't know that there would be anyone there then.
MR SNOEK: On the second farm?
MS PATEL: Yes.
MR SNOEK: What I noticed, I went to the garage to see whether there are cars there. I then realised that there were people inside after checking the garage.
MS PATEL: Simply because you saw the cars there you assumed that there would be people there?
MR SNOEK: Yes I also saw a cortina that I said I once saw it parked at the first farmhouse, that is when I assumed that there are people in this house.
MS PATEL: Now in accordance with your plan for when you went to the first farmhouse, you said that you would go there and knock. Why did you not do the same at this farmhouse, why did you wait, what was the purpose of that? You'd also said earlier that you were prepared to attack if necessary. I don't understand why you waited, could you please explain that?
MR SNOEK: It's because it already was about sunrise so I knew that there were people there and I decided that the attack will take place if they did appear.
MS PATEL: Now the question is, why did you wait?
MR SNOEK: When you are going to attack someone you don't just go and attack people with weapons. I for one, I knew that as it was already about sunrise, they will appear at any stage, so there was no need for me to go and knock.
MS PATEL: But you were armed yourself at that stage, you'd already had, what was it, was it a rifle that you took from the first house?
MR SNOEK: Yes I was also armed but the way that I was armed was not exactly armed in the true sense of the word because I noticed that the rifle had a problem.
MS PATEL: When did you notice this, that the rifle had a problem, did you try using it before you got to the second farm?
MR SNOEK: I know the rifle, I know the rifle exactly, so the moment I was taking it, I took out the magazine that was in there, I put in a new one but I noticed that the bullet had difficulty to go inside the run of the rifle, so I knew that it needed some repairs somewhere somehow.
MR LAX: If I could just go back to something you said, you said that you decided to wait because it was nearly morning and it was almost sunrise, is that right?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MR LAX: You see, look at page 4 of your statement, the last paragraph - page 4 of the record, sorry, page 4 of the bundle, the last paragraph on page 4, the second last paragraph. Have you got page 4? If you look at the second last paragraph, you talk about going to the farm, you say
"One day Arthur and I travelled to Gert's Kraal Farm and on out arrival there at midnight we waited until in the morning for Phillipus Swart to come out but it was his wife who came out. We grabbed her and tied her legs after we had pointed to her with a gun"
So you waited from midnight until early in the morning before someone came out. That's not the same as what you just told us in your evidence. Please explain this to us.
MR SNOEK: Which one, that I've just said now?
MR LAX: According to your statement you waited from midnight till the morning, but now you're saying you only waited from early in the morning just before sunrise till they came out. Just explain this difference to us.
MR SNOEK: I've just said we pushed a bakkie far from the house so that we can start the engine, so that took some time. Even to take the bakkie back under the trees so that the owner can not notice that there were people around in his yard, so that process took time up until it was in the morning.
MS PATEL: The time that you spent trying to, that you moved the bakkie, was this not at the first farm?
MR SNOEK: Your Honour it's on the second farm, not the first farm.
MS PATEL: Okay and how many hours did this take, from midnight to sunrise, for what, five hours? Because you've confirmed even in your affidavit that was tendered this morning that you arrived at the farm at 12 o'clock at night? Are you saying the process of trying to start the bakkie and moving it down took you four to five hours at least?
MR SNOEK: Your Honour, from the first farm walking to the second farm, arrive there, break the garage door, take a car out, open the gate pushing the car in order for it to be far away from the house and when you are about to be on the field, seeing hills and approaching hills and you are the only person who's got strength enough. So I cannot say that would take me so many hours, but I could notice that it was about to be the morning.
MS PATEL: When the woman came out from the farmhouse you accosted here at the garage, is that right, or you accosted her and took her into the garage and to the store room?
MR SNOEK: I didn't take her into the garage, she got there by herself.
MS PATEL: Okay so it was in the garage then that you got her?
MR SNOEK: Yes at the last door of the garage where I got her.
MS PATEL: Was Mr Tshikila with you at the time?
MR SNOEK: At the time I was coming across to this woman Mr Tshikila was in the other garage.
MS PATEL: Can you please explain exactly how you assaulted her?
MR SNOEK: When I followed her whilst she was going inside the garage, I pointed at her with the rifle asking her to obey but she couldn't, she screamed instead and when she screamed I grabbed her forcing her to get down, I assaulted her with the back of the gun on her head but before I hit her with the back of the gun, I first assaulted her with my hands clapping her and fisting her. After that I knocked her on her head with the back of the gun.
MS PATEL: Did you cover her mouth at that stage with a cloth or not, what did you cover her mouth with(...intervention)? MR SNOEK: I tried to cover her mouth but I couldn't succeed in so much that she couldn't scream because I was trying to cover her mouth and she would strive and she would succeed.
(background audience noise)
CHAIRPERSON: Please be quiet, it's not that very funny.
MR LAX: Sorry he said that the reason he couldn't succeed was that he was trying to hit her and cover her mouth at the same time. Did I get your answer correctly?
MR SNOEK: Whilst I was grabbing her, throwing her down it's the time I was hitting her with a fist and clapping her with my hands.
MR LAX: And you were trying to put something in her mouth to stop her from shouting.
MR SNOEK: At the very same time I was taking off my hat trying to cover her mouth with it.
MS PATEL: So at that stage you didn't succeed in getting her quiet. Is that correct?
MR SNOEK: I did not succeed because she screamed for a very long time.
MS PATEL: Did you tie her up before you went into the house?
MR SNOEK: Yes I did tie her just before I went to attack the husband.
MS PATEL: Was she still screaming at that time?
MR SNOEK: Yes she was but in a very low tone by the time I was tying her.
MS PATEL: Did Tshikila come and help you tie her up?
MR SNOEK: Yes he gave me a hand.
MS PATEL: Did you question her about anything?
MR SNOEK: I didn't ask her any questions. The only thing I said to her the first time I was approaching her whilst I was pointing at her with the rifle, I was just asking her to obey.
MS PATEL: To obey what?
MR SNOEK: My instructions.
MS PATEL: What were those instructions?
MR SNOEK: To sit down and tie her.
MR LAX: Your instructions to her was that she should tie herself up?
MR SNOEK: My instructions were for her not to scream and sit down and I was going to tie her.
MR LAX: This was a 58 year old woman that you were dealing with.
MR SNOEK: Yes, but I don't know her age.
MS PATEL: You didn't ask her anything about who was in the house or where the keys were or any other weapons in the house? You didn’t ask her anything? You just asked her to obey your instructions? Is that correct?
MR SNOEK: There was nothing I could say to her because her reaction gave me no chance to ask her any questions even if I had intentions to do so.
MS PATEL: Mr Snoek, you stated that the reason you waited was because you knew farmers had firearms. You didn’t know how many people there were in the house because you deduced only from the fact that there were cars parked there, that there were in fact people in the house. Are you saying then that you didn’t see it necessary to question this old woman that you had? You had a gun in your hand, you had tied her up, you weren’t going to ask her who or what is in the house so that you can prepare yourself, because remember your testimony is that you didn’t know anything about that house. You had never been there before. And yet, despite all of that, you decided to proceed and go into the house. The woman had been screaming already, wouldn’t she have alerted people in the house?
MR SNOEK: As I have said before Ma'am, the way she was screaming and the way she was reacting, I had no chance to ask her any questions because she was screaming so much that I got scared and people inside the house could hear her screaming. I tied her and I said to my comrade, he must look after her, I am going inside.
MS PATEL: So now you are saying, you tied her in a sack before you went into the house?
MR LAX: Sorry I didn’t hear anything about a sack.
CHAIRPERSON: I didn’t hear anything about a sack either.
MR LAX: You just told your - you tied her up and then you told your Comrade Mr Tshikila to look after her while you went to the house. That was your answer as I heard it, is that right?
MR SNOEK: Yes. After I’ve tied her, I ask Mr Tshikila to look after her whilst I was going inside the house.
MR LAX: So you didn’t assault her in any other way after you tied her?
MR SNOEK: What I did, I took the bags full of fertiliser and put them on her sides in order for her to be steady.
MR LAX: You put it on her head, not on her sides? Why don’t you tell us the truth? You put it on her head, to stop her shouting, a 50kg sack of meal. Isn’t that the truth?
MR SNOEK: To put the sacks on the head, its not true, in order for her not to breath.
MR LAX: You tried to make her keep her quiet, not to make her not breathe.
MR LAX: Are you saying - did you put the sack on her head or on her sides, what are you saying Mr Snoek?
MR SNOEK: As she was lying on the floor, I took the sacks and put the sacks on her side as I have indicated, not putting the sacks on her head. The bags that were there were not so much. I for one cannot carry a 50kg of mealies. How come can I take a 50kg of bag put on one person’s head?
MR LAX: So you deny that you put a bag on her head? Is that right?
MR SNOEK: I don’t know about putting bags on her head but putting bags on her sides, its true.
MR LAX: Well the question is, do you deny that you put a bag on her head?, yes or no? It is very simple.
MR SNOEK: The bags were not on the head. There may be on the head ...
MR LAX: I can’t hear the translation.
MR SNOEK: I want to get this clear. To take a 50kgs of bags to put on the face I didn’t do but to take the bags to support her on the sides in order for her not to move, because she was not screaming as loud as she did before. The reason why I put those bags there, its for my colleague not to struggle if she wants to get up.
MR LAX: So you don’t know anything about a bag on her head?
MR SNOEK: No.
MS PATEL: And the reason for the bags on the side was so that she wouldn’t struggle in case, I mean you were going to go into the house and so that she wouldn’t be a problem to the co-applicant, this old woman who had her legs tied and that’s your explanation?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: But she had already been assaulted by you, you have admitted to hitting her with the gun, to slapping her. She was now tied on the floor. Did your co-applicant at any stage put a bag over her head?
MR SNOEK: I don’t know whether he did that or not because when I finished tying her legs, I told my comrade to watch over her, to watch her because I am going to attack the husband inside the house.
MS PATEL: When you came back ...(intervention)
MR LAX: You have just said, you were going to attack the husband inside the house, your previous evidence was that you didn’t know that there was anybody in the house. Please explain this to us?
MR SNOEK: Which evidence are your referring to, please explain to me which evidence are you referring to? When did I say that I didn’t know that there were other people in the house because I said, I was told. I deducted from seeing the cars that there were people inside the house.
MR LAX: Your previous evidence was you didn’t know who, that there would be people in the house, you didn’t know who would be in the house. You saw that there were cars there, you saw one person. You didn’t know how many other people might be there. You certainly didn’t know whether this old lady had a husband or not. Now you’re saying, you went, you were going to go and get the husband. Now either you knew that she had a husband, in which case everything else you’ve told us isn’t correct with regard to knowing that there was nobody there or you didn’t know that she had a husband but you were expecting maybe to find someone else there. Do you understand my question?
MR SNOEK: Sir, I said before, seeing the cars there I assumed that there were people inside the house. There was not only one person because I saw the Cortina that I saw before, it was in that house together with the Isuzu. From seeing those cars I then realised that there were people inside the house, not a person.
MR LAX: Let me take you to paragraph, page 15 again, to your co-applicant’s affidavit. The top paragraph on page 15 says this
"Willy had told me that there were two farmhouses in that farm and one of which the farm owner and his girlfriend were sleeping in, while the other we were going to, would have no occupants."
So you knew the farm owner was there, you knew he would be in the house with his girlfriend as you put it. It was in fact his stepmother. That’s what your co-applicant says. Is he making another mistake or is that the truth?
MR SNOEK: Yes, he is telling the truth because I told him this after we left the first farm. I told him this, there was another farm. I then said that maybe the farm owner is in this second farm.
CHAIRPERSON: I see that it is 14:05 now and as mentioned earlier, we’ll take the lunch break now for half an hour. We’ll take a half an hour adjournment, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
Mr Snoek I remind you that you still under your former oath. Ms Patel.
WILLY LITHO SNOEK: (s.u.o.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: (continued) Thank you Honourable Chairperson.
Mr Snoek, just before the adjournment we were on the question of the bag that was allegedly placed over the head of the deceased. The Court at your trial - in fact if one looks at the Judgement on page 25, the Court confirms that you were the one who placed the bag containing the mealies on the face of the deceased and if I can take you to page 46 also of the bundle of documents, the second paragraph, it is in fact a statement by yourself in which you are explaining the events that took place and if I can just read to you, it says:
"so toe ek haar kop met die sak toegedruk en Njengenja het haar voete vasgebind, het sy begin stil raak".
Are you deny ...?
MR LAX: Sorry, just one second. We don’t seem to have our Afrikaans interpreters with us. I see that cubicle is empty and I am not sure that our Xhosa interpreters can necessarily go from the one to the other. Perhaps if you could - Sonya if you wouldn’t mind? Otherwise I am sure Adv Bosman could probably provide a literal translation?
ADV BOSMAN: Xhosa? (Laughter).
MR LAX: No, in English and then ...
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I think perhaps, if the Adv Bosman will read the Afrikaans in English and then you can translate from the English.
ADV BOSMAN
"So then I covered her head with the sack and Njengenja tied her feet and she then became quiet."
Is that all you wanted Ms Patel?
MS PATEL: Yes thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you hear that Mr Snoek? Did that get translated?
MR SNOEK: Yes I did.
MS PATEL: What is your comment on this, are you denying that you made this statement and that the Court was incorrect in its finding, that you were in fact the one who placed the bag over the deceased’s head?
MR SNOEK: No I am not denying it.
MS PATEL: So you are agreeing that you the one that put the bag on her head?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: OK. Did you know the owner of the farm at all?
MR SNOEK: No I didn’t.
MS PATEL: You had never seen him before, never had any dealings with him whatsoever?
MR SNOEK: No I never had any dealings with him. I never had any contacts with him.
MS PATEL: In that same statement that I referred you to in which you admitted to putting the bag over her head, if you turn to page 42, the second paragraph, it says in Afrikaans
"ek ken die Oubaas goed".
ADV BOSMAN: I’ll just translate that.
"I know the Oubaas well."
MR SNOEK: The wife I didn’t know but Mr Phillipus Sharp. I had an idea about him but not knowing him per se.
MS PATEL: What is this idea that you had about him, could you elaborate please?
MR SNOEK: I was heard or told about him, so then I was looking for this person that I was told about and then I had an idea of whom was he.
MS PATEL: Why were you looking for the person, I thought you were looking for firearms?
MR SNOEK: To look for the person did not happen at the same moment whereby I had intention to get firearms. I was looking for the person after I got the information from Hermanus.
MS PATEL: I’m sorry, I still don’t understand. Why were you looking for Mr Sharp?
MR SNOEK: I got information about him, that he’s got many weapons in his farm.
MS PATEL: Did you know anything else about him?
MR SNOEK: No, nothing else I know about Mr Sharp. The only thing that I know is that he had weapons in his farm.
MS PATEL: Why is it then in that same statement, in the second paragraph as well, at page 42. Adv Bosman, if you may just after me
"Ek het gewag, ek wil gewag het totdat dit dag raak. Totdat die Oubaas kerk toe gaan."
ADV BOSMAN
"Till daylight."
I’ll just repeat that.
"I wanted to wait until daylight came. Until the Oubaas went to the church."
MS PATEL: Did you say that?
MR SNOEK: Yes, I said it in the Courts of Law.
MS PATEL: So how did you know - if you didn’t know anything about him, how did you know he would be going to church?
MR SNOEK: I was waiting for him to appear, that’s it. For him to go to church, I don’t know, I didn’t say it but to wait until the sun rises, I did that.
MS PATEL: Okay. In fact, you go further, you call him Oubaas Flippie, which is an indication that you knew him a lot better than you would like us to believe. Did you never refer to him as Oubaas Flippie?
MR SNOEK: What is written here, I didn’t write it. I didn’t say those words, like Oubaas Flippie. This was written by Mr Claasen, the person whom I gave the confession statement so he decided to write these words like Oubaas.
MS PATEL: He made up these word himself, you had nothing to do with it?
MR SNOEK: He wrote them himself, I didn’t tell him to do so.
MS PATEL: No. You may not have told him to write it down but did he make up these words himself? The reference to Oubaas Flippie, did he make that up himself? I am not saying that you told him to write it down. The question is, did you not use these words yourself?
MR SNOEK: From Mr Claasen there was never any word like Oubaas Flippie.
MR LAX: Just to help you Mr Snoek, this statement here wasn’t made by Mr Claasen, it was made by Captain Jonker. He took it down. Maybe you getting confused with a different statement that you might have made to someone else. Do you understand? Whatever the case is, the question still remains, whoever you made the statement to, did they just make up all these facts themselves or did you tell them part of the story? That is really the question you are being asked.
MR SNOEK: The one about Oubaas Flippie I never said it, I think he did that himself.
MR LAX: I see. So you didn’t know Mr Sharp by his name even? You just knew there was a farmer who had a farm, who had guns on his farm. You didn’t know what his name was or anything like that?
MR SNOEK: According to the information that I got, I knew him as a Mr Flippie.
MR LAX: So you did know him as Mr Flippie?
MR SNOEK: As far as the information is concerned, yes I knew him as Mr Flippie.
MR LAX: Then why wouldn’t you have referred to him as Flippie in your statement, if that’s what you knew him as? Those are supposed to be your words that are written there. If you knew his name as Flippie, it is not surprising that they refer to Flippie here. Do you understand?
MR SNOEK: Yes I understand.
MS PATEL: What was Mr Sharp doing when you went into the house?
MR SNOEK: When I went into the house, when I went to the house, I didn’t enter, I stood next to the door. I then met Mr Sharp while he was going to the door. I don’t know what he was doing. I met him while he was coming to the door. I waited there next to the door and then I met him there.
MS PATEL: Okay. What does that door lead into, is it the front room or is it a bedroom or is it a kitchen or what is it?
MR SNOEK: The kitchen door.
MS PATEL: And you say he was on his way to the door, to the back door?
MR SNOEK: Yes. I was standing next to the door and he was coming towards the door and then I met him there.
MS PATEL: OK and did you say anything to him?
MR SNOEK: No, I just attacked him, there was nothing I said. I said to him I want to help him about what he had in his hand and when he was giving me this I then attacked him.
MS PATEL: Sorry, did you say you wanted to help him with what he had in his hand, what do you mean by that? What did he have in his hand?
MR SNOEK: I don’t remember what it was but there was something in his hand. I greeted him, after that I told him to give this so that I could help him. When he was giving me this, then I attacked him.
MS PATEL: Oh OK. I’m sorry, are you saying he was carrying something? Is that what you are saying and that you offered to assist him?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: Okay and what was his response to your offer?
MR SNOEK: He gave me this. He handed it over and then during that process, I attacked him.
MS PATEL: He didn’t know you from before this, did he?
MR SNOEK: I wouldn’t know whether he knew me or not.
MS PATEL: But you certainly never knew him?
MR SNOEK: Not that I didn’t know him, but accordingly to the information that I got I got to know him, because of that information.
MS PATEL: So, for all intents and purposes, you were a stranger at his door in the early hours of the morning, and he says, fine, here, take this from me, whatever it is that’s in my hand, he accepts your offer for assistance?
MR SNOEK: Yes, that is correct.
MS PATEL: And this is not strange to you. Here is a white farmer accepting assistance from a person who he doesn’t know at all?
MR SNOEK: I’m telling you what happened. I waited for Mr Flippie next to the door, when he was coming towards the door carrying whatever he was carrying, that I do not remember, I then said to him, I wanted to help him and then I could see that he was shocked. While he was trying to give me this, I took it from him and then I attacked him.
MS PATEL: He was shocked but still he handed over whatever ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I don’t think we need dwell on this, its not going to be all that material. He said what’s happened.
MS PATEL: In your statement you say at page 46 that Mr Sharp, or Mr Flippie as you refer to him, was in the process of removing ash from the stove and that you then greeted him. It is the third paragraph on page 46.
ADV BOSMAN: I will just translate that into English.
"When I came into the kitchen, the Oubaas was busy removing ash from the stove. I greeted the Oubaas. I told him that he must obey me, I am just looking for the keys to the van and that I would not harm him at all."
MR SNOEK: This statement was the one I used in Court. I’m not in Court here, I am here to tell the truth.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that this statement is not the truth, this that’s being read and what you are saying is the truth, Is that what you are trying to say?
MR SNOEK: What I’m saying here is the truth. I waited for him next to the door. He then came towards the door. Its not that I didn’t find him inside the house.
MR LAX: Well maybe you can explain this to us then. If we read your statement, your affidavit, that was handed in today by your lawyer and which was read into the record, if you look at the last paragraph, which was a part of paragraph eight, you say
"I went to Mr Sharp’s house and I met him in the kitchen".
You didn’t meet him at the door, you didn’t meet him outside the door, you met him in the kitchen which is exactly what your other statement says. Is this also a mistake, is this also a lie in your affidavit? Please explain this to us.
MR SNOEK: What I said in this affidavit is the truth. I assaulted Mr Sharp in the kitchen but I waited for him in the door. I didn’t go straight to the kitchen and meet him inside. I met him - I waited for him in the door, next to the door and then I went inside the kitchen with him. I was attacking him at that time.
MR LAX: So the words
"met him in the kitchen"
is wrong, that’s not correct but the rest of its correct?
MR SNOEK: I met Mr Sharp in the door of his kitchen, not inside. I didn’t go inside and look for him. I waited for him next to the door.
ADV BOSMAN: Please tell me if I am wrong but I recall you saying to your colleague there that he must watch over the old woman, you were going to go inside the house.
MR SNOEK: Yes. I told Comrade Tshikila to watch the woman and I’m going inside to attack the husband.
ADV BOSMAN: But now you say you did not go into the house, you waited at the door.
MR SNOEK: Yes, I didn’t go in, straight inside. When I got there I waited in the door, at the door.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you, please continue.
MS PATEL: And you attacked him - you attacked Mr Sharp whilst he was handing over whatever it is that he had in your hand, in his hand, sorry.
MR SNOEK: Yes, I attacked him in that time.
MS PATEL: The telephone didn’t right before you attacked him?
MR SNOEK: The telephone rang whilst I was attacking him, not before the attack because I was outside.
MS PATEL: And did he try to answer the phone, Mr Sharp?
MR SNOEK: He tried.
MS PATEL: You see that - part of what you say is contained in the statement that is in Afrikaans. It says that after you came in and you asked for the keys and that he must obey you, and then the telephone rang and then you say that the Oubaas then went to try to grab the telephone and then you say, only after that
"ons het toe gewoel".
ADV BOSMAN: Ms Patel, I think you have it wrong there. He did not say that the Oubaas was going to grab the telephone. He said the Oubaas went ...
"toe die Oubaas na die telefoon toe gaan" - "when he went to the telephone, I grabbed to Oubaas."
MS PATEL: Yes, no, sorry.
CHAIRPERSON: What are you asking him?
MS PATEL: The applicant is saying that he attacked Mr Sharp before the telephone rang and in terms of this statement it was only afterwards that he attacked him.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What’s your comment on that Mr Snoek?
MR SNOEK: I am saying that I attacked him after the phone rang.
CHAIRPERSON: What Ms Patel is saying is, you said now here that you attacked him before the telephone rang but in this statement, the one that was used in the Court, from what you’ve said there it would appear that you only attacked him after the telephone started to ring and she is asking, have you got any comment about the difference between those two versions?
MR SNOEK: Sir, I attacked Mr Sharp, after that the phone rang. That’s what I know.
MS PATEL: Okay. You said at some stage that Mr Sharp was shocked, is that correct?
CHAIRPERSON: He was shocked or shot? Shot? Shocked?
MR SNOEK: He looked as if he was shocked when I met him at the door, when I was offering assistance for whatever he had in his hand.
MS PATEL: You see, the reason I’ve asked you these questions is, it just, it to me seems strange that you say that you didn’t know him and he didn’t know you, given that firstly he in fact did hand over whatever it is that he had in his hand and also that in terms of your statement, even after you had said to him that you want the keys to the van and that he must obey your orders, that despite that, even when the telephone rang, he still decided that he was going to try to get the call. It seems almost as if he knew you. Did you not ever work at his farm before then?
MR SNOEK: No I never worked in the farm.
MS PATEL: You're absolutely sure you never ever had any dealings with Mr Sharp before this incident?
MR SNOEK: I can’t remember any.
MS PATEL: Did you not in your interview with Mr Kaiser here, tell him that you had a grudge against Mr Sharp because you had assisted him one day or at some stage with his vehicle and that he gave you very little money for your help? Did you not tell Mr Kaiser that?
MR SNOEK: I don’t remember saying that.
MS PATEL: Is it true or not though, that this in fact what happened?
MR SNOEK: I don’t remember whether it happened or not.
MS PATEL: Surely if this is a man you went back to attack, you would have remembered whether you’d had any dealings with him before or not or did you help so many people out, that you can’t remember?
MR SNOEK: Are you referring to Mr Sharp?
MS PATEL: Yes.
MR SNOEK: I don’t remember having any contact with Mr Sharp.
MS PATEL: So its possible that you did?
MR SNOEK: I never had any dealings or contact with him.
MS PATEL: So Mr Kaiser is fabricating this as well, that you had said this to him?
MR SNOEK: Maybe he is fabricating it.
MS PATEL: Does Mr Kaiser know you from anywhere?
MR SNOEK: I don’t know whether he knows me or not.
ADV BOSMAN: Ms Patel can you just indicate where this Mr Kaiser ...
MS PATEL: No, it was a verbal instruction ...
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
MR LAX: Sorry Mr Snoek. Why would an investigator whose job is to help you get information to complete your application, who comes to see you to take a story from you, with the purpose of helping you complete your application. Why would he manufacture something that would be adverse to you?
MR SNOEK: As the investigator wanted to investigate and help me, why didn’t he write this down, if I said it?
MR LAX: We’ll have to ask him that later. I have no idea but you have already said that he made up something else that is appearing in your statement, that isn’t true, which he did write down, which we dealt with earlier this morning and you said he made that up. Why would he do that?
MR SNOEK: I don’t want to lie. The last paragraph in my statement, I am still saying that I didn’t say what is written there, honestly.
MR LAX: That’s fine. Please continue.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel, do you have any further questions?
MS PATEL: I’m almost through. There is just one more thing, I’m just trying to find the reference. If you will just bear with me.
MR LAX: While you are doing that ...
Did you testify in the Magistrate’s Court? When you appeared there? Before the Magistrate, not before the Judge? Before the Magistrate?
MR SNOEK: Yes, I gave evidence to Magistrate Claasen.
MR LAX: And you were convicted in the Magistrate’s Court on everything else except the murders and attempted murders, is that right?
MR SNOEK: In which court?
MR LAX: In the Supreme Court when you appeared, you were only there on the murders per se and attempted murders. The Judge in his Judgement says that
"The two accused came before this Court on six counts. They have already both been convicted on their Pleas of Guilty on their Counts 3 and 4 of housebreaking, with intent to steal, and theft, and on Count 5 of unlawful possession of a firearm and on Count 6 on unlawful possession of ammunition."
This leaves Counts 1 and 2 and those were the murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances. The question I am asking is, did you testify before the Magistrate and I think you have said yes you did?
MR SNOEK: The evidence I gave before the Magistrate, was about the murder. I don’t remember being convicted before or being convicted for theft. My first conviction was 20 years, a murder case. The second one was 15 years for robbery. That was my first conviction. I don’t remember being convicted before for other cases. The first time I was convicted I was convicted for 20 years.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairperson, I think it is only on interpretation were it is conviction and sentence. That is why there is this difference that he was not sentenced. He regarded "...(Xhosa word) ..." as being sentenced, not to be found guilty. So that’s where I think the interpretation ...
CHAIRPERSON: The confusion has come in. Yes, thank you Mr Mbandazayo.
MR LAX: So the point I’m making is that, you were sentenced by the Judge, that is so, but you were convicted by the Magistrate?
MR SNOEK: I was never found guilty by the Magistrate. Its the Judge that found me guilty and he sentenced me.
MR LAX: Okay. The most important issue I’m asking you about though is that you did testify before the Magistrate. Do you remember that?
MR SNOEK: The only thing that I testified, is in the Magistrate Court whereby there was a person known as Mr Claasen who was a Magistrate himself. That’s where I can remember.
MR LAX: Now in the record of your evidence in the Magistrate’s Court is exactly the same story, that appears in your statement, the statement that you made to Jonker. So in the Magistrate’s Court you gave the same version that you told Jonker. Do you understand?
MR SNOEK: Yes, I do agree.
MR LAX: Now why did you do that if it wasn’t true?
MR SNOEK: Sir, Mr Jonker and others that you are talking about, like Claasen as well, I had to work with them the way they wanted me to, simply because I was scared or I was afraid to be taken to the Death Row.
MR LAX: So, the evidence that appears there and the evidence or the version that appears in the statement, is something they made up and you just agreed to say that in Court?
MR SNOEK: As I am saying it today, I said it to them before. If they have decided to add and subtract and take off of other things, it was out of their own initiative. I didn’t ask them to give it to me to read. Simply because I wanted to do what they asking me to do.
MR LAX: Yes. The question I am saying is though, in the witness box you didn’t read the statement out. You told your story.
MR SNOEK: Yes, I had to tell my story the way it was in the papers because I had been threatened by Jonker and others. I had no chance to change anything.
MR LAX: So they gave you the paper and they made you memorise it. Is that what you are saying?
MR SNOEK: I’ve said to you Sir, that I didn’t took those papers and read them.
MR LAX: Okay. Please carry on.
MS PATEL: Do you think Mr Snoek, that it was necessary for you to kill Ms Slabbert? That it was necessary to kill her and to assault Mr Sharp in order to complete or to effect your operation?
MR SNOEK: Under their negative reactions, there was need or a necessity.
MS PATEL: The fact that she’d screamed was sufficient cause for her to be killed?
MR SNOEK: I would say yes, that was the reason.
MS PATEL: And your reasoning is the same for Mr Sharp?
MR SNOEK: Sharp succeeded because the rifle was not working. I wanted to shoot him.
MS PATEL: So you would have found it necessary. You thought it was necessary to kill him but you didn’t succeed because the rifle wasn’t working?
MR SNOEK: Yes, he was so fortunate that the rifle was not working.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you know how to use a rifle, Mr Snoek? Did you know how to use that particular rifle, that .30 ... ?
MR SNOEK: Yes, I do know it exactly.
MR LAX: So even though you tied this man up and you’d hit him over the head, you still wanted to shoot him. What was the point of that?
MR SNOEK: If I wanted to kill Mr Sharp, I would have killed him but my intention was to shoot him at that moment whilst I was still at the door.
MR LAX: I see. So when you were at the door you pointed your fire arm at him, with the intention of shooting him, but it wouldn’t work and then you attacked him, is that what you are saying?
MR SNOEK: Whilst I was at the door, my intentions were these, I will shoot him if I did get into contact with him because I didn’t know where he was hiding his weapons in the house.
MR LAX: Well you see you haven’t said anything about pointing your fire arm at him from the door yet. You told us what you were doing at the door. You said nothing about pointing a fire arm at him or trying to shoot him. The first we are hearing of it now in your evidence. Please explain why is that the case?
MR SNOEK: I said here, that Mr Sharp was so fortunate, that the rifle was not working. It had a problem. I didn’t say there, when I was going to the door. I didn’t say that I had a rifle with me or that I pointed a rifle whilst I was at the door.
MR LAX: Please carry on.
MS PATEL: Are you saying then, just to follow on to the previous questions, that your intention was to go there and attack him first. Not necessarily to get the keys to the car, because you said even when you left Mr(...intervention) sorry, even when you left Mr Tshikila with the old woman, you said you’re going in to attack Mr Sharp. So it is not correct that you went in there looking for the keys. You went in there. You waited there and you went in there to kill him and this had nothing to do with the getting firearms. This had to do with you and Mr Sharp.
MR SNOEK: Getting Mr Sharp’s keys and taking his weapons, I wouldn’t just go in there and take those things. I wouldn’t just go there and say Mr Sharp, give me your keys, give me your weapons. It was necessary for me to attack him so that I can get the car keys and the weapons. He wouldn’t just give me the keys when I’m saying that I want his keys. He wouldn’t just give me his van when I said I said I wanted his van or give me the fire arms when I just said he must give them to me. It was a necessity or it was a need for me to attack him. I wouldn’t negotiate with him.
MS PATEL: Okay so the use of violence was a necessary part of any plan, regardless of what circumstances you were confronted with?
MR SNOEK: If the circumstance forces you to use violence, you would use violence, sir.
MS PATEL: Okay and the use of violence was part of your plan in this specific operation.
CHAIRPERSON: I think its abundantly clear, that’s what he says. He said he went there and he wasn’t going to negotiate. He was going attack.
MS PATEL: The reason I put that question Honourable Chairperson, if one turns to page 49, the accused states there, that he wouldn’t have used violence, if they had handed the keys over to him.
CHAIRPERSON: He can put it ... but I think he has made it quite clear that the use of violence was part of his plan and it is also very evident from what he did.
MS PATEL: Then just ... there’ just one or two other aspects that I want clarify. You say that in terms of your training, when you did your basic training, that you had left before you completed your training. Is that correct?
MR SNOEK: Yes, that is correct.
MS PATEL: How long had you been in training before you left?
MR SNOEK: I don’t remember but it was, I think it was two or three months. It was not a long time.
MS PATEL: Okay. During that short period that you were there, were you given instructions as to the modus operandi of an operation? Was there a set policy that was explained to you during your training, that you can recall?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: Can you just briefly tell us what that policy was? What was your understanding of the policy?
MR SNOEK: The policy was to attack the Defence Force, the Police and the Reservists and the farmers, that were staying in our father’s land.
MS PATEL: Is there anything else?
MR SNOEK: Like what, Ma'am?
MS PATEL: In terms of the policy, was there any limitations placed or code of conduct that you had to abide by?
MR SNOEK: Yes, discipline and - I don’t, I don’t understand clearly your question, please repeat it.
CHAIRPERSON: I think if you could be more specific perhaps because there’s, we’ll be here for a long, long time.
MS PATEL: In terms of carrying out an operation, was, in terms, what you were told at your training, did you need specific authorisation for all your operations that you carried out?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MS PATEL: And what would happen if parties went beyond what they were authorised to do?
MR SNOEK: What would happen where? I want you to clarify your question.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Snoek, its really very simple. You had to operate according to orders. You got specific orders. What would happen to you? What would your Comrades do to you? What would your Commanders do to you, if you did other things beside what you had been ordered to do? That’s really the question. Have I expressed it correctly?
MR SNOEK: Nothing would happen, sir because each and every APLA soldier had flexible initiatives.
MR LAX: If you disobeyed your orders or you went beyond your orders, or you used force when you shouldn’t have, nothing would happen? Wouldn’t you be asked to account for that? Wouldn’t you be required to comply with the code of conduct?
MR SNOEK: Nothing would happen because attacking the farmers was part of our policy.
MR LAX: You didn’t go there to attack the farmers. You went there to take fire arms. There is a big difference. You didn’t go there "willy nilly" to attack the farmers. On your own evidence, you only went there to get fire arms and then maybe, as you changed it at a later time, to take a vehicle to get to the Transkei, although you hadn’t got permission or orders to take a vehicle. Do you understand what I am saying to you? That’s been your evidence.
MR SNOEK: Yes, I understand.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you heard of the Code of Conduct of APLA?
MR SNOEK: No.
CHAIRPERSON: You don’t know what its called?
MR SNOEK: A Code of Conduct?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. There is a special Code of Conduct that APLA uses. It had a special name. I won’t waste time. You obviously don’t know it. It’s The Fifteen Points of Attention. Any APLA Cadre would know that. Ja, you see, you are nodding your head now.
MR SNOEK: Are you referring to The Fifteen Points of Attention? Yes, I do know them.
CHAIRPERSON: What was your code name for these operations?
MR SNOEK: ....
CHAIRPERSON: Beg your pardon?
MR SNOEK: Stafenda.
CHAIRPERSON: Stafendus? After the man who had killed Verwoerd?
MS PATEL: And what was your co-applicant’s code name?
MR SNOEK: I don’t know.
CHAIRPERSON: So you were operating using your ordinary names?
MR SNOEK: In this operation we used our normal names. He knew me by my name and I knew him by his name.
CHAIRPERSON: What other operations did you get involved in, because from what you say, it seems there were other operations?
MR SNOEK: There were no other operations.
CHAIRPERSON: So you never used your code name?
MR SNOEK: No, I never used it.
MS PATEL: If I can just refer you to page 11 of Mr Tshikila’s application form. If you look at 11(b), he states - that we were not informed of the real names of the APLA operatives. We only knew there combat names and if you asked further than that, the person who asked for more in ..., that person who asked for more information just disappears. How do you reconcile that with what you have just told us or is Mr Tshikila’s understanding of how operations are carried out wrong?
MR SNOEK: I think you should ask him this.
MS PATEL: I am asking you if Mr Tshikila’s understanding of the use of real names for APLA operatives is incorrect?
MR SNOEK: Maybe he heard wrong, I won’t know.
MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mbandazayo do you have any re-examination?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, it’s just few.
Mr Snoek, am I correct to say that, is it your evidence that, you are the person who identified this farm as a target, this one of Mr Sharp?
MR SNOEK: Yes, that’s correct.
MR MBANDAZAYO: And after that you sought an approval from Mr Nkonki to carry on the mission?
MR SNOEK: Yes, that’s correct.
MR MBANDAZAYO: And the approval was to get weapons from the farm that you were given?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MR MBANDAZAYO: And you did get weapons from the farm?
MR SNOEK: Yes
MR MBANDAZAYO: And also that, it is noticed that you also took your own initiative and you took some other items which included items which were mentioned in Court and also the vehicle?
MR SNOEK: Yes that’s correct.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, after you took that initiative, what was your - why did you take that initiative, to take the other, the clothing and the vehicle which were not part of your, of the approval from Mr Nkonki? What were you going to do with the clothing and other items?
MR SNOEK: Sir, these items you are talking about, are very useful to the Africans who arrived in Transkei, who keep on coming in, in Cape Town and Uitenhage - sorry in Transkei and Uitenhage. There were times you can’t be at your home, you cannot sleep at your home. You will be away for a month in the forest. So that is the reason why I’ve taken these items in order to be useful to us.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Now you also - you were questioned here about, you indicated that you had undergone basic military training, where you a fully fledged member of APLA?
MR SNOEK: I was a recruiter.
MR MBANDAZAYO: So all in all what you are telling this Committee, you were not a fully fledged member of APLA?
MR SNOEK: I don’t know how to answer your question Sir because I am a fully, a full member of the APLA but I didn’t finish my training as a soldier, which means military training and there I was a recruit.
MR MBANDAZAYO: And because you were a recruit, you don’t all the ...(...intervention)
MR LAX: Mr Mbandazayo, maybe you shouldn’t lead him too hard on that one.
CHAIRPERSON: I think he said he was a recruiter. What is a recruiter? Someone who looks for people to go and serve in the army?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I think it was all under interpretation. He said he was a recruit. So he was just a recruit, not a recruiter himself. He was a recruit himself. So that’s why. Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions. Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MBANDAZAYO
CHAIRPERSON: Dr Tsotsi do you have any further questions to ask?
DR TSOTSI: No I have no questions.
MR LAX: Thanks Chair. Just two small issues. Mr Snoek you said in your evidence that this chap Hermanus never bought dagga from you, you just helped him find a purchaser. Is that right?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MR LAX: Well you see in your statement which was made to the Truth Commission at page, if you will just bear with me one second I will get you the exact page reference. At page 4. You said that Hermanus, who used to buy dagga from me ... So it is clear from that, that he bought dagga from you. What’s correct? Either he bought from you or he didn’t buy from you?
MR SNOEK: The correct one is he used to arrive in the township to look for dagga and then I would organise for him to get the dagga. That is the correct one.
MR LAX: Now, why did you leave your training?
MR SNOEK: I wanted to cross the border. I didn’t want to be here in South Africa. My intentions were not for me to be trained in Transkei or in South Africa.
MR LAX: Well why didn’t you do that? You seem to have waited a long time and you didn’t get round to doing that. When were you trained?
MR SNOEK: In 1985.
MR LAX: And so you gave up your training in 1985?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
MR LAX: And in the time from 1985 till the time these offences were committed, you didn’t leave the country, why?
MR SNOEK: To leave the country, you don’t just go.
CHAIRPERSON: What do you do to leave the country then? Many people in the past left the country by just going.
MR SNOEK: They had support from their leadership.
CHAIRPERSON: The question is, did you ask for support? The reason is, why didn’t you go overseas in those seven years? And your answer is, you just can’t get up and go. Is that your only answer?
MR SNOEK: I didn’t get the support to cross the country or the border.
CHAIRPERSON: Why didn’t you go back and finish your training?
MR SNOEK: No. I decided to participate locally, politically and locally.
MR LAX: Now, where was your base?
CHAIRPERSON: Training or APLA?
MR LAX: Once you - just one second ...(intervention)
MS PATEL: I’m sorry, I don’t know if its appropriate for me to come in, in terms of your question, Honourable Chairperson, if you would allow me. If you refer to paragraph 4 of the affidavit, during the period 1985 or is it 1986, to at least 1988, the applicant spent the better part of those years in jail for dealing in dagga and the abuse of a minor ...
CHAIRPERSON: We are aware of that, yes. What is the question about the base. The training base or?
MR LAX: At some point after leaving your training, and in-between your periods in jail, we understand that you established a base for yourself. Is that right? Yes.
MR SNOEK: Will you please repeat your question. It is not clear to me.
MR LAX: What I understand from all the documents before us, is that you established a base for yourself.
CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean a base? A place or a ...?
MR LAX: Base. A place from which to do operations. That’s how I would understand a base. That’s the term that was used. Do don’t know anything about establishing a base for yourself?
MR SNOEK: Your first question asked me about which base do I know. Now I want to say to you there are many bases that we had in Transkei. We had bases in KwaXmashe, further down there was another one in Nmaxwe. The one that I was using was between Butterworth and Idutshwa which was known as Gwadana.
MR LAX: Did you establish that base? ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Pleased be quiet.
MR SNOEK: These are the bases that I know. I never establish any base for myself. The base that I was working in is the one known as Gwadana.
MR LAX: I want you to turn to page 14. You told your co-applicant that you were getting military training in Transkei, this was after 1988, you were getting military training in the Transkei and you had established a base for yourself. That’s not true, is it?
MR SNOEK: No, its not true.
MR LAX: Well he will have to explain why he says you told him that.
Thank you Chairperson. I have no further questions.
CHAIRPERSON: Adv Bosman?
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you Chairperson.
Mr Snoek, do I understand you correctly, that you had before this incident about which you have given evidence today, taken two rifles from the same home?
MR SNOEK: I only got one rifle in this incident.
ADV BOSMAN: No, prior to this incident you said you had taken rifles, is it correct that you had prior to this incident, taken two rifles? What did you do with those rifles?
MR SNOEK: I gave the rifles to the organisation.
ADV BOSMAN: Did you not sell them? Did you not sell them to the organisation?
MR SNOEK: We are not selling rifles in the organisation.
ADV BOSMAN: If you look at page 49 of the bundle of documents.
CHAIRPERSON: Page 49, second paragraph, at the top.
ADV BOSMAN: You were asked about how you knew about the safe and your answer as its recorded here is that you said
"On a previous occasion I had broken in there and I took two rifles. I had sold these rifles in the Transkei".
What do you say to that?
MR SNOEK: I was just making - it was bad then, that’s why I made this statement. To be with the Murder and Robbery Squad here in Port Elizabeth, its very dangerous. Its because I wanted this whole thing to be fail to me. That’s why I said the statement.
ADV BOSMAN: To whom did you give the rifles? To which person?
MR SNOEK: I gave the rifles to the Gwatana base.
ADV BOSMAN: Yes, but to whom did you hand the rifles over? You couldn’t have just given them to nobody?
MR SNOEK: There was another Comrade there, whom I was communicating with known as Vusilinxolo.
ADV BOSMAN: And where did this happen? At the base? Where did you give the rifles to him? At the base?
MR SNOEK: I gave the rifles to the organisation, handed them to Vusilinxolo.
ADV BOSMAN: At the base?
MR SNOEK: Yes.
ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Snoek, the deceased, how many times did you strike her with the butt of the rifle?
MR SNOEK: Sir, I cannot remember how many times but I did hit her for more than two times, but I did hit her. That’s what I’m sure of.
CHAIRPERSON: Was she ever struck with a spade or a shovel?
MR SNOEK: Not in my presence Sir. Maybe I was not there when that was done.
CHAIRPERSON: Please keep quiet. Did you see your co-applicant, Mr Tshikila strike the deceased at all?
MR SNOEK: No, I didn’t see him Sir, doing that. I didn’t see him doing that Sir.
CHAIRPERSON: When the break ins and these robberies occurred, were you sober?
MR SNOEK: I am not drinking sir, I was sober.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax, you said you wanted a further question.
MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson. Just one thing Mr Snoek, this conflict that you were talking about, what conflict was it in kwaNobuhle?
MR SNOEK: It was a conflict between the UDF and amaAfrica?
MR LAX: So why would PAC people need to get involved in that conflict, it had nothing to do with them?
MR SNOEK: If you look in my affidavit sir, you would see that I said I joined the PAC through AZANIO, at that time it was AZANIO, not PAC.
MR LAX: It still begs the question. Why would PAC people or AZANIO people who were not part of the UDF, why would they be in conflict with amaAfrica?
MR SNOEK: Are you referring to the whites?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairperson, I think there is a problem in the interpretation, I don't know.
MR LAX: Perhaps I can repeat myself.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps if Mr Lax, let Mr Lax repeat the question and if you can just monitor the interpretation.
MR LAX: The conflict was between the UDF which as we all know, is a (indistinct) organisation or was an (indistinct) organisation, and amaAfrica, which was a vigilante organisation, a conservative organisation, correct?
MR SNOEK: Are you talking about Africans, sorry amaAfrica?
MR LAX: Precisely. There was a vigilante organisation which was operating in some of the Eastern Cape towns, in the same way that the Witdoeke were operating in the Cape and it was called amaAfrica in die Eastern Cape.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairperson, I think that will cause a lot of problems because definitely, it was interpreted as vigilante group and it was a group, who were referring to, which was a PAC group there.
MR LAX: Are you saying there was a PAC group in kwaNobuhle calling itself amaAfrica?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Definitely Mr Chairperson, there was PAC members were calling themselves Africans, and they were called amaAfrica.
MR LAX: And they were in conflict with UDF?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Mr Chairperson.
MR LAX: Thank you, that is very helpful.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by the members of the panel?
MR MBANDAZAYO: None Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MBANDAZAYO
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, thank you Mr Snoek, you may stand down, that is the end of your evidence.
WITNESS EXCUSED: .
CHAIRPERSON: I see it is now 4 o'clock, I think this will be a convenient time to adjourn. Until what time, are you staying in Port Elizabeth Mr Mbandazayo?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Mr Chairperson, I am staying around now for the hearing.
CHAIRPERSON: We've got another matter tomorrow as well. I am just worried, it has been suggested half past eight, I don't know if the authorities will be able to get your clients here by half past eight. I wonder if you can perhaps just ask the people from the Department, what time they can get here in the morning, either half past eight, if not that, 9 o'clock.
MR LAX: Perhaps you could make special arrangements to help us.
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, they are saying that they can try their best, they say the latest would be quarter to nine.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, thank you. We have now come to the end of today's hearing. The matter will be postponed to proceed tomorrow morning in this hall, at half past eight in the morning, or so soon thereafter as we can start.
Mr Dingani, do we need to - I think with regard Mr Mbandazayo's, with regard to Mr Dingani's application, we will just remove it from the roll to be placed on the roll at a later stage?
MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Just put it on record that you are appearing for him as well.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
