<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<hearing xmlns="http://trc.saha.org.za/hearing/xml" schemaLocation="https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/export/hearingxml.xsd">
	<systype>amntrans</systype>
	<type>AMNESTY HEARINGS</type>
	<startdate>1999-08-26</startdate>
	<location>PRETORIA</location>
	<day>8</day>
								<url>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=53649&amp;t=&amp;tab=hearings</url>
	<originalhtml>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/1999/99081631_pre_990826pt.htm</originalhtml>
		<lines count="758">
		<line number="1">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>CHAIRPERSON:   We are continuing with the amnesty application of E A de Kock and nine others, in respect of the Nelspruit 4 and Tiso.  It is Thursday the 26th of August and the Panel and the parties are constituted as has been indicated on the record.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="2">
			<speaker>DEON GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>(s.u.o.)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="3">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Very well.  Mr Hattingh?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="4">
			<speaker>MR HATTINGH</speaker>
			<text>We have no questions, thank you, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="5">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO QUESTIONS BY MR HATTINGH</text>
		</line>
		<line number="6">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Cornelius?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="7">
			<speaker>MR CORNELIUS</speaker>
			<text>I have no questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="8">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO QUESTIONS BY MR CORNELIUS</text>
		</line>
		<line number="9">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Cornelius.  Mr Bam?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="10">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Chairperson, just one singular aspect.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="11">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Certainly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="12">
			<speaker>INTERPRETER</speaker>
			<text>The speaker&#039;s microphone is not on.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="13">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>...(indistinct - no microphone).</text>
		</line>
		<line number="14">
			<speaker>MR SIBANYONI</speaker>
			<text>Mr Bam?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="15">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>I beg your pardon, it must have gone again.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="16">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Gouws, the initial discussion with regard to the Coin robbers, the initial robbery, the first robbery - let me put it that way, my instructions are that there was no planning initially to shoot these persons dead and it was not discussed as such, in other words that there would be killing, when those discussions were held with the Nelspruit Murder and Robbery Unit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="17">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is indeed correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="18">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="19">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BAM</text>
		</line>
		<line number="20">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Bam.  Mr van den Berg?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="21">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="22">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Gouws, before we deal with the incident itself, just a singular aspect regarding the broad background to your involvement here.  It is correct that previously you were involved in aspects for which you have applied for amnesty, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="23">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="24">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And I will point out to you that there is indeed a connection between you and Vlakplaas, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="25">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="26">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>If one studies your specific application for which you have already received amnesty, for the Kwandabele 9, the persons who were involved in that were in the first place, a Capt Hechter from Security in Pretoria or Northern Transvaal, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="27">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="28">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>But the other persons who were involved in this incident were among others, W/O Wouter Mentz, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="29">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="30">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And at this stage of the Kwandabele 9, he was an officer at Murder and Robbery, he was one of your colleagues, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="31">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="32">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And later he was transferred to Vlakplaas.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="33">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="34">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And then the other person who was involved in Vlakplaas at a certain stage, was Joe Mamasela.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="35">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="36">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And he was also involved in the Kwandabele 9.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="37">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="38">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>If one looks at the staff of Murder and Robbery who were involved in the Nelspruit incident, that would be the incident for which you have applied for amnesty in this hearing, in the first place there was Capt Geldenhuys, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="39">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="40">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And in the second place also, I think he was a W/O Boshoff.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="41">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="42">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Geldenhuys had a connection with Capt or Col de Kock, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="43">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="44">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>They knew each other since their Koevoet days.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="45">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="46">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And Boshoff, you were not certain at the stage of this incident whether he had already been transferred to Vlakplaas or not.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="47">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I&#039;m not completely certain about that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="48">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I will not refer you specifically to Boshoff&#039;s application which appears in the documents, but is it clear that at the stage of this incident he was still involved with Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="49">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="50">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>The aspect of financial gain as a result of these incidents, has been corrected by you and you say that this is linked to the Carousel incident.  Do I understand you correctly?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="51">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="52">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>With regard to the Carousel incident, you state that you received the money - I don&#039;t know whether it was directly or indirectly, from Gen Smit, Basie Smit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="53">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="54">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Who reported the incident to him, was it you or someone else?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="55">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know, everyone who was involved in the Carousel incident was instructed to report to the police headquarters on a certain morning, all of us were congratulated and every one of us received a cheque of R1 000.  I don&#039;t know who planned it or organised it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="56">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And who handed over the cheque to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="57">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Gen Smit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="58">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I am not certain whether you were present when Mr Nortje, one of the other applicants, was cross-examined regarding the parallels between the Carousel incident and the Nelspruit incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="59">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="60">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I am not going to put this pertinently to you again, however I will leave it for argument later on with regard to the mutual facts connected to this.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="61">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	You were involved in the initial attempt against this gang of robbers at Coin at a stage, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="62">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="63">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Where you waited for them within the premises of Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="64">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="65">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>In answer to a question put by Mr Bam, you stated that the initial discussion that there was no plan to kill anyone.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="66">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct initially.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="67">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>But when you waited for them the plan was to kill them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="68">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="69">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And at this stage, which information did you have or which information was conveyed to you with regard to the robbers? - to express is as such.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="70">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That they were political activists. Holtzhausen at that stage had contact with Ben van Zyl when these persons were on their way to Coin and it was positively stated to me, from Holtzhausen, that all the passengers are armed with handguns.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="71">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Were the names of the robbers ever mentioned to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="72">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, not at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="73">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Not one name?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="74">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, not at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="75">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>During this Coin incident they did indeed arrive.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="76">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="77">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>But they did not execute their plans.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="78">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="79">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>My recollection fails me, but this attempt to apprehend them at Coin, was this before or after Carousel, can you recall?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="80">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot recall as specifically.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="81">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>My colleague tells me that it was before the Carousel incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="82">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I would accept that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="83">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>In how many other incidents were you involved with Vlakplaas, where persons were apprehended?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="84">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>There were quite a few.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="85">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Quite a few?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="86">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="87">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And during this period?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="88">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Before and after.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="89">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Before and after them.  We are aware of at least three, that being Coin, the Carousel incident and then also the Nelspruit incident.  Were there any others?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="90">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="91">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>When did Mr Holtzhausen approach you with regard to the Nelspruit incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="92">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>He did not approach me directly, he approached Capt Geldenhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="93">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Very well.  And when did you receive an order from Capt Geldenhuys to go through to Nelspruit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="94">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I think it was a day just before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="95">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And did Capt Geldenhuys give you any information with regard to what the action involved?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="96">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>He simply stated that a gang of robbers would go down to Nelspruit and that we were supposed to go there.  That was the order that I received.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="97">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And according to you, the planning for this incident then took place partially at the Drum Rock Hotel and then partially at the scene.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="98">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="99">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>There are two aspects that I would like to obtain further particulars about, one is the aspect of the AK47s.  When was the AK given to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="100">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>At the scene.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="101">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Was the fact that the AKs would be planted ever mentioned to you before you arrived at the scene?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="102">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, this was at the scene.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="103">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>What was your specific instruction with regard to the AK?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="104">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>To toss the AK into the kombi, that was the instruction.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="105">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Were you given an instruction to fire rounds through the AK47 before you left it in the vehicle?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="106">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot recall anything like that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="107">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Did you fire any shots with the AK before you left it there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="108">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="109">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>You were not in possession of the handgrenades, it was at no stage given to you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="110">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="111">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>The second aspect is that with regard to the petrol.  Was this discussed at the Drum Rockor only at the scene?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="112">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I&#039;m not completely certain about that.  I cannot say with certainty whether it was at the Drum Rockor at the scene, but it did emerge at a certain point, but I cannot remember precisely when.  And then, at the scene I saw the petrol cans.  This was after the shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="113">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>The person who was seated in front of the vehicle on the left at a certain point fell halfway through the window or was tossed halfway through the window, was he still alive when this happened?  Can you recall?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="114">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, it is very difficult to say, I cannot say precisely.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="115">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>During the planning, which information was conveyed to you with regard to these potential robbers, were any names mentioned to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="116">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, all I was told is that they were ANC activists who were once again planning to rob the very same Coin Security company premises.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="117">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Because your application is very specific about it.  If you will look at page 93 of your application, in paragraph 2 you state pertinently that these were ANC activists and this is also your evidence here.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="118">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="119">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I would like to know how you reconcile this with what you have stated in paragraph 4 of your application which appears on page 94</text>
		</line>
		<line number="120" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;And at this point in time I realised and suspected that it would be the same persons who planned the robbery and that the objective of it would be to obtain money for the ANC or the PAC.&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="121">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I had knowledge as a result of the briefing session which was led by Brig Engelbrecht, as well as information from sources at Murder and Robbery, that the PAC was also involved in the same type of robbery.  Although the information indicated that these persons were ANC members, it may just as well have been PAC members.  That is why I have included PAC.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="122">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Therefore you were not certain of the affiliations of these robbers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="123">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>The information indicated that they were ANC, but the PAC also did the same kind of work, so I just followed the information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="124">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>But the information indicated that they were ANC activists?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="125">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="126">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr van den Berg?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="127">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Can you recall whether Capt de Kock was present during the planning?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="128">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Col de Kock?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="129">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Col de Kock, sorry.  Was he present during the planning at the Drum Rock Hotel?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="130">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he was at the Drum Rock Hotel, but I cannot recall that he was present during the briefing session.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="131">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>And at which point did he arrive, did he arrive at the hotel before you departed for the ambush or did he arrive at the scene of the ambush?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="132">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, he arrived at the hotel early that evening and then at a certain point he departed again and then I saw him at the scene again, before the shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="133">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>If one studies Capt Geldenhuys&#039; statement which is on page 252 and the pages after that, I would like to refer you to page 260.  If you look at paragraph 40, was it ever mentioned to you that there was anything about arms smuggling in this incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="134">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, not at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="135">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Were you present when the reconnaissance was undertaken for the place for the ambush?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="136">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, not at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="137">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Not at all.  So the first time when you were on the scene, when the shooting took place, was that evening when all of you went there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="138">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="139">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>There was evidence by Capt Gevers that some of you were all at the police canteen in Nelspruit at a certain point in time.  Were you there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="140">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I have been there quite a few times in my life, I cannot recall that I was there on that specific night.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="141">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>There was also evidence by Capt Gevers that according to his recollection, between 8 and 10 beers were had.  Did you have any beers that evening?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="142">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I had a few beers at the Drum Rock Hotel that evening.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="143">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I have no further questions, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="144">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG</text>
		</line>
		<line number="145">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr van den Berg.  Mr Francis or Ms Pillay?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="146">
			<speaker>MR FRANCIS</speaker>
			<text>Ms Pillay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="147">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Very well, Ms Pillay then.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="148">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="149">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Gouws, just a point of clarity first.  I had a look at your application and it first refers to you being &quot;tans nog in diens&quot; and then later there&#039;s some reference to the fact that you&#039;re now pensioned off due to some medical reason.  Are you still with - in the service?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="150">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I was declared medically unfit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="151">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And when did you leave the service?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="152">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>December &#039;96.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="153">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So from, I think it&#039;s 1981 or 1982 until December &#039;96, you were in the same unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="154">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.  No, no, from &#039;86 ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="155">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, from &#039;86.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="156">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>From &#039;86 I&#039;ve been at Murder and Robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="157">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you were - for 10 years you were in the same unit, Murder and Robbery Unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="158">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, it&#039;s for more, from &#039;86 till &#039;96.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="159">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It&#039;s 10 years.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="160">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Oh ja, that&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="161">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So for 10 years you were in the same unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="162">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Ja.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="163">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So at the time of the incident, the Nelspruit incident, you were in fact a specialist, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="164">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="165">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were a specialist in murder and robbery incidents.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="166">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="167">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you were not part - at the time of the incident you weren&#039;t part of any covert or counter-insurgency unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="168">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="169">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And your job was - I see you said in your application at page 86, it refers to being part of the &quot;Speurtak&quot;, your job was to investigate.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="170">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="171">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>How did your job in 1996 differ from what it was in 1982?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="172">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>&#039;96?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="173">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yes, just before you left.  How did it differ from what it was in 1992, the time of this incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="174">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Then I was just doing regular investigations.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="175">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So your job description was basically the same?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="176">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="177">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Identical?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="178">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="179">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>There was no fundamental change?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="180">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="181">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So in 1996, Mr Gouws, would you have ambushed and killed suspected robbers, even before they came near the scene of a crime?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="182">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="183">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So why did you do it in 1992?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="184">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I received an order.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="185">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Who did you get an &quot;opdrag&quot; from?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="186">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Capt Geldenhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="187">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So Capt Geldenhuys instructed you to ambush and kill these people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="188">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="189">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Now let&#039;s just go into that a bit, Mr Gouws, your &quot;opdrag&quot; from Capt Geldenhuys.  When did he give you specific instruction to actually join this operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="190">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>It was a day before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="191">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Which &quot;voorval&quot;, there have been many &quot;voorvals&quot;, Mr Gouws.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="192">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>The Nelspruit incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="193">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Which one are we talking about, there were two in Nelspruit.  You&#039;re talking about the second incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="194">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>The shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="195">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Not the Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="196">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="197">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Okay.  So you were not involved in Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="198">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I were involved</text>
		</line>
		<line number="199">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you get instruction from Capt Geldenhuys for that incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="200">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Ja, to go to Coin, ja.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="201">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So when did - all the incidents are interlinked, Mr Gouws, so Capt Geldenhuys had to give you instruction for each and every incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="202">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="203">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So in terms of your working with Mr Holtzhausen, when did Capt Geldenhuys first give you instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="204">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>It was just before the Coin incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="205">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Just before Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="206">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="207">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Are we clear, that was - your first instruction from Capt Geldenhuys was just before Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="208">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="209">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What does &quot;just before Coin Security&quot; mean, how long before Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="210">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>A day, maybe two days before the time, I ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="211">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>A day or two days before Coin Security.  And by then Mr Holtzhausen had put together his planning for Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="212">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I suppose so.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="213">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So it was clear that the robbery was going to take place at Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="214">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="215">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>At the time when you got instruction from Capt Geldenhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="216">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="217">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Okay.  Mr Gouws, can I refer you - let me just find my page reference.  Sorry, let me just clarify this, Mr Gouws, you were only taking instruction from Capt Geldenhuys from Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="218">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="219">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And he was the only one that gave you instructions?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="220">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Regarding which incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="221">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>No, I mean with regard to your involvement with Mr Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="222">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he was my direct commander.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="223">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you only got instructions from him?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="224">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="225">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And the first time he gave you instructions with regard to any involvement with Mr Holtzhausen was a day or two before the Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="226">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="227">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>When Coin Security had been planned already.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="228">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="229">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Now can I refer you to Mr Holtzhausen&#039;s affidavit.  The page reference - I seem to have lost my page reference, let me just find it.  If you can have a look at page 309, Mr Gouws, if you can have a look at paragraph 11</text>
		</line>
		<line number="230" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;The prospective robbery would be committed in Pretoria, at a bank in Lynwood Road.  Ben said that the bank was situated within a shopping centre.  The name of the Shopping Centre was made known and Deon Gouws and I, from Pretoria Murder and Robbery, visited the place and observed the area.&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="231">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I do not know about that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="232">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you&#039;ve got no knowledge that you accompanied Mr Holtzhausen to Pretoria, to the bank in Lynwoodweg?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="233">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I don&#039;t know about that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="234">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What does &quot;ek dra nie kennis&quot; mean?  I&#039;m sorry, my Afrikaans isn&#039;t good at all, I&#039;m sure you can pick that up.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="235">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I was not on such a story.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="236">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So does it mean you deny it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="237">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="238">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You&#039;re denying that in fact you accompanied Mr Holtzhausen to Lynwood?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="239">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I did not visit a bank.  I have visited many banks, but not this one.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="240">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>In other words, you say it is not true?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="241">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="242">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you say that Mr Holtzhausen is lying in this affidavit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="243">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Perhaps he was with someone else, but he wasn&#039;t there with me.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="244">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>He wasn&#039;t with you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="245">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="246">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And if Mr Holtzhausen should testify that it was you, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="247">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Then he&#039;s lying.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="248">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Then he&#039;s lying.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="249">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Ja.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="250">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>But if - assuming you were there that time, it would have been without instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="251">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="252">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It would have been without Capt Geldenhuys&#039; ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="253">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="254">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Okay.  Can you describe your relationship with Mr Holtzhausen to us please, Mr Gouws.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="255">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Sorry?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="256">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Your relationship with Mr Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="257">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Well we were good friends, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="258">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were good friends.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="259">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="260">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And is that it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="261">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Well that&#039;s it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="262">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Your professional relationship?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="263">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>We worked together.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="264">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Would you know why - sorry, how many people were attached to Murder and Robbery at the relevant time, around &#039;91/&#039;92?  Pretoria Murder and Robbery, how many people were attached to that unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="265">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I should say about 13.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="266">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>13 people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="267">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>13.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="268">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I said 13.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="269">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Ja.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="270">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And all of them were equally qualified as you were?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="271">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="272">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Why is it then that Mr - that you were always involved with Mr Holtzhausen?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="273">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I think that it must have been a position of confidence.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="274">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>&quot;&#039;n Vertrouens posisie&quot;?  And why do you think that he chose you specifically of all 13 people at Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="275">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I think that he can answer that question himself.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="276">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Because I refer you, Mr Gouws - I seem to have lost a page of my page reference, will you just give me a second.  I&#039;m sorry, Mr Chairperson, can you just give a second, I&#039;ve lost the page with my page references.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="277">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Ms Pillay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="278">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Mr Gouws, do you know why Mr Holtzhausen specifically selected you to partake in the Coin Security incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="279">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="280">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You wouldn&#039;t know why he selected specifically you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="281">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="282">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Because I refer you to page 310 then, Mr Gouws, that&#039;s paragraph 17, where Mr Holtzhausen set out the people he initially selected to be part of Coin Security, and I see your name is reflected there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="283">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="284">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You&#039;ve got no explanation as to why he would choose specifically you of 13 people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="285">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="286">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You&#039;ve got no knowledge.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="287">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="288">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So Mr Gouws, let me just get this straight, you&#039;re denying any involvement in the initial plannings, the Lynwood bank planning?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="289">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="290">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You have no knowledge of that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="291">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I have no knowledge, no recollection.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="292">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Okay, maybe you should just take us from Coin Security incident.  What did Capt Geldenhuys, what did he give you instructions to do?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="293">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>To accompany C10 to Coin Security in Nelspruit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="294">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>&quot;Om C10 te vergesel&quot;.  Does that mean you only had to accompany them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="295">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="296">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Would you partake in any - if there was any firing, any shooting, were you empowered to partake in that shooting?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="297">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="298">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were.  So his instructions was not merely to accompany C10?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="299">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Well if a shooting were to take place I would have participated.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="300">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Was that taken for granted?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="301">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="302">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>He didn&#039;t give you a specific instruction that should there be firing, that you were to be involved?  You could be empowered to actually shoot?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="303">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="304">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Because Mr Gouws, you knew before the Coin Security incident, that these robbers were to be killed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="305">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I did not know at that stage.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="306">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So when did you know they were to be killed?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="307">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>After we were told at the Coin offices by Ben van Zyl that they were armed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="308">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So the only reason you killed them was because - sorry, the only reason you were going to kill them was because you thought they were armed?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="309">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="310">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were prepared to go ahead with that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="311">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="312">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It never crossed your mind that you could try to actually arrest them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="313">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, it is easy to explain, Coin Security&#039;s staff were seated in the offices, they were armed.  That is the information that the robbers had.  In other words, they would enter with firearms and open fire left and right and I would obviously shoo them, I wouldn&#039;t wait for him to shoot me.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="314">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Won&#039;t wait for him to shoot you first, you would actually shoot him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="315">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Definitely.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="316">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So only in defence.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="317">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="318">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Not attack?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="319">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>If he had a weapon in his hand I would shoot.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="320">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You will shoot him because he has a weapon in his hand.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="321">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Otherwise he would shoot me.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="322">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Was that the modus operandi of the Murder and Robbery Unit at that time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="323">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Not always.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="324">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So why did you do it this - why was that your approach this time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="325">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Because political persons were involved in this.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="326">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So because there were political people involved, you decided that if they have a gun on them you will shoot them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="327">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>If they were busy with a robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="328">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So who gave you the mandate that if they were people and only because they were political people, that distinguishes them from other robbers and that&#039;s why they deserved the special treatment of being killed if they have a weapon on them?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="329">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>It was obvious.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="330">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Sorry?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="331">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>It was obvious.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="332">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I didn&#039;t get that.  It was obvious, is that what you&#039;re saying?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="333">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="334">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>When you&#039;re saying it was obvious, what do you mean?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="335">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Exactly what I say.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="336">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So Capt Geldenhuys didn&#039;t give you the instruction that if there were ANC people, you could then go ahead and kill them, even if you would not kill other robbers in the same situation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="337">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="338">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>He didn&#039;t give you that instruction?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="339">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="340">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yet you were prepared to go that far.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="341">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="342">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And act outside your instructions from Capt Geldenhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="343">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he did not give me specific orders.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="344">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yet you were prepared to do that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="345">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="346">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were prepared to go outside your instructions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="347">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="348">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Okay.  Did you know, Mr Gouws, at the time of the Coin Security incident, did you know to what extent C10 and Ben van Zyl had been involved in the actual setting up of that whole operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="349">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson, I did not know.  It was only on that evening when the robbery was not committed that I met Ben van Zyl.  I&#039;d known him already, but I did not know beforehand of any ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="350">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you knew afterwards, you knew the extent to which they actually contributed to the setting up of that operation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="351">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I was not informed in detail.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="352">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I&#039;m talking about afterwards, you knew afterwards, after Coin Security.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="353">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I did not talk to Ben van Zyl much, so I did not know precisely what the prior planning was.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="354">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did Holtzhausen tell you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="355">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="356">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So no-one told you that the police and Ben van Zyl had basically set up the Coin operation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="357">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I did not know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="358">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You had no knowledge of that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="359">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="360">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What were you told about the Nelspruit incident, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="361">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That it was ANC activists who once again wanted to rob the Coin Security offices.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="362">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And who informed you of that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="363">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Mr Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="364">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Holtzhausen.  And what were your instructions from Capt Geldenhuys?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="365">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>To participate in the shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="366">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Oh so this time he didn&#039;t just tell you to actually &quot;vergesel&quot; C10, he told you to actually take part in the shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="367">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="368">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So his instructions were clearly different from what they were at Coin Security?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="369">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="370">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>But Geldenhuys himself was there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="371">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="372">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Was he also present during the first Coin incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="373">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="374">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So were you - at the Drum Rock Hotel, were you specifically informed as to how the operation would unfold?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="375">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, not much was said at the Drum Rock Hotel, it was simply discussed superficially.  I think the reason for that was that some of the persons were not yet at the scene, the scene for which the ambush was planned.  Therefore, most of the planning was undertaken on the scene before the time.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="376">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>But at the Drum Rock Hotel you were aware that these people were going to be shot and killed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="377">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="378">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were aware of that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="379">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="380">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you find out - and you were aware that they were going to be shot and killed even before they had come near the scene of the crime.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="381">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="382">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Of the so-called crime.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="383">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="384">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Were you aware that there was going to be no robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="385">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="386">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were aware of that fact.  Didn&#039;t it strike you as odd ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="387">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>In the sense that it would be prevented or in the sense that there wouldn&#039;t be a - there&#039;s no planning of a robbery at all?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="388">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>In the sense that it wouldn&#039;t happen at all.  There was no planning of a robbery at all, from the part of the police.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="389">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Sorry, from the?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="390">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>From the perspective of the police there wouldn&#039;t be any robbery at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="391">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Because they would prevent it or because it wasn&#039;t planned at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="392">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Because it wasn&#039;t planned at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="393">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Or was it planned so that it wouldn&#039;t happen?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="394">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Well I think - ja, it goes hand-in-hand, it was planned that the robbery - there wouldn&#039;t be any robbery basically.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="395">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, it appears to me as if that was part of the plan.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="396">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="397">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Part of the police plan, that there would never really be a robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="398">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Exactly yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="399">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="400">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You confirm that, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="401">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="402">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>As an investigator with Murder and Robbery Unit, a unit that specialises in murder and robber, it didn&#039;t strike you as strange that you would set up an ambush to kill people even if there was going to be no robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="403">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I acted under orders.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="404">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>That does not excuse you, Mr Gouws.  I am asking you if it didn&#039;t strike you as strange that you would kill people even where there would be no robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="405">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, they wanted to commit a robbery, in either event they would have done it at some point.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="406">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you would kill anyone who wants to rob?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="407">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I wouldn&#039;t say anyone.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="408">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So who would you kill then?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="409">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>These were specific targets.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="410">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Why were they specific targets?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="411">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That you can ask of the Security Branch perhaps.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="412">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I&#039;m asking you, why were they specific targets?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="413">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I acted on their information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="414">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What was the information at that time?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="415">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That they were ANC activists.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="416">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you ask them how many people were going to be killed?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="417">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="418">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you ask them whether they had information of exactly who was in the kombi and what their political persuasion was?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="419">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="420">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And yet you went ahead with this operation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="421">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="422">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Even though in terms of your training, you were specifically a Murder and Robbery investigator.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="423">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="424">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And I ask you again, Mr Gouws - you didn&#039;t answer my question, my question to you was, didn&#039;t you find it strange that these people ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="425">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>He did answer the question, with all respect, Mr Chairman.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="426">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Well let him try again.  Ms Pillay?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="427">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t believe he answered the question, Mr Chairperson, and if he did then he has to excuse me because I missed it.  If he can just answer the question again then.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="428">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	My question to you, Mr Gouws was, didn&#039;t you find it strange that these people - you being a specialist in the field, you being a specialist Murder and Robbery investigator, didn&#039;t you find it strange that these people were to be killed and that was the intention, specifically to put them - to ambush and kill them even before they had come near the scene of the so-called robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="429">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="430">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You didn&#039;t find it strange?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="431">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="432">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It happened before in your experience.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="433">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="434">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>When did it happen before?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="435">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Not a similar incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="436">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Definitely not a similar incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="437">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="438">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So in your experience as someone attached to Murder and Robbery, a similar incident had never happened?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="439">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="440">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So this was different?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="441">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="442">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yet you didn&#039;t question it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="443">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="444">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Why didn&#039;t you question it, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="445">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I agreed with it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="446">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Sorry?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="447">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I agreed with it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="448">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You agreed with it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="449">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="450">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You agreed that these people should be killed even before they had robbed and even before they had come near the scene of the robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="451">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="452">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Why would you agree with it?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="453">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, they were criminals ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="454">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>They&#039;re criminals.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="455">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>They would have committed the robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="456">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>They were going to rob.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="457">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>They were ANC activists.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="458">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yes?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="459">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Those are my reasons.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="460">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Gouws you will agree with me that shooting people in cold blood in an ambush is a serious incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="461">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="462">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It&#039;s something that is not undertaken lightly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="463">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="464">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You&#039;re saying that you agreed to kill these people because they were criminals, because they were going to rob and because they were ANC people, is that correct?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="465">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="466">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you have specific knowledge that they were criminals?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="467">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, no, I simply acted according to the information which came from Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="468">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You had no specific knowledge.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="469">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="470">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you have knowledge that they had robbed before?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="471">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="472">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And I put it to you Mr Gouws that they were not all ANC people either, how do you respond to that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="473">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>According to my information they were all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="474">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Gouws, I&#039;m not sure whether you were here when Mr Nortje was testifying, but it was put to Mr Nortje that one of the people were actually IFP members.  If you had known that ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="475">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>It was put to him that according to the evidence, there was speculation that one was an IFP member.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="476">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I stand correct, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="477">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	That was the information that was put to Mr Nortje, Mr Gouws.  If you had information that possibly one was an IFP member and one definitely was a PAC member, would you have carried on with this operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="478">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="479">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You would have carried on?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="480">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="481">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Even if you knew then for a fact that they were not all ANC people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="482">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="483">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Why would you have carried on then, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="484">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>The circumstances were the same.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="485">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What circumstances?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="486">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>They were criminals and they wanted to commit a robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="487">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Gouws.  So you&#039;re saying that the main reason these people were killed is because they are criminals and they are going to rob?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="488">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>And that these were political activists.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="489">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And that because they&#039;re political activists?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="490">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="491">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Not necessarily that they were stealing to - sorry, that they were going to rob to fill the coffers of the ANC?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="492">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>It was also the information which was generally known.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="493">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>No, but Mr Gouws you&#039;re saying that you would kill them because they were criminals, they were robbers and that they were all political activists, that&#039;s why you killed them.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="494">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, but the aspect of the political activists, that the coffers of the political organisation would be filled was general knowledge.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="495">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>It was general information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="496">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="497">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Which you didn&#039;t bother to check in relation of this specific incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="498">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, it was general knowledge.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="499">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And I put it to you Mr Gouws, that that general knowledge was in fact wrong and inaccurate and that five people lost their lives because of that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="500">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	So you&#039;re saying that these - if these political - these political activists would have used the proceeds of the robbery in any case to fill the coffers of the political party? </text>
		</line>
		<line number="501">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That was the information.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="502">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So if we got - if we have five robbers, Mr Gouws, hypothetically one of them is an IFP, one of them definitely is a PAC and one an ANC, to which coffers would the proceeds go?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="503">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I would not know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="504">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You won&#039;t.  Mr Gouws, do you drink?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="505">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>On occasion, yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="506">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you drink at the time of the incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="507">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Before the incident I had beers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="508">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You did drink before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="509">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="510">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>How long before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="511">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>About three/four hours before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="512">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Three or four hours before the incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="513">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="514">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You being an investigator from Murder and Robbery Unit, going on an operation, drank three or four hours before the incident.  Where did you drink, Mr Gouws?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="515">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>At the Drumrock.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="516">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>With whom were you there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="517">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I can&#039;t remember who was there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="518">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>But who were accompanied by?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="519">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="520">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="521">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>And Geldenhuys.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="522">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Geldenhuys.  And you all drank?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="523">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="524">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you drink light stuff, heavy stuff?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="525">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Beer.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="526">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Beer.  Is that what you drank?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="527">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="528">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And Holtzhausen, what did he drink?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="529">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I assume also beer.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="530">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You assume beer.  And Geldenhuys, what did he drink?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="531">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I think also beer, I can&#039;t remember.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="532">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>How many beers, Mr Gouws, can you remember?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="533">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Three or four beers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="534">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Three or four, so it wasn&#039;t very heavy drinking?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="535">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="536">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Gouws, can you have a look at Mr Holtzhausen&#039;s affidavit at page 311, please.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="537">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Paragraph?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="538">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>If you look at paragraph 18, the last line</text>
		</line>
		<line number="539" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;We booked in at the Drum Rock Hotel before we went to the police station.  We also visited the canteen in Nelspruit, where we consumed strong drink.&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="540">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I was not there at the canteen that evening, I was only at the Drumrock.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="541">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Your evidence today is that you were not at the canteen.  Is it that you don&#039;t have a recollection of being at the canteen or that you were not at the canteen?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="542">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I was not at the canteen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="543">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Let&#039;s look at Geldenhuys&#039; affidavit, page 261, paragraph 44</text>
		</line>
		<line number="544" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;From approximately 16H00, I met Sgt Gouws and Holtzhausen at the canteen in Nelspruit.&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="545">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I was definitely not here, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="546">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You were not there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="547">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="548">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So now we have Mr Geldenhuys who&#039;s also a liar.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="549">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, perhaps he may be confusing me with someone else.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="550">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>He confused you with someone else.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="551">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know, but I definitely wasn&#039;t at the Nelspruit canteen that night.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="552">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>At the canteen, was this a police facility?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="553">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="554">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Where you would be able to enjoy subsidised drinks?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="555">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="556">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Can you recall that you saw the Nelspruit commander that day and that he was informed that you were undertaking an operation in his area?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="557">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson, if I recall correctly, Capt Geldenhuys and Holtzhausen co-ordinated with him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="558">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Gouws, your application refers to R1 000 that you were given for the Carousel incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="559">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="560">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Do you know why it was paid out to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="561">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I don&#039;t know, probably for good work.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="562">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>When you say &quot;goeie werk&quot;, what are you referring to?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="563">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That robbers were captured.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="564">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Were there robbers caught in Carousel?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="565">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, no, shot.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="566">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So it was &quot;goeie werk&quot; for killing robbers?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="567">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="568">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Is that what motivated you to participate in the Nelspruit incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="569">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Not at all.  I think that on that day the former President of Bophutatswana also wrote us a later, President Mangope.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="570">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So were you paid money for the Nelspruit incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="571">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Sorry?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="572">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Were you paid money for - were you given a bonus for the Nelspruit incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="573">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Not at all.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="574">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Does that mean that there was no &quot;goeie werk&quot; in the Nelspruit incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="575">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot put it that way, I don&#039;t know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="576">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Do you normally get paid extra money for good work, as a police officer?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="577">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="578">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So how do you explain why you received money on that occasion?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="579">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know, this was the first time in my police career that it happened.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="580">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And it hasn&#039;t happened since?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="581">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="582">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Does it mean that you haven&#039;t done good work since?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="583">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That must be correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="584">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Were you aware Mr Gouws, that Mr Geldenhuys&#039; view was that Pretoria Murder and Robbery was just used as a front to legitimise this operation?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="585">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I realised that afterwards.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="586">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You became aware of that afterwards?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="587">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="588">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And what&#039;s your response to that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="589">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I still feel that we did our job.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="590">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You did your work by killing people before they had come near a robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="591">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="592">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And when you say your &quot;werk&quot;, you mean work of the Pretoria Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="593">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="594">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You don&#039;t feel that you were used by the people of Vlakplaas?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="595">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>To a certain extent, probably yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="596">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>What do you man &quot;tot &#039;n sekere mate&quot;?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="597">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>We were instructed to participate in an operation and then the decision was made that these persons would just be immediately killed.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="598">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And you actively ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="599">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>So in other words, anyone could have done it, anyone that could handle a weapon?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="600">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="601">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>You didn&#039;t need a specialist from Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="602">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="603">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And you actually actively participated in this &quot;skiet voor die voet&quot;.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="604">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="605">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Because you started shooting first didn&#039;t you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="606">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Holtzhausen fired first and I began to shoot directly after him.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="607">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Immediately.  But of the lot, you were with the first group that started shooting.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="608">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="609">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>So you were completely comfortable with &quot;skiet voor die voet&quot;.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="610">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="611">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Even though you didn&#039;t, as you&#039;ve testified here today, you didn&#039;t specifically have a lot of knowledge of these people?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="612">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="613">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You yourself.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="614">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="615">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And you in now way even bothered to confirm whatever information was given to you.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="616">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I had trust in the information from the source.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="617">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Which &quot;bron se inligting&quot;?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="618">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That was given to us by Holtzhausen.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="619">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Yet you - earlier you called Mr Holtzhausen a liar.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="620">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I wouldn&#039;t say that he lied about that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="621">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You don&#039;t think he lied, so what do you say about that, when he referred to you being there at Lynwood?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="622">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>He said he may have made a mistake and you put it to you him, if he knew you were there, if he knew you were not there, then he would say that it&#039;s a lie.  He didn&#039;t say he was a liar, you asked him whether he&#039;s been there, he said</text>
		</line>
		<line number="623" isquote="true">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>&quot;No, he may have mistaken me with another person&quot;.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="624">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>		&quot;But if he still persists, would you then say he lied&quot;?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="625">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>		&quot;Yes, I would say he lied.&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="626">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Well we&#039;ll only know whether Mr Holtzhausen ...(intervention)</text>
		</line>
		<line number="627">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>But you could argue that, that&#039;s argument, it&#039;s not a question to a witness.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="628">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And we&#039;ll only know whether Mr Holtzhausen persists with that when he in fact testifies.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="629">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="630">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, carry on, Ms Pillay.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="631">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Mr Gouws, do you recall what Mr de Kock&#039;s role at the scene was?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="632">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot say specifically.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="633">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You can&#039;t specifically say what his role was.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="634">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="635">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you see him there?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="636">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I saw him there.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="637">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And what did he do?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="638">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>He was just around.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="639">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You was just around.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="640">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That&#039;s correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="641">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>And you can&#039;t specifically say what exactly he was doing?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="642">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot say.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="643">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did you see Mr de Kock fire any shots?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="644">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Not at all, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="645">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Oh, you didn&#039;t see anything.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="646">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="647">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>Did Mr de Kock bring the men into a line when there was so-called chaos?  Do you recall that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="648">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I can recall that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="649">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You can remember that.  And what did Mr de Kock do after that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="650">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I cannot recall.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="651">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>You can&#039;t remember that.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="652">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="653">
			<speaker>MS PILLAY</speaker>
			<text>I have no further questions, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="654">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PILLAY</text>
		</line>
		<line number="655">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you.  Ms Patel?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="656">
			<speaker>CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Honourable Chair.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="657">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Just shortly, Mr Gouws.  You stated that you knew Ben van Zyl from a long time before this incident had taken place.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="658">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="659">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Can you tell us in what capacity you knew him, was it professionally or personally or both?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="660">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>He was stationed at the Brixton Murder and Robbery Unit.  I began at Pretoria Murder and Robbery in 1986 and I then met him in 1987, via Murder and Robbery.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="661">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Okay.  Did you have any - well you had professional dealings with him then from 1987 onwards.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="662">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="663">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Do you have any idea why he left Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="664">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I don&#039;t know.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="665">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Did you have any dealings with him after he left Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="666">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="667">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>None whatsoever?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="668">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, the first time that I saw him again was with the Coin incident.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="669">
			<speaker>MS PATEL</speaker>
			<text>Alright, okay.  Thank you, Honourable Chairperson, I have no further questions.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="670">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL</text>
		</line>
		<line number="671">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Ms Patel.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="672">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="673">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Mr van den Berg.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="674">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Before the Panel asks questions, there&#039;s one aspect that I neglected to ask him, it&#039;s just to put something on record.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="675">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, certainly.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="676">
			<speaker>FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>I asked you about the Kwandabele 9.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="677">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="678">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Could you confirm the date of this incident, which was approximately June/July 1986, is that correct?  Can you recall that?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="679">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I am not certain of the date.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="680">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>But it was early within the period that you were with Murder and Robbery?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="681">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I had not yet joined Murder and Robbery, that is why I think that it may have been in the beginning of 1986.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="682">
			<speaker>MR VAN DEN BERG</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="683">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG</text>
		</line>
		<line number="684">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr van den Berg.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="685">
			<speaker>MR SIBANYONI</speaker>
			<text>No questions from me, Mr Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="686">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Sibanyoni.  Adv de Jager?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="687">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>None.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="688">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey, re-examination?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="689">
			<speaker>RE-EXAMINATION BY MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Just one or two questions, Chairperson.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="690">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Mr Gouws, it was put to you that you were not a member of any counter-insurgency unit.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="691">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="692">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>But did you know that C10 was such a unit?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="693">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="694">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And also fulfilled such a role in &#039;92?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="695">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="696">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Although you yourself were not a member of a covert counter-insurgency unit with relation to the deeds for which you request amnesty, that being the Kwandabele 9 and the Nietverdiendt 10.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="697">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No, I was not involved in Nietverdiendt 10.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="698">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The other was the murder of Minister Piet Ntuli in Nutsi near Kwandabele.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="699">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Yes, that is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="700">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was that a covert action of the Security Police, in which you were a participant?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="701">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="702">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So it was not unusual for you to participate in something like this?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="703">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="704">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Very well.  Then with regard to the first time that you went to the Coin Security company, when Geldenhuys was not present, your evidence is that you received orders from him to accompany C10.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="705">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="706">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Who was at the scene there, who had the highest rank?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="707">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>If I recall correctly, it was Capt Gevers.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="708">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>From Vlakplaas?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="709">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="710">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And Holtzhausen, what was his rank at that stage?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="711">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>I am not certain, I think he was a Warrant Officer.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="712">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Was he also a higher rank than you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="713">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="714">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And did he take the lead with the planning of the incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="715">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="716">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Then I just want to ask you, if your commander sends you with another unit such as Vlakplaas, at that stage - in light of the evidence regarding 1991, the basis had already been laid by Gen Engelbrecht for cooperation between C10 and Murder and Robbery, if the commander of Murder and robbery sent you to accompany those persons, would you say that effectively you would be placed under their command for that purpose?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="717">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="718">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>The question was also put to you with regard to the fact that C10 used you during the Nelspruit incident, your evidence was that you didn&#039;t really have a problem with it.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="719">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>That is correct.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="720">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>And if we look back to what took place during 1991, during that briefing session, what is your comment regarding the fact that you were applied in this incident?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="721">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, basically we were instructed to assist.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="722">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>So this was not unexpected to you?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="723">
			<speaker>MR GOUWS</speaker>
			<text>No.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="724">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Chair, I have nothing further.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="725">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LAMEY</text>
		</line>
		<line number="726">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Thank you, Mr Lamey.   Mr Gouws, thank you, you are excused.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="727">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>WITNESS EXCUSED</text>
		</line>
		<line number="728">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes Mr Lamey, who is next ?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="729">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, before Mr Lamey continues, at this stage I would like to direct a request to the Committee.  It is also my instruction that the Committee consider whether Mr Holtzhausen could give his evidence.  He has been subpoenaed.  And I think that everybody accepts that they are interested in what he has to say, with the permission of course of Mr Lamey and Mr Cornelius next to me and with the approval of the Committee, I think that it would only be beneficial. Various applicants have referred to aspects which only Mr Holtzhausen can respond to, consequently there are a reasonable number of interruptions in the continuity of events as they took place, within the evidence, and I think that Mr Holtzhausen would be able to approach this in either event.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="730">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I understand you.  Mr van Zyl is also in the same situation and we have begun to think that it would be one of the two.  You say that Mr Holtzhausen is also prepared?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="731">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>Yes, he is prepared.  If it pleases you, he may begin his evidence.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="732">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>I would just like to hear the response of all the parties concerned because it is no matter to us.  As I&#039;ve said I understand you and it does make sense that Mr Holtzhausen and Mr van Zyl, it would appear as if there are many relevant points of information which could assist us with this investigation.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="733">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>Yes, Mr Chairperson.  I would just like to supplement that by saying that it is my opinion that it would avoid much unnecessary cross-examination by the other concerned parties.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="734">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="735">
			<speaker>MR BAM</speaker>
			<text>And it could expedite the proceedings.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="736">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes.  We appreciate all your ideas in order to expedite these proceedings.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="737">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>	Is there anyone here who has a problem with this?  Is there anybody who has a difficulty if we were to listen to the testimony of Mr Holtzhausen?  Mr Lamey?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="738">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, I have just been caught somewhat unawares because it was my intention to call my clients in terms of my preparation and planning.  There were certain aspects that I wanted to take up with Mr van Zyl.  I don&#039;t wish to waste any time, but I would like to request a brief adjournment so that we can discuss the matter.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="739">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Would it suit you if we took Mr Klopper&#039;s evidence now, or would that throw you completely?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="740">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>I don&#039;t know if he is present, I just want to ensure whether he is present.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="741">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Would he have been your next witness?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="742">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Yes.  I think he is in the next room.  I see he is here.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="743">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Yes, because I don&#039;t really want to interrupt the proceedings.  Mr Bam has made an excellent</text>
		</line>
		<line number="744">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>suggestion there.  However, if you have a potential problem with that then we can take the following witness and during the tea adjournment all of us can observe the situation and see what there is to do about it.  If we take Mr Holtzhausen now or Mr Klopper now, it surely wouldn&#039;t make such a tremendous difference other than what it may interrupt the proceedings and your line of examination.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="745">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>As I&#039;ve said, I don&#039;t necessarily have a problem with it, I just need some time to consider it and just to consult with Mr Bam and take instructions from my clients.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="746">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>That would be if there was the decision to take Mr Holtzhausen next, but if Mr Klopper is called now you will not have a problem with that, is that what your preparation entailed?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="747">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Perhaps Holtzhausen could go in before Klopper.  I just want to confer with my clients and be certain.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="748">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey, certainly your clients don&#039;t really have a say in what sequence they appear.  In the first place, I think that the Panel can call whichever witness they want at whichever time.  The Panel determines that.  Here we have a man who was responsible for planning, it was strange to me that he was not called initially or Mr van Zyl was called initially, because then we would have had a greater sense of continuity, but we have called persons who were basically just foot-soldiers who received orders from above.  Why don&#039;t we give the commanders from above to give evidence first?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="749">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>As I&#039;ve said, I don&#039;t necessarily have a problem, it&#039;s just that my one immediate aspect is that Mr van Zyl is an important person to have here and we anticipated that Mr Klopper would go and then him and at the moment he is not here physically, he being van Zyl.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="750">
			<speaker>ADV DE JAGER</speaker>
			<text>Well then we really cannot help the matter, Mr Holtzhausen must give his evidence.  We cannot help if Mr van Zyl is not present because the matter has been set down for a week, he should be here.  It is his case, if he&#039;s not interested in it, then it is his problem.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="751">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Mr Lamey, I saw Mr Klopper indicating to you that he is present.  Can we proceed with him at this stage without interrupting the proceedings?  That is what I&#039;m not very favourably inclined towards.  Can we hear Mr Klopper&#039;s evidence then?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="752">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Chairperson, may I just request the following, it may be preferable that Mr Holtzhausen give evidence at this point before Mr Klopper, due to the considerations mentioned by Mr Bam.  I just want a brief moment, just to confer.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="753">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>So you say, you are not ready to call Mr Klopper immediately?</text>
		</line>
		<line number="754">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>Yes, I am ready, but if there are other good reasons why Mr Holtzhausen should perhaps proceed before him, then that may also be advisable.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="755">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>No, in my opinion there is not such an urgent reason to interrupt the proceedings.  It would have been convenient, but it is not of the utmost necessity.  If you ready to call Mr Klopper, then I think we should go ahead with that.  We will adjourn at the usual time and then if there are any further problems, you can resolve these issues and tell us whether or not there are problems with Holtzhausen.  I just don&#039;t wish to interrupt the proceedings.  If we stand down for two minutes, we will have to begin in 20 minutes time.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="756">
			<speaker>MR LAMEY</speaker>
			<text>As it pleases.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="757">
			<speaker>CHAIRPERSON</speaker>
			<text>Will someone please call Mr Klopper.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="758">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
	</lines>
</hearing>