WILLEM ALBERTUS NORTJE: (sworn states)
MR LAMEY: Thank you Chairperson.
EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Mr Nortje you were also a state witness during the de Kock trial during which you gave evidence regarding various subjects appearing on the charge sheet, is that correct?
MR LAMEY: And in your own handwriting, you initially completed a form which can be found on page 46, 47 and 48, is that correct?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAMEY: And it was signed on the 19th of November 1996 and as an annexure to that and this was before you obtained a legal representative.
MR LAMEY: Was attached your version of what you know with regard to events and what you wish to apply for amnesty for, is that correct?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAMEY: Then we find on page 25 to 23 of bundle 1, the particulars that you provide with regard to Bheki Mlangeni.
MR LAMEY: Later you obtained legal representation. You prepared a supplementary affidavit which we can find on page 54 to 55 and then on 59 you signed it and therein there are also particulars regarding your background and training.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry 54 to 55 you say a supplementary affidavit?
MR LAMEY: Yes, it is the supplementary ...
MR LAMEY: Application regarding the various incidents.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it's 54 to 59 in my bundle, is the second application.
MR LAMEY: Yes, indeed, I apologise Chairperson. And what you have signed before a Commissioner of Oaths.
MR LAMEY: And then on page 60 up to and including 68, we find a review of your background and training and how you ended up at Vlakplaas ultimately.
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAMEY: Mr Nortje, the only thing that is lacking in this bundle and which has been submitted to the Committee is page 68(a) and 68(b) which is your statement in which you give the particulars that you already know which has being incorporated with your original amnesty application.
MR LAMEY: Then do you also confirm that which was submitted as page 68(a) and (b)?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAMEY: If we can just return, you have also seen in the bundle which has been served before this Committee, that there is an extract of your evidence which you gave during the de Kock trial with regard to this matter, the evidence in chief and the cross-examination.
MR LAMEY: And your testimony during the de Kock trial, according to the best of your knowledge, is this also true and correct?
MR LAMEY: You also received indemnity in terms of Section 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
MR LAMEY: Then I would just like to lead you regarding that which you have stated on pages 52 and 53. Were you also involved in the tapping of the movements of Dirk Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: I can just recall that on one day no other members were available so Mr de Kock asked me just to listen to the tapes. On this particular day there wasn't really much which was said on the tapes, but I think it was Dirk Coetzee's home telephone number that was being tapped at that stage. I can just recall that one specific day that I listened to the tapes.
MR LAMEY: Now did you become aware at a certain stage that discussions arose which were aimed at detecting a way to murder Mr Coetzee after his revelations which he made?
MR NORTJE: Yes, this came mostly from Mr de Kock's side to me. We all shared the sentiment, we all agreed on the nature of his revelations.
MR LAMEY: Did you then associate yourself with this?
MR NORTJE: Yes, I associated myself with this.
MR LAMEY: And did you become aware that a planning phase originated in preparation of a parcel bomb which was to be sent?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that came to my knowledge, by Mr de Kock.
MR LAMEY: And what you know of this you have already set out in writing on page 52?
MR LAMEY: Were you personally involved in any actions in the execution of this plan?
MR NORTJE: No, I was not involved in any such actions.
MR LAMEY: Can you tell us whether you were there that day on the farm when the test run was undertaken with regard to the device and that this test was carried out on a pig's head?
MR NORTJE: Yes, I know about it. I was present.
MR LAMEY: How did it come about that you were present there, can you recall?
MR NORTJE: I had close liaison with Mr Bosch and Mr de Kock and Steve Bosch told me that they were going to test the thing, perhaps a day before the time, I'm not certain, but he arrived at the farm on that day. I was also there and the people from the Technical Division also arrived there and he told me that he had the pig's head with him. We then went down to the river. I'm not completely certain, but I think I drove with him, I must have driven with him. As I've said, the pig's head was in his car. We went to the river along with the technical staff. Later it was clear who was all present there. Kobus was there and Bellingan or Bosch rather and me. I cannot specifically recall Bellingan being present. As I said some of the other members such as Wal du Toit and Japie Kok, I'm also not certain about them, but they could have been there, I would not dispute that.
The pig's head was placed down there. The head phones were attached to the pig's head and I think Kobus then detonated the device. Afterwards we saw that it had functions properly, we returned to the farm and I think M de Kock was already at the farm at this stage or at least he was at the homestead where the offices were situation and they had a discussion there, but I didn't listen to them or what they were saying any further after that. I'm assuming that he must have explained that the device had worked successfully.
At a certain stage, I don't know whether it was a day or two or three later, it must have been a number of days afterwards, I saw the parcel in Steve Bosch's office. I know that I said that something was written on it, but I became confused with the time when we gave the fingerprints, because then we saw pictures of the parcel and I've thought about this extensively. On the day that I saw the parcel there was nothing written on it. It was a brown cardboard box, I would say. I didn't come close to it. I didn't stand next to it to see specifically what was written on it. I didn't see that anything was written on it. As I have said, I've thought extensively about this matter.
Furthermore, I wasn't involved, all I know is that the parcel was sent, but what I do recall is that at a certain stage the address presented some problem, the address of the sender, that is why I would imagine that Mr Kok had asked Chris Magopa at one point, or he may have asked him, or he would have asked him, I cannot say that he did ask him, he wanted to ask him for an address, but I wasn't further involved with that. I wasn't anticipating that anything further would take place, I simply continued with other services and afterwards I heard that the parcel had been sent. At that stage, I didn't know that Bellingan and Radebe had sent the parcel. Bellingan disclosed this to me much much later and then at a certain stage during the inquest, they came to take the fingerprints from us and as far as I know Gen Engelbrecht was aware of everything. During the process of the taking of the fingerprints, I didn't really know who had written on the parcel because we had to make samples in our own handwriting of what appeared there and at a ...(end of tape 1B) ... to him and he was quite shaky and all he told me was that he hadn't written in the same style as what he usually wrote. Now Simon and I had a very good relationship of trust and I knew immediately what he meant. I cannot say that he wrote everything on the parcel, but he may have written some of the details on the parcel, that is why I have stated it as such.
MR NORTJE: Subsequently the story of Kritzinger who would come to the farm emerged and according to me he issued a warning that they were coming. I was involved. I know that I was in the office of Steve at that stage. According to me, Charlie Tait had taken over the office and there was a lot of equipment such as cameras and other technical equipment. There were briefcases containing equipment and documents and so forth. We moved everything which could possibly indicate anything. I suppose that many items were unnecessarily destroyed as well, but we were acting preventatively, we cleaned the offices next door, burned documents and left the offices clean and tidy. The carpets were vacuumed. It was quite a clean-up operation.
MR LAMEY: May I then just ask you, Steve Bosch's office, was this also included in the clean-up?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is what I am referring to.
MR LAMEY: You also state that at a certain stage, when Kritzinger visited the farm, it would have been futile for any kind of investigation because everything had been removed.
MR NORTJE: Yes, although I didn't suspect that he would find anything, he still came there.
MR LAMEY: A list has been submitted, I'd just like to examine you briefly about this. It is a list of handwriting and fingerprint tests. You have heard that certain people were referred to as deceased at that stage and we know that Simon Radebe was not deceased at that stage. Can you recall whether any of the others who were reported as deceased, were indeed deceased at that stage?
MR NORTJE: The only one that I could think of who may have been deceased at that stage, was Mosse and Madiba, but Mpofu died later, but he was a worker. He was a policeman, but he dealt with the workers on the farm. He drove vehicles and so forth, so the mention of his name didn't really make any sense to begin with.
CHAIRPERSON: Who were the two who you say were dead?
MR NORTJE: Bobby Madiba and Mosse.
CHAIRPERSON: What number is that?
MR NORTJE: It's number 9 and number 18. I don't think that number 20 was deceased at that stage yet.
MR LAMEY: And then Brian Ngqulunga?
MR NORTJE: No, he was deceased.
MR LAMEY: He was already deceased?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct. I don't know who this Eric Salinda is.
MR LAMEY: Very well. Mr Nortje, what would you say was the objective in killing Mr Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: Well it was clear that his revelations had caused extensive damage and it was more of a precautionary measure for the purposes of damage control. I know that Mr Coetzee had also recruited one of the farm workers who had gone after him at a certain stage, but I think that all the circumstances and the events which occurred and all the news coverage that we received and all the facts which were about to emerge, all contributed to the decision.
MR LAMEY: You also state specifically that it was to restrict any further damage, so damage had already been caused by the media coverage by that stage?
MR LAMEY: Your instructions to become involved in the clean-up process in the offices, who gave you this instruction?
MR NORTJE: Mr de Kock. Well, all of us were instructed to participate.
MR LAMEY: So basically everybody was instructed to assist and you also gave your share of assistance in this regard?
MR LAMEY: Thank you Chairperson, I have nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before we go on, can I ask something about Exhibit E? The copy I have got, the photograph, has a star against Eric Salinda, that this witness has just referred to and a line leading down apparently to something that is written on the back of the page, that doesn't appear on my photograph.
MR RAUTENBACH: It seems what happened, what is written down there is Kritzinger doesn't know him, the point is just, it seems that the surname was spelled wrongly and it was probably referring to Eric Sefadi and that's why it's written in, Kritzinger doesn't know him.
CHAIRPERSON: Well the same way this witness doesn't who him either.
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, yes, the witness just said that he knows Eric Sefadi and that it's probably the wrong...
CHAIRPERSON: It's just a typing error.
CHAIRPERSON: All right, thank you.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HATTINGH: Mr Nortje, just singular aspects. Did Mr de Kock ever tell you that he was in the process of preparing a parcel bomb to be sent to Dirk Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: I can only tell you that I drove with him and he told me about these plans that he had. On that day we went to Mr Wal du Toit, specifically about this issue, but once again I was not present during the entire discussion, he left me to one side but he told me before and after what his plans were. I think he dealt with it according to the need-to-know principle, that is why I did not sit in on the discussion but I know what the discussions were about.
MR HATTINGH: Very well, can you tell us whether or not he ever told you that he had received an instruction from Head Office to do so?
MR NORTJE: Well, I cannot say that he stated it pertinently, because I cannot recall that but I assumed this from his discussions, the surveillance actions which were underway, due to these factors, Head Office must have known about it and when I refer to Head Office, I'm referring to Mr Engelbrecht and Mr van Rensburg, our direct Commanders and I knew that Gen Engelbrecht knew about it.
MR HATTINGH: Something which I have noticed in your evidence once again, I don't know where specifically it is, perhaps you could refresh my memory about this, is the following. Were any videos shown on Vlakplaas about Mr Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: Yes. I think that it was on TV and then someone recorded the bite and the following day we sat in the office and we watched the video recording.
MR HATTINGH: And did Mr de Kock tell you that you had an order from Head Office to listen to the tape or watch the tape and give any input with regard to the statements which were made on the video?
MR NORTJE: Yes, all of us were present, so I assume so.
MR HATTINGH: You have also stated that Mr de Kock displayed a remarkable sense of hatred or malice towards Mr Coetzee, but during your evidence in the trial of Mr de Kock, you also remarked that all the members of the police felt this way.
MR HATTINGH: In fact on page 120 of bundle 2, at approximately the second paragraph from above, this would still be during evidence in chief, Mr Ackerman says to you
"Now at that stage did you think he was serious when he said that he wanted to kill Dirk Coetzee?"
"Yes, he spoke quite extensively about it but I knew he was serious because that was everybody's sentiment at that stage."
"He wasn't alone in this feeling towards Dirk Coetzee?"
"No."
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Very well. Now with regard to the incident when Mr Flores was arrested, you stated you were present but you would also recall that during the criminal trial, you really couldn't remember what exactly was discussed there between Mr van der Westhuizen and Mr de Kock.
MR NORTJE: No, I cannot recall specifically but it was about Flores.
MR HATTINGH: Now at that stage, Mr Nortje, did Mr Flores also possess information regarding Vlakplaas activities which, if it were to come to light, would damage Vlakplaas?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that is correct.
MR HATTINGH: Is it possible that Mr de Kock was concerned regarding the fact that he was arrested and could possibly disclose information which could place Vlakplaas in a detrimental position which brought you under the impression that he was concerned that Mr Flores would leak out information because - I'm sorry I've put the question quite clumsily, let me re-attempt. You state that upon that occasion Mr de Kock was concerned that Mr Flores would disclose that he, Flores, was sent to recruit persons to kill Mr Coetzee.
MR HATTINGH: Is it possible that your recollection about this is faulty and that Mr de Kock was concerned in general about any kind of information which Mr Flores could disclose which would place Vlakplaas at a disadvantage?
MR NORTJE: No, that was definitely one of his concerns, but I knew about this action before Flores was arrested and I'll tell you why - One evening I was at Flores' home when we met Simpson, and there it was not directly stated, I don't know what Flores and Simpson spoke about, but I came to know through Mr de Kock that he would launch an action to get to Mr Coetzee via the Irish Organisation, RUC or something like that.
MR HATTINGH: Or let us try to cut it even shorter. You have heard Mr de Kock's evidence in this regard?
MR HATTINGH: That this Mr Simpson had admitted that he would be capable of arranging such an action and that he requested quite a hefty amount for this?
MR NORTJE: Yes, apparently R100 000-00.
MR HATTINGH: Yes and you stated during the criminal trial that Mr de Kock gave Mr Flores R100 000-00, or that Mr Flores wanted R100 000-00 but he only gave him R10 000-00.
MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock says that the R10 000-00 was given because Mr Simpson had stated that they had already incurred expenses in monitoring Mr Coetzee's movements and determining what his whereabouts were.
MR NORTJE: As I understood Mr de Kock, it was a preliminary amount because there was too little time to obtain the R100 000-00, as I understood him. You must remember that Mr de Kock said many things sometimes in the heat of the moment and he may have been under the wrong impression, but this is what I believed to be going on.
MR HATTINGH: You would concede that there may have been a misunderstanding in this regard between you and Mr de Kock?
MR NORTJE: That is truly what I believed, what I have just told you. According to me it was not a misunderstanding, he may have meant something else, but this is the way that I interpreted it.
MR HATTINGH: You would concede that R10 000-00, especially if one is to exchange this into Irish Pounds, even if it was in 1990, was quite a low amount to be paying for the assassination of a person who enjoyed such prominence in international media circles?
MR NORTJE: Yes, it didn't make any sense to me, but I didn't question him specifically about it, I simply accepted.
CHAIRPERSON: I understood you to say it was only a payment on account, the R10 000-00.
MR NORTJE: Yes, as I understood it, it was a preliminary payment for any expenses that they may have incurred but if it had gone through, the rest of the money would have come through, but these are just assumptions that I'm making. If I say that the money would have come, he may have done so through other arrangements, these are just impressions that I have created.
MR HATTINGH: And then, with regard to the procurement of the address of Mr Coetzee, how clear is your recollection in this regard?
MR NORTJE: I must tell you that I did not participate in this regard, I did not know how the address was obtained.
MR HATTINGH: Did you hear the name Chris Magopa?
MR NORTJE: Yes, with regard to the sender's address, that is the reference. The reference is not with regard to Dirk Coetzee as such. At a certain stage there was a problem at the very beginning, just after they had received the parcel, but the sender's address, or at least this is what I understood from Mr de Kock, he didn't have a sender's address, or at that stage he spoke of Chris, he said that Chris Magopa was in Zambia at a certain stage, that is why I deduced that he may have obtained that address.
MR HATTINGH: I have the statement, the police statement that you made in Denmark, I don't believe that it is necessary to hand it up because the evidence that you gave in the criminal trial in this regard is in agreement with this, page 72 of the evidence.
CHAIRPERSON: That's volume 2? Bundle 2?
MR HATTINGH: Bundle 2. Sorry Mr Chairman, I think
MR LAX: Mr Hattingh, if you look on page 52 of his application.
MR HATTINGH: Chairman, I'm looking at his application now and I'm looking at page 72, bundle 1. There you say that
"The final product was then given to Steve who then packaged it on the farm and was posted then by Balletjies and Simon from either Joubert Park in Johannesburg or from Swaziland. As far as I can remember and I'm not sure, Chris Magopa helped to provide them with the address"
and that is the address of where the package had to be sent to in Zambia and now you said your recollection was that Chris helped you to give the name of the sender.
MR NORTJE: I was confused. Why I'm saying, as I said, Zambia because it had to be Dirk's address that he wanted. The sender's address I did not know, it was never mentioned but I know that the day when the parcel arrived there, the address of Dirk Coetzee was still a problem. In the morning at a certain stage, it could have been that afterwards, these things could have happened that he gave evidence about, that he went to Head Office to get the address.
MR HATTINGH: Mr Nortje, let us put this in short, is it not correct that Chris Magopa, before he became an askari, that he was a member of the PAC?
MR HATTINGH: And are you aware of the fact that a bomb was set to explode in the PAC offices in Lusaka? I'm sorry, not in Lusaka, but in Dar Es Salaam, that Mr Magopa did not provide you the address with that sending of the bomb, that maybe you confused it with this incident?
MR NORTJE: At that stage when I was in Denmark, Chris's name came up and there was talk about an address and that's why I remember his name.
MR HATTINGH: Mr de Kock just mentioned that Chris Magopa provided them with the address to send that bomb. I was busy looking at something else when you, in your evidence, mentioned something in the line of that you carry knowledge of Gen Engelbrecht. Knowing about everything, did you say something like that concerning this incident?
This was now during the post-mortem inquest.
MR NORTJE: Yes, he definitely knew about it.
MR HATTINGH: Why do you say that?
MR NORTJE: Well, through his actions and things that happened, he definitely knew about it.
MR HATTINGH: Did you have contact with him concerning the preparation for the post-mortem inquest?
MR HATTINGH: Concerning Mr Radebe, you also heard his evidence, is that correct?
MR HATTINGH: That he did not write on that package his own handwriting. Can you deny that?
MR HATTINGH: Mr Chairman, another thing which I omitted to inform you that I discovered last night when going through my documentation and the record of the inquest was that both my learned friend and I were wrong when we informed you that Col Hattingh did not give evidence at those proceedings. In fact he did give evidence.
And I would like to put to you that he testified that the handwriting of one person that was sent to him and that he later found out was Radebe's, that was during Mr de Kock's hearing that it was received, that that handwriting was Mr Radebe's. According to Col Hattingh, it was not the person who wrote on the package. Do you accept that?
MR HATTINGH: And another thing Mr Chairman, either you or Mr Lax asked whether he gave evidence about the possibility of detecting a person's attempt to disguise his handwriting, I forget who it was who asked that question. He did in fact give evidence and he did say that there are ways and means of ascertaining whether a person is trying to disguise his handwriting, so he was mindful of that possibility at the time, when he carried out his examination of the handwriting.
I now get to the political motive where you say that you, or that you included in your application, you mentioned the damage that Mr Coetzee could do, were you aware of the fact that I'm at this stage, I'm unfortunately not sure of the date but he later wrote a book about his actions as a member of C1 at Vlakplaas.
MR HATTINGH: And that it was a very thick book. I also saw this book again, or read it again. It was just as thick as Mr de Kock's book. It was however not in a book form, but was on folio pages.
MR NORTJE: I cannot say for sure.
MR HATTINGH: In detail he was cross-examined concerning incidents or allegations that he made at the hearing, are you aware of that? At the hearing of Mr de Kock.
MR NORTJE: Yes, I do know about that.
MR HATTINGH: And then I would like to put to you that that book, as far as I know, he wrote this with the assistance of Mr Jacques Pauw and he was actually the person who did the writing on behalf of Mr Coetzee.
MR NORTJE: That is correct, yes.
MR HATTINGH: And that that book contained far more detail concerning illegal actions as compared to his initial revelations made in the "Weekblad", so although he made certain things public in the "Vrye Weekblad" and that was detrimental to Vlakplaas.
MR NORTJE: I cannot deny that.
MR HATTINGH: As well as the government and the National Party.
MR NORTJE: I cannot deny that.
MR HATTINGH: And you heard Mr de Kock's evidence that concerning him, one of the main reasons why Mr Coetzee had to be eliminated, was the fact that they wanted to prevent that he testify in London in the Lothar Neethling Civil case.
MR HATTINGH: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH
MR BOOYENS: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.
MR RAUTENBACH: Just one aspect.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RAUTENBACH: Would you agree with me that at the stage when the package was sent in May, that Coetzee approximately had six months to provide people with information.
MR NORTJE: That is correct, yes.
MR RAUTENBACH: And as far as you know, was this book ever published? Do you know if that book that was just talked about was ever published?
MR NORTJE: That must be the book that Jacques Pauw wrote.
MR RAUTENBACH: No, I'm talking now about the Dirk Coetzee book.
MR NORTJE: I assumed that was the book that Jacques Pauw wrote.
MR RAUTENBACH: We are now talking about that one that was in book form, that's all about Dirk Coetzee and his story.
MR NORTJE: No, I do not think I saw this book.
MR RAUTENBACH: Do you know of such a book?
MR RAUTENBACH: I've got no further questions Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RAUTENBACH
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, I have just one question.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: You said that because Mr de Kock assigned everybody to do the tapping system and so forth, you assumed that it came from Head Office, the orders, is that correct?
MR NORTJE: That's correct, Chair.
MS LOCKHAT: Would you think that Mr de Kock would do this, the sending of the bomb, through his own initiative?
MR NORTJE: You see, the reason why I'm saying it was his initiative, is it may have been his plan to send this specific package, or the preparation of it, there were other suggestions from other people, but at the end a decision was made and in my own opinion, I thought it was Mr de Kock's idea and this is now the specific idea of the walkman. It was unique, it hasn't been used before and that's the only reason.
MS LOCKHAT: I just want to refer the Committee to bundle 2 and page 130 where, under cross examination at line 22 on that page, just in relation to Mr de Kock and his thought processes, you said
"Everybody was upset and I do not know if someone had the courage to do something about it, but the accused..."
MR LAMEY: Sorry, could we just get clarity on the line, sorry, we can't find the line.
MS LOCKHAT: Line 22 from the top of the page. Shall I read it again?
MS LOCKHAT: 130. Bundle 2. I'll start again.
"Everybody was upset and I do not know if someone had the courage to do something about it, but the accused was willing to do something about it because most of the people just talk about what they want to do and do not do it."
MR NORTJE: That was my personal opinion of the situation.
MS LOCKHAT: So would you say whether Mr de Kock had gotten the orders, or not? He basically felt that someone had to do the task of taking out Dirk Coetzee and that in his state of mind as to being the hero of the day at the end of the day, that he would have done it anyway?
MR NORTJE: It's possible, yes. There could have been other people who also wanted to make the plans. In previous cases it was so, but in this incident he took the initiative.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOCKHAT
MR SIBANYONI: Mr Nortje I heard you saying Mr Coetzee had recruited some workers from the farm, you are referring to the askaris?
MR NORTJE: The person that he recruited, I think his name was Bruce, he was a former Zimbabwean and I know that he left because he had Spyker Tshikalanga there and Brian told him about where we moved the weapons from Vlakplaas to Daisy and that Bruce saw this and he also told it to Dirk, so he was busy getting information from the farm, or recruiting people from the farm to give him information.
MR SIBANYONI: Mr Coetzee was the Commander at Vlakplaas at one stage. By the way what were the major problems that he left his position, or what were his problems with Vlakplaas people?
MR NORTJE: Well, I did not know him but what I heard was that he had problems with the senior officials, that he got involved in diamond smuggling but at one stage he was just removed from Vlakplaas, but that was long before I got there.
MR SIBANYONI: I also heard you saying you saw Simon Radebe shaking.
MR SIBANYONI: After he was asked about the handwriting.
MR NORTJE: Yes, after we provided them with the handwriting samples, he became very nervous. Maybe he was nervous because of something else, but the conclusion I made was that we trusted each other and I believed that the indication that he gave me was that he had something to do with that writing on the parcel. Maybe he was involved in something else that he was nervous about, I cannot say, but the fact that he was involved in the sending of the parcel, maybe he was scared about that.
MR SIBANYONI: Was it not a very cold day?
MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairman.
MR LAX: Just one small aspect on this question of Mr Flores. You said that you met with Simpson and Flores at Flores' house one evening.
MR LAX: And I didn't catch the full extent of your evidence in relation to that incident and I just wanted to re-canvass it with you please. What exactly did you pick up from Simpson on that night in relation to their discussion? What was his task?
MR NORTJE: You must just remember that we knew he was an MI6 agent. Mr de Kock handled him with care, he also did not trust him so he wouldn't have told him directly what we wanted, but after the discussion and after we left, there was talk about the fact that he had contacts with this group in Ireland who did this type of work and that is the assassination of a person, so that was still the beginning of the process, so far as I can remember, they just talked about it.
MR LAX: Let me just stop you there. Who spoke about this? Did Mr de Kock speak about this?
MR NORTJE: Mr de Kock talked about it. Flores was present, Simpson was present and myself but it was never said directly and this is my recollection, it was never said that we are going to kill Dirk, we talked about the possibility.
MR LAX: And then later at Centurion Park, when the issue came up again about Flores and his being arrested and so on, is that why you made that assumption that this is what de Kock was in fact anxious about?
MR NORTJE: Yes, because you must remember that in the meantime there was a lapse of time, a lot of things were talked about and that was my thought pattern and what I knew. This is the purpose, it was Flores' second agenda and that was Ireland.
MR LAX: Because Mr de Kock says in his evidence, that the reason Simpson was engaged was to get more information about Coetzee, not to kill him, does that seem reasonable to you, that you may have mislead yourself in the context?
MR NORTJE: Yes, we had information that the end result of that operation was the surveillance, that the end product was that somebody would go and eliminate him.
MR LAX: So you're saying that the whole purpose of the observation and the surveillance was to do a hit on him in due course?
MR NORTJE: That's how I understood it. That's the impression that Mr de Kock left with me. If he was just big talking, I don't know.
MR LAX: Well you said - if he was speaking big or so, was he the sort of person who did speak big?
CHAIRPERSON: I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you've just been telling Mr Lax. You said that the four of you were together, Simpson, Flores, yourself and de Kock at Flores' house, as I understand and de Kock handled him with care, because he knew he was an MI6 agent.
CHAIRPERSON: He didn't tell him what he wanted, he never said directly that we are going to kill Dirk, but was there a general discussion about possible assassinations, or killings?
MR NORTJE: Yes, that's how I remembered it, the possibilities were discussed of such a thing. As I said, I do not believe that we gave him the target directly, I cannot remember, but when we left, that was in my mind, that this is what is going to happen at a certain stage.
CHAIRPERSON: What I want to know, you say possibility, was it in general that people get killed, or was it somebody might have to take out Dirk Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: No, I think the possibilities, or we investigated the possibilities, or he investigated the possibilities, but I cannot say that Dirk or maybe Flores will be able to elaborate on this more, what he told Simpson, or the instructions that he gave Simpson to get to Dirk. I believe that it happened at a later stage.
CHAIRPERSON: No, but I'm asking what you heard. Were there general discussions about the fact that somebody might take out Dirk Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: Yes, at a later stage, yes.
MR NORTJE: No, I cannot say at the meeting, but I later, in discussion this came up and I also heard that ...
CHAIRPERSON: Discussions with whom?
MR NORTJE: With Flores, Mr de Kock afterwards.
CHAIRPERSON: So with Simpson there were no discussions about killing Dirk Coetzee?
MR NORTJE: No, not at all. Not as far as I can remember, not at that specific night.
CHAIRPERSON: Well, were there other nights with ...(indistinct) and Simpson, when Simpson was there?
MR NORTJE: No, not where Simpson was present.
CHAIRPERSON: If Flores was present, you say there were general discussions, yourself, de Kock and Flores, about what could be done.
CHAIRPERSON: And was that when the money was mentioned?
MR NORTJE: I am not sure, no I think the money issue was discussed at a later stage, just before we left England, or when he heard that he had to go to England, I think it was in that time that we started with the actual process.
CHAIRPERSON: So the money question of R10 000 and R100 000 raised between you de Kock and Flores, not in Simpson's presence, Simpson never said anything about money.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Re-examination?
MR LAMEY: No re-examination, thank you Chairperson.
MR LAMEY: Sorry, there was one aspect that I just thought of that I omitted and that is
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY: Mr Nortje, just concerning the final preparation of the package, do I understand your evidence correctly that you only saw the package in Bosch's office at a stage?
MR LAMEY: Did you think it was him that wrapped it or prepared it because you saw it there,
MR NORTJE: No, well I assumed he did it, but I didn't know what the exact circumstances were. I didn't know what the next step would be because I wasn't involved in it.
MR LAX: Just one thing arising, that I had meant to pick up on earlier. That was - you said in your evidence in chief that this parcel was in a cardboard box, that was your evidence.
MR NORTJE: That is correct, yes.
MR LAX: A brown cardboard box.
MR NORTJE: As far as I can remember it was the size of a cardboard box, it did not have sharp edges. As far as I can remember it had round edges but it was the size of a shoe box.
MR LAX: You see the - I hear you're probably explaining it, but you were very clear in your evidence in chief, what you saw there was a cardboard box.
MR NORTJE: Yes, let me put it this way. It was covered in brown paper but i compared it with a carton box, because it was the same size, I would say it was just wrapped in brown paper/
MR LAX: It wasn't the shape we've been given, for example, by Mr Kok. He talks about, which was in a bubble pack with two tapes on the top and then wrapped in brown paper.
MR NORTJE: No, I cannot remember that I saw that.
MR LAX: ; Roughly a bit bigger than palm size.
MR NORTJE: It was definitely bigger, the one I saw. It may been repacked later, I don't know.
MR LAX: So you saw something the size of an average shoe box?
MR NORTJE: Yes. That's what I can recall.
MR NORTJE: I am not sure if it was the day when the parcel arrived there, or the day after that, I cannot help you with that. As I said, I did not know when they fetched the package, I just walked on day into the office and saw the package.
MR LAX: Was it just on the table?
MR NORTJE: I may be mistaken, but I cannot remember a plastic bag.
MR LAX: Did it have any string on it at that stage?
MR NORTJE: Not as far as I can remember.
MR LAX: Thanks. Sorry Chairperson, I had just forgotten that aspect.
MR BOOYENS: Mr Chairman, if I may just, through you, Mr Lax I think was under the wrong impression about the size of the parcel. That object that was palm-sized, that Mr Kok testified about was the size of the tape player.
MR LAX: Yes, fair enough, no, no you're quite correct on that.
CHAIRPERSON: But you did go on to say, as I understood it, that you had that, there was a plastic cover and on top of that were two cassettes and not anything else, no other packaging.
MR BOOYENS: It's just that the entire package wasn't as small as the palm.
CHAIRPERSON: No, that was the base and then it went up, but it was certainly very much smaller than a shoe box. Just on plain logic, it wouldn't have been much bigger either, if you think about it. Yes, but even so. There wouldn't be confusion between ... The size of a shoe box.
MR BOOYENS: ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously) shoe box. Thank you Mr Chairman.
MR LAMEY: I've got no further evidence Chairperson and that concludes the applicants that I represent.
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, that concludes all the evidence of all the applicants.
MR RAUTENBACH: Mr Chairman, on behalf of the family, we do not intend calling any witnesses.
CHAIRPERSON: So we now adjourn this matter till next Thursday for Gen van der Westhuizen and I trust you gentlemen can all make arrangements to be here. Very well, this matter is now adjourned till Thursday morning of next week at 9.30.
MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And what do we proceed with now?
MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson that concludes the roll for today but tomorrow we'll commence with the Sweet Sambo incident.
CHAIRPERSON: Are any of you gentlemen concerned in the Sweet Sambo incident?
MR LAMEY: Chairperson, from what - I've just had an opportunity to look briefly at the documents. It doesn't seem to be any much contentious about that incident.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you appearing in it? And you are?
MS LOCKHAT: And Mr Vim Cornelius as well is appearing for one of the applicants.
CHAIRPERSON: Because I have read the papers and I'm inclined to agree with Mr Lamey that from what I have seen in the papers, subject to anything you may have to say, there does not appear to be a great deal of conflict between the parties which is one version it appears. There may be a minor detail here or there where they differ, but otherwise they appear to agree far more than any of the others and it struck me that if you gentlemen could get together and perhaps talk to Mr Cornelius, it might be possible to very much shorten proceedings, in that matter, that it seems to be one where there is really an agreed version. I am not talking, and I want to make it quite clear if any one is appearing for the families, about what happened to the deceased at an earlier stage, there may be considerable dispute about what happened there, but we are not interested in that in the sense that the ...(end of tape 2B) ... they instruct me that if you gentlemen all got together, none of your applicants seem to differ, it might be possible to considerably shorten proceedings. Thank you.
Thank you all for your assistance in this matter. If you have any more bright ideas or if you see any walkman you want to bring along next week, do so.