amntrans AMNESTY HEARINGS 1999-10-20 PRETORIA 6 JOHANNES JAKOBUS STRYDOM AM5464/97 https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=53779&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/amntrans/1999/99101228_pre_991020.htm JOHANNES JAKOBUS STRYDOM (sworn states) EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, do you confirm the correctness of your application? The pages are a bit jumbled, but your application commences on page 421, 422, 423 up to page 429. Do you confirm the correctness thereof? MR STRYDOM That's correct, yes. MR DU PLESSIS MR STRYDOM That is correct, yes. MR DU PLESSIS I would just like to question you about a few aspects in order to clarify what you say in your application. What was your rank at that stage? MR STRYDOM I was a Warrant Officer. MR DU PLESSIS And in which unit were you? MR STRYDOM Unit C, at Compol building. MR DU PLESSIS And who was your commander at Unit C? MR STRYDOM Capt Hendrik Prinsloo. MR DU PLESSIS And Capt Crafford, what was his position? MR STRYDOM Capt Crafford at that stage was the commander. MR DU PLESSIS But Capt Prinsloo was also your commander? MR STRYDOM He was also my commander, yes. MR DU PLESSIS Who was the senior man, Crafford or Prinsloo? MR STRYDOM Crafford was the senior man. MR DU PLESSIS And Mr Strydom, how many times were you involved in the interrogation of Mandla? MR STRYDOM As far as I recall, only once. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. And who was present during the interrogation, can you recall? You say in the second paragraph, you refer to Capt Sakkie Crafford and black members, can you recall who the black members were? MR STRYDOM It was Capt Sakkie Crafford and black members, Jerry and Smuts. There were others, but I cannot recall their names. MR DU PLESSIS And were you aware of the subject matter of the interrogation? MR STRYDOM Yes, I was. MR DU PLESSIS You have read the application of Capt Crafford. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS And you have seen what information was available there from Mandla. MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR DU PLESSIS You will find that on page 496, Chairperson, 496 and 495. And you refer in paragraph 2 to shifts of interrogation. Let us just clear this up, were there specific regular shifts which the various divisions had undertaken, or what did you mean by that? MR STRYDOM I can specifically recall that I and Capt Sakkie Crafford one afternoon undertook the interrogation. MR DU PLESSIS Yes, but what I mean is, were there regular shifts? Would you for example every afternoon between two and four, interrogate the man? MR STRYDOM No, for sure not, it was different times. MR DU PLESSIS Were you ever present where Capt Prinsloo undertook the interrogation of Mandla? MR STRYDOM No. MR DU PLESSIS You are saying that you were only present that specific one time to which you refer. MR STRYDOM That's correct, with Capt Crafford. MR DU PLESSIS And you are saying in the second paragraph that at some stage you drove, you left the activist in the care of the black members and when you returned at 10 o'clock that evening you found him hanging from a tree. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS Could you please explain how he was tied to the tree. MR STRYDOM He was tied to the tree by his hands and he was on his feet, he hung. MR DU PLESSIS Did he hang upside down? MR STRYDOM No. MR DU PLESSIS And his feet were not hanging in the air, or he was not hanging in some funny fashion? MR STRYDOM No, his feet were not away from the ground. MR DU PLESSIS You say he was then already assaulted by the black members. MR STRYDOM It seemed to me so. MR MALAN Did you say his feet touched the ground? MR STRYDOM Yes. MR MALAN So he was just tied up? MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. MR MALAN He could have stood if he wanted to? MR STRYDOM Yes, he could. MR MALAN But he was hanging. MR STRYDOM Yes. MR MALAN Thank you. MR DU PLESSIS And then you refer in your last sentence to a funny name, Myali, should that be Mtjali? MR STRYDOM Yes, that has to be Mtjali. MR DU PLESSIS Then in the third paragraph you say Capt Crafford took his pistol and held the barrel up in the air and pulled the trigger until the magazine was empty. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS And you struck him with a soda water bottle. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS Did you get any information from him of any value during this assault and interrogation? MR STRYDOM No, we did not obtain any further information from him because from the questions that Sakkie Crafford put to him there was no significant information which we obtained from him. MR DU PLESSIS You have seen in Capt Crafford's application on page 497 - you do not have to page there, he says that he, Crafford, burnt Mandla with a log. MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR DU PLESSIS Was this at the same time when he fired with a pistol and you struck him with the bottle? MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR DU PLESSIS Was there anybody else who burnt him, anybody but Capt Crafford, who burnt him with a log? MR STRYDOM Not as far as I can recall. MR DU PLESSIS And at that stage when you did these things and the pistol was fired and the bottle was used and he was burnt with the log, was Mandla cooperating or was he not cooperating? MR STRYDOM He did not offer any cooperation. MR DU PLESSIS What was the purpose of these actions? MR STRYDOM To intimidate him and to break his moral. MR DU PLESSIS At a stage he was unconscious and he had several wounds to his head. MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR DU PLESSIS And you are saying in the laster sentence "During interrogation he supplied information and several names to us." MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR DU PLESSIS When did he do this, after he was struck with the bottle, before he was struck with bottle, after he was burnt, before he was burnt, when did he do this? MR STRYDOM After he was assaulted and burnt and struck with the bottle. MR DU PLESSIS One of the other applicants, I think Mr Mathebula, says in his application that he was tied to a water tank. Can you recall that you read that? MR STRYDOM I read that. MR DU PLESSIS What do you say about that? MR STRYDOM That is not correct, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS And then he says that you were also responsible for burning Mandla with the log. MR STRYDOM That is not correct. MR DU PLESSIS You say that Capt Crafford said in his application on page 497, that he Capt Crafford was the one who burnt him with the burning log. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. And that is how you recall it? MR STRYDOM That is how I recall it, yes. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. Mr Strydom, what the purpose of the interrogation? MR STRYDOM To obtain information with regard to the incidents that had been mentioned already. MR DU PLESSIS And then in the last paragraph you say you went home and the following day you went back there. Why did you do that? MR STRYDOM I wanted to return to see how it was with Mandla. MR DU PLESSIS What happened when you arrived there? MR STRYDOM When I arrived there I found Capt Prinsloo there. MR DU PLESSIS And what did he tell you? MR STRYDOM He was upset because of the assault. I did not want to argue further with him and I climbed into my car and went back home. MR DU PLESSIS And were you afterwards sent on an operation to Swaziland? MR STRYDOM That is correct, Sakkie Crafford and I. MR DU PLESSIS Do you know whether this was this was before the interrogation of Mandla had ceased, or do you not know? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall. MR DU PLESSIS Was it shortly after this Sunday? MR STRYDOM It was shortly after that Sunday. MR DU PLESSIS Mr Strydom, you have now confirmed the other pages with regard to the political objective and everything with regard to that, is there anything else that you would like to tell the Committee about the TRC process, and to the family with regard to this incident? MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS Would you please continue. MR STRYDOM It has been many years that this thing has been eating away at me and I have had many sleepless nights up to now. And from my heart I would like to apologise to the family members and say how sorry I am and I hope that they will forgive me for this assault and for the death of Mandla, which ensued because of this assault. Thank you very much, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS Chairperson, I neglected to ask one question. May I just deal with that please. CHAIRPERSON Yes, you may. MR DU PLESSIS You will see on page 421, application was not made for murder. However, during my consultation with Mr Strydom I asked him a specific question and that question made me reconsider my position and I'm going to apply on the basis of what he told me - I'm going to ask him the question now, for murder and then I will argue it and leave it in the Committee's hands. Mr Strydom, when the interrogation took place, did the idea emanate by you that Mandla, because of the interrogation and the assaults, could die? MR STRYDOM Yes, I did think about it and I foresaw that he could have died because of the assault. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. Madam Chair, I will leave it for argument, the whole question surrounding actions and where the eventual cause of the death is different from the actions, but the actions could have caused the death. It's that whole difficult argument, but I will ask leave to amend page 421 to include an application for murder. Thank you. I have no ...(intervention) MR MALAN May I just make sure at this point ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON I was going to suggest, Mr du Plessis, that we will respond to that once we have heard your argument. MR DU PLESSIS Yes, yes, if the Committee finds that this evidence is not enough to prove murder in dolus eventualis, then I'm in your hands. But I will leave it for argument, that's the only basis for that application which I've made. CHAIRPERSON We note that you intend to make such an application during argument. MR DU PLESSIS Thank you, thank you Chairperson. MR MALAN On this point, may I just follow it up. When you spoke to the family you asked for forgiveness for the assault and the consequent death. Do you ask that - I ask this on the same background as on the request of your legal representative. Did you think that his death could follow on a basis of a necessity because of the nature of the assault? Is that what you're trying to tell the family or not? MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR MALAN So you thought that he would be assaulted in such a manner that they would murder him because they could not release him? MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR MALAN Because that is what I am hearing you saying to the family. And then an immediate follow-up question in my mind is why do you think he was killed? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, because I never saw him again after that Sunday. MR MALAN Very well. I think my question was misunderstood, but I will leave it there. Thank you. MR DU PLESSIS Thank you, Chair, I have no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS CHAIRPERSON Thank you. Mr Alberts? MR ALBERTS Thank you, I have no questions, Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR ALBERTS CHAIRPERSON Mr Jansen - or Mr Botha first? MR BOTHA No questions, Madam Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA CHAIRPERSON Mr Jansen? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JANSEN Thank you, Chair. Mr Strydom, with which of the black members of Unit C did you usually work? MR STRYDOM Along with Mtjali, he usually worked with me. MR JANSEN Mr Matjeni whom I represent says he usually worked in a group with Mr Dos Santos. Does that concur with your recollection? MR STRYDOM That is correct yes, Chairperson. MR JANSEN At the stage when these incidents took place, could one assume that the last thing that came to your mind was that you would 10 years later have to recall these incidents and that you'd have to give evidence about it? MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR JANSEN So would you then accept that when I put to you that one has to leave room that you might be mistaken in the events? MR STRYDOM Yes, that is possible, I may err. MR JANSEN Because you know for example that Mr Jerry Matjeni denies that he was in any way involved in the assault or in an assault of Mr Mbizana. MR STRYDOM It is possible that he may not have been involved. MR JANSEN I say this with reference to that sentence on page 422, the final part of that paragraph where he(sic) says "He was then severely assaulted by the black members." ... and directly afterwards - "The black members names, except for those of Jerry and Mtjali I cannot recall." Would you concede that insofar as you implicate Mr Mtjali in an assault, you may be mistaken in your recollection? MR STRYDOM It is possible yes, that I may be mistaken, Chairperson. MR JANSEN Thank you, Chair, I have no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN CHAIRPERSON May I find out, Mr Strydom, how you can be mistaken about the identity of the persons that you've indicated to have been Jerry and Mtjali as having been involved in the assault on Mandla at approximately 10 hours at night when you came back and found him hanging on the tree? How is it possible that you can be mistaken with regard to the identity of the black members that were responsible for his assault? MR STRYDOM The possibility exists because it has been 16 years and the names confused me, or it could have confused me, that I cannot recall all the names. CHAIRPERSON How long had you worked with Mr Matjeni and Mr Mtjali, prior to this incident? MR STRYDOM I worked along with Mr Mtjali for many years, it can be 15 years. And Jerry I only knew from 1985 up until my retirement in 1992. CHAIRPERSON So at the time of this incident you knew both men reasonably well? MR STRYDOM I beg your pardon, Chairperson? CHAIRPERSON At the time of the occurrence of this incident you knew both men reasonably well. MR STRYDOM That's right, ja. CHAIRPERSON And this is my difficulty. Where is there room for confusion? MR STRYDOM Well it's nearly 16 years ago that this thing happened, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Yes. You can speak to me in Afrikaans. MR STRYDOM Thank you very much. It has been more than 16 years and I cannot recall the names of the persons present there. It may have confused me entirely, the names. CHAIRPERSON Do you know of any other black members who were part of the interrogation of Mr Mandla? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, I cannot recall. I don't know of any names that were present. CHAIRPERSON Do you recall whether Jerry and Mtjali were part of Mandla's interrogation at any stage? MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON And that would be the interrogation session where you participated in his interrogation. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON You only participated in one such session. MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON And that session followed after you had found Mandla hanging from the tree. MR STRYDOM That's correct. CHAIRPERSON Mr Prinsloo? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PRINSLOO Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, you have heard the evidence of Mr Prinsloo and that is that he had already spoken to Brig Cronje before he discovered that the person, the deceased, Mandla, had been assaulted. Do you agree with that? MR STRYDOM I agree, yes, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO And you have also testified that Mr Prinsloo admonished you and was very angry with regard to this specific incident, that Mandla was interrogated and assaulted. MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO Mr Strydom, it is so that Capt Prinsloo was the appointed person who specifically investigated matters at the branch ...(intervention) MR DU PLESSIS Honourable Chairperson, I want to object against the previous question. The previous question to Mr Strydom I think was a bit misleading. The previous question related to the fact that Mr Prinsloo alleged that Mr Strydom testified that his client, Mr Prinsloo, was unhappy that an interrogation took place firstly and secondly, that there was an assault. That was the basis of the question. Now as I understood I object against that because as I understood his evidence-in-chief, that wasn't his evidence-in-chief, his evidence-in-chief was that Prinsloo wasn't happy with the assault and not necessarily the interrogation itself as well. CHAIRPERSON That is correct ...(intervention) MR PRINSLOO Chairperson, I did not think that the witness misunderstood me, but let it remain there. MR DU PLESSIS But my objection is against my learned friend putting evidence to the witness which wasn't his evidence, as if it was his evidence. CHAIRPERSON His evidence only related to the assault. MR DU PLESSIS Ja. MR PRINSLOO Mr Strydom, was Mr Prinsloo tasked and satisfied that you questioned Mandla? MR STRYDOM He did not have any objection, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO Mr Strydom, why did you want to question him? You did not arrest him, you were not involved in the investigation, so on which grounds would you interrogate him? MR STRYDOM I was in the presence of Capt Crafford, Chairperson, and I acted under his instruction. MR PRINSLOO What did you and Mr Crafford know of the facts with regard to Mr Mandla? In order to question him, what did you know? MR STRYDOM Crafford knew everything, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO Are you saying that he was tasked with this investigation of Obet Masina and this Justice Mandla? Is this what you are telling the Committee? MR STRYDOM "Ek was gemoeid gewees met die ondersoek van Obet Masina, ja". ...(no English interpretation) MR PRINSLOO I want to put it to you that Mr Crafford did not help in any input in the investigation. Do you want to comment on that? MR STRYDOM No, comment, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO Which facts did you know about in order to question Mandla? MR STRYDOM I had the fact of the bomb explosion in front of Checkers in Silverton. MR PRINSLOO So the only thing you could ask him was whether he placed a bomb in a refuse bin in front of Checkers? MR STRYDOM And I had information about the murder of a municipal policeman in Mamelodi. MR PRINSLOO Which policeman was this? MR STRYDOM He was guarding a house and a handgrenade was thrown into the house and he was killed. MR PRINSLOO One moment please, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON May I find out Mr Strydom, how did you come to know of these facts on which you based your interrogation of Mandla? MR STRYDOM I cannot hear the question properly, Chairperson, my hearing isn't of the best. CHAIRPERSON You say that you questioned Mandla on the basis of certain information which you knew, and I want to know how did you come to know of the facts on which you questioned him on. MR STRYDOM Chairperson, every morning in the office we had a conference among out members and it was common knowledge in the office that this specific Mandla had been arrested and the reason for his arrest as well. CHAIRPERSON Yes. Do you wish me to repeat my question, Mr Strydom? MR STRYDOM Yes, please. CHAIRPERSON How did you come to know of the facts on which you based your interrogation of Mandla? MR STRYDOM Capt Crafford was the interrogator at that stage and I received my information from him. CHAIRPERSON Was he the one who was putting questions to Mandla? MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON And what was your role during the interrogation of Mandla? MR STRYDOM I was supposed to take notes of the questions and the answers. CHAIRPERSON During his interrogation did you assault him? MR STRYDOM Yes, I assaulted him during the interrogation. CHAIRPERSON Thank you. You may proceed Mr Prinsloo, I'm sorry to have interfered with your cross-examination. MR PRINSLOO Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, you say that notes were taken during the interrogation, what became of those notes, who received those notes? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall where those notes went. I don't know what Capt Crafford did with the notes. MR PRINSLOO But those notes never reached Capt Prinsloo, I will put it to you. MR STRYDOM That may be so, but Capt Crafford handled it and I don't know what he did with it. MR PRINSLOO And you say that you were divided into shifts when it came to interrogating this person, is that correct? MR STRYDOM Yes. MR PRINSLOO Who divided you into shifts? MR STRYDOM It could have been Capt Prinsloo. MR PRINSLOO Well Capt Prinsloo - have you heard his evidence and what his modus operandi was and what his specific method of investigation was? And you knew him quite well to know that he would not drag others into his interrogation process, is that correct? MR STRYDOM It may be correct, but with regard to that specific case, it was not so. MR PRINSLOO And you know how precise he was with his interrogations as well as the presentation of evidence. MR STRYDOM Yes, I know him to be like that. MR PRINSLOO And that one would not deal lightly with a person and simply obtain information in that way and then use the information for Court purposes. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS Madam Chair, may I ask where this is leading? Is my learned friend disputing the fact that this interrogation took place, that Capt Crafford was involved in the interrogation with Mr Strydom, or what is the purpose of this? CHAIRPERSON I'm sure Mr du Plessis, we'll soon learn from Mr Prinsloo where he is heading to. MR PRINSLOO Honourable Chairperson, the witness has just stated that Prinsloo told him to undertake the interrogation and he did not do it. I've already put it to him, and that was the reason for it. Crafford had given the man an order to interrogate, that Prinsloo was not aware of ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON I don't think that's his evidence, Mr Prinsloo, his evidence is that he was tasked not by Prinsloo, but by Mr Crafford and that Mr Prinsloo might have divided them into shifts. MR PRINSLOO Unless I misunderstood him Madam Chair, I understood him to say explicitly that Prinsloo instructed him to do the interrogation. CHAIRPERSON No, it was Crafford who instructed him to do the interrogation and he did the interrogation in the presence of Crafford, and his role was merely to take notes during Crafford's interrogation. ADV MOTATA And upon your question is that "Mr Prinsloo was not upset that we had interrogated him". MR MALAN Just to come to the aid of Mr Prinsloo, my notes indicate that after he said Crafford, you asked him whether Prinsloo had divided them into shifts and he stated that it could have been Prinsloo, but he did not say that he gave the order. I think that is where the confusion ensued. MR PRINSLOO Then just for clarity's sake Mr Strydom, Mr Prinsloo did not divide you into shifts with regard to the interrogation, is that correct? MR STRYDOM That may be correct, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO And the purpose with which you were gathered there on the farm, was not for you to interrogate Mbizana, it was that from that point you would undertake certain work, as per Prinsloo's evidence. Is that correct? MR STRYDOM No, Sakkie Crafford and I worked together at that stage and he undertook the interrogation of Mandla. MR PRINSLOO Are you saying that the explicit purpose of why you were on that farm was to interrogate Mbizana? MR STRYDOM That is correct. CHAIRPERSON Maybe how you have phrased your question might actually be very confusing to Mr Strydom. Mr Strydom, what is being sought from you by Mr Prinsloo is to find out why were you on the farm, what was the reason for you being on the farm during that period? Was it to exclusively interrogate Mandla or were you there for other purposes? MR STRYDOM I was exclusively there in the company of Capt Crafford because he, Crafford, interrogated the man and I took the notes for Crafford, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Go ahead, Mr Prinsloo. MR PRINSLOO Thank you, Madam Chair. So did Capt Crafford give you the order to go to the farm with the purposes of interrogating Mbizana? Is that what you say MR STRYDOM Capt Crafford and I went to the farm together. MR PRINSLOO Did Capt Crafford give you the order to go to the farm? MR STRYDOM Yes, with him to accompany him to the farm. MR PRINSLOO And the exclusive purpose was to interrogate Mbizana, is that what you've said? MR STRYDOM Yes. MR PRINSLOO Had Mbizana already been arrested and was he already being held on the farm at that stage? MR STRYDOM Yes, he had been arrested. MR PRINSLOO So you arrived there at a later stage, after he'd already been taken there? MR STRYDOM Yes, he was already there. MR PRINSLOO So you don't know what took place before the time? MR STRYDOM No, I don't know what happened there before the time, Chairperson. MR PRINSLOO So the interrogation with regard to Mr Prinsloo and the arrangements that he had made before the time, was something that you were not aware of? MR STRYDOM No, I would not have known about it. MR PRINSLOO And that would be that he would be the person who would exclusively interrogate the person. MR STRYDOM It is possible, yes. MR PRINSLOO And you don't know whether Crafford took this decision of his own volution to interrogate the person as you have stated, without the knowledge of Prinsloo? MR STRYDOM My experience was that ...(intervention) INTERPRETER The speaker was unclear. MR PRINSLOO You have heard the evidence of Mr Prinsloo in this regard, I'm not going to repeat it. I just want to know from you, this Mtjali that you have referred to, was this an old man? MR STRYDOM Yes, he was an elderly man. MR PRINSLOO And he had been a member of staff for quite some time? MR STRYDOM Yes, for many years. MR PRINSLOO Thank you, Chairperson. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PRINSLOO CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Prinsloo. Ms van der Walt? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WALT Just one question. Mr Strydom, I look at your application on page 422, the second-last paragraph where you sketch the events, you state - or just before that, I beg your pardon Chairperson, you stated that at approximately 22H00 that evening you returned to the farm where this activist was found hung up in a tree and that he had been assaulted by the black members. Is that your evidence? MR STRYDOM Yes, that is correct. MS VAN DER WALT And then you continue by giving a description of how Sakkie Crafford held his pistol in the air and pulled the trigger and how you hit him with empty bottles. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MS VAN DER WALT Did any other assault take place during that period in time that you have described here in this second-last paragraph? MR STRYDOM Not at this specific point in time, but it appeared to me that someone may have assaulted him in the absence of me and Sakkie. I noticed that his eyes were swollen. MS VAN DER WALT But what I want to know from you, because in the previous paragraph you have stated that the black members assaulted him, or that he was assaulted by the black members because they were there, but you state that when you were there and Sakkie Crafford held his pistol and fired shots and you hit him with the empty soda water bottle ...(intervention) MR DU PLESSIS But Madam Chair, he has already testified that in his evidence-in-chief, that there was a burning of - the burning took place at the same time. MS VAN DER WALT Ek sal dit baie waardeer as die advokaat hom nie behulpsaam is nie, want ek wil by hom weet of dit die aanranding ...(tussenbeide) ...(no English interpretation) MR DU PLESSIS May I ask whether the witness of Mrs van der Walt is disputing the evidence of this witness, and upon what basis? CHAIRPERSON Ms van der Walt, you were still proceeding to explain. MS VAN DER WALT I would like to know if any other assault took place during that period which mentioned in this second-last paragraph. If I may just obtain that answer. CHAIRPERSON Notwithstanding his viva voce evidence which was established in his evidence-in-chief, that after this incident that has been referred to, that is at page 422 on the third paragraph, that there was a later assault wherein the private parts of Mr Mbizana were burnt. Do you want to find out if there is any other incident other than that one to which he has already given evidence? MS VAN DER WALT Yes. CHAIRPERSON Mr Strydom, what is being asked of you is, are you aware of any other incident other than the incident that you've already evidenced to, wherein Mr Mbizana had his private parts burnt by Mr Crafford, was there any other incident wherein he was assaulted during that night, that you are aware of? MR STRYDOM There was no other incident with the exception of the gun that was fired near his head by Crafford, the burning with the burning log by Crafford and my share in the assault with the soda water bottle against the head. MS VAN DER WALT And you say further that there were various wounds on his head. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MS VAN DER WALT So if Mr Kruger testifies that there was a burn wound on his head, would you agree? MR STRYDOM I would not be able to agree with it, I would not be able to comment on it, but I did not see any burn wound on his forehead. MS VAN DER WALT Which wounds did you see? MR STRYDOM I saw a wound which had been applied with the soda bottle. MS VAN DER WALT Was it an open wound? MR STRYDOM Yes. MS VAN DER WALT Where was it? MR STRYDOM Next to the head above the ear. MS VAN DER WALT And it was visible? MR STRYDOM Yes, it was visible. MS VAN DER WALT Nothing further, thank you. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Ms van der Walt. Mr Joubert? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JOUBERT Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, you have already indicated that you are not certain which black members were involved during the interrogation, but you have indicated in your evidence-in-chief that Jerry and Smuts along with other members were present. Are you certain of the fact that Smuts and Jerry were present? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, when I made my statement I was not certain, but after I have read statements during the last week, I have realised that Jerry and Smuts were there. MR JOUBERT And are you aware of the duration of their presence and their involvement? MR STRYDOM I was only aware, according to my information which I have now, that they were guarding Mandla at the camp. MR JOUBERT So if I understand you correctly, they were present on the farm but they did not actively participate in the interrogation? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR JOUBERT When you say "No, Chairperson, do you mean that I am not correct, or do you agree with what I have stated? MR STRYDOM I agree with what you have stated. CHAIRPERSON I don't think your question though was answered Mr Joubert, about the duration of their presence. You asked a question if he was aware of how long Smuts and Jerry were there. MR JOUBERT No, Madam Chair, no, I just asked whether they merely present and whether they were actively taking part in any questioning of the deceased. CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you. My mistake then. MR JOUBERT Mr Strydom, in your evidence-in-chief when your legal representative led you, it came to light that you alleged that Mandla was not bound to a water tank. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR JOUBERT The version of Mr Mathebula would be that he was indeed disrobed completely and tied to the water tank. MR STRYDOM That is not correct. MR JOUBERT Mr Mathebula's evidence will also be that the incident which took place on that particular evening during which Mr Mandla was burnt and assaulted, was not a formal interrogation of Mandla, but that it was the result of a serious bout of drinking and a social party after which Mr Mandla was brought out for a bit of fun and pleasure. MR STRYDOM That is not correct, Chairperson. MR JOUBERT Now Mr Strydom, you say that you went there with Mr Crafford to interrogate Mandla. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR JOUBERT Precisely when did you go to the farm for the interrogation? MR STRYDOM It was on a Saturday morning. MR JOUBERT And this interrogation, what form did it assume? MR STRYDOM Crafford led the interrogation, and I have previously stated I took notes. MR JOUBERT Was any violence applied during this interrogation? MR STRYDOM At this stage no violence had been applied, it wasn't necessary. MR JOUBERT Did he give his cooperation possibly? MR STRYDOM Yes, it is possible. MR JOUBERT And you then left the farm. MR STRYDOM Crafford and I left the farm. MR JOUBERT And later that evening, at approximately 10 o'clock it would appear, you returned to the farm. MR STRYDOM Yes, that is correct. MR JOUBERT Why did you return at 10 o'clock? MR STRYDOM We simply went to buy food and then we returned. MR JOUBERT For how long were you away from the farm between the first interrogation and your point of return? MR STRYDOM Approximately two hours. MR JOUBERT You have stated that Mandla was then tied to the tree, is that correct? MR STRYDOM Yes, when we returned he was tied to the tree. MR JOUBERT When you state in your application that he was hung up, do you mean that he was hanging onto the tree? MR STRYDOM He was tied to the tree with his feet on the ground. So I cannot say that he was suspended in the air. MR JOUBERT Was he at his full positive at that stage? MR STRYDOM Yes, he was. MR JOUBERT Was he standing upright against the tree? MR STRYDOM Yes, he stood upright against the tree. MR JOUBERT So he was not in any kind of slumped position as such? MR STRYDOM No. MR JOUBERT Now your choice of words in your application, referring to the fact that he was hung up, where does this come from? MR STRYDOM As I've stated he stood with his hands which we were attached to the tree above his head. MR JOUBERT You have also testified that there was a case in which Crafford burnt him with a log. Where did this log come from? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, there was a fire. MR JOUBERT Was it quite a cold evening? MR STRYDOM Yes, it was a cold evening. MR JOUBERT Did any other persons also assault Mandla with burning logs? MR STRYDOM No. MR JOUBERT Are you certain of that, or can you not recall? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall. MR JOUBERT So the possibility exists that it could have taken place? MR STRYDOM Yes, it could have. MR JOUBERT If you can just bear with me for a second please, Madam Chair. I have no further questions, thank you Madam Chair. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Joubert. Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN Thank you, Chair. FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR JANSEN May I interject here before Mr van Heerden for the victims. Subsequent to your questions concerning the possible mistake Mr Strydom may have made in respect of the black members there, I took certain instructions from Mr Matjeni and I believe I should put those on record, because there seems to be some confusion in this regard. Thank you, Chair. Mr Strydom, I do not want any confusion about this. I think my initial statement may have been wrongly interpreted. It seems that it was common cause that you, or that Mr Matjeni, Mr Jerry Matjeni was present at that stage when you and Mr Crafford had assaulted Mr Mbizana. Is it your version that the black members who were present there at that stage, like Mr Matjeni, were involved in the assault of this Mr Mbizana? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I would not say that they were involved, but that they were present, that's a fact. MR JANSEN Yes. When you assaulted the person, but it is about the sentence that he was then already badly assaulted by the black members. From what did you deduce that Mr Mbizana was assaulted before you arrived there? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, as I have said, and I am saying that I suspected that he was assaulted by the black members because I saw that his eyes were swollen like someone had struck him in the face with a first. MR JANSEN But you may be entirely wrong with regard to that deduction? MR STRYDOM I may be incorrect, Chairperson. MR JANSEN Then I also have to put it to you that Mr Matjeni says that except for the assault at that stage, he was never present on any other occasion where Mr Mbizana was assaulted. His version is also, and I want you to comment on this, that although he cannot specifically recall where Mr Mbizana was when you arrived there, Mr Mbizana was taken by Crafford, van Jaarsveld and yourself and his clothing was removed and he was then tied in that vicinity to something. And once again Mr Matjeni cannot recall the specific detail. Can you comment? MR STRYDOM My comment Chairperson, is that I don't have any knowledge of any such an incident where the man was disrobed. MR JANSEN Was he burnt with his clothing on? MR STRYDOM Yes, when he was burnt by Crafford he was still wearing his clothing, Chairperson. MR JANSEN And where did Crafford burn him on his body? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall exactly, but various places of his body. CHAIRPERSON Did you see him burning him particularly on his private parts? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, I did not see that. MR JANSEN And did his clothing catch alight? MR STRYDOM Yes, his clothing caught fire but not with flames, with smoke. MR JANSEN Were the clothing items burning seriously? MR STRYDOM Not so bad that it was in flames. MR JANSEN But what I mean is, was a large part of the clothes, in other words a large surface of the clothing, was a large surface of the clothing burnt? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall, Chairperson, all that I can recall is that after he was burnt some of the members, I cannot recall whom, threw water on him. MR JANSEN Thank you, Chair, I have no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN CHAIRPERSON Thank you, Mr Jansen. Mr van Heerden? CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN HEERDEN Thank you, Chairperson. Sir, you made a statement that every morning a conference was held in the offices. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN How many people usually attended the conference? MR STRYDOM The whole unit if they were available. MR VAN HEERDEN Does this include Brig Cronje? MR STRYDOM No, it was only Unit C. MR VAN HEERDEN At such a meeting or conference, was information exchanged? MR STRYDOM The day's tasks were discussed, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And you are saying that it was general knowledge that Mandla had been arrested? MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And it was then not kept secret? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. It remained within the unit, it did not go any further, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Was instruction given to keep it within the unit? MR STRYDOM That was normal practice, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Was instruction given? MR STRYDOM The instruction existed for many years already, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN In your statement you say that the tents were put up and the purpose for these activities was to interrogate activists and terrorists. This is in the first paragraph of page 422. MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Was there more than one person that was questioned there? MR STRYDOM I cannot specifically recall, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Would the camp have specifically been set up for one person? MR STRYDOM It may be so, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Didn't you discuss it with Capt Crafford? MR STRYDOM Not at all, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN You have also further testified that you only participated in one interrogation session or shift. MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR VAN HEERDEN "U getuig ook dat die man pragtig saamgewerk het". ...(no English interpretation) MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And you took notes? MR STRYDOM Yes, I took notes, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN What type of information did he give to you? MR STRYDOM At this stage I cannot recall anymore, Chairperson. As I have said, this was more than 16 years back. MR VAN HEERDEN But you have a clear recollection that he cooperated. MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And then you went out to purchase food and you returned and the man was tied to a tree. MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Why did you return? MR STRYDOM Because we had stayed there. MR VAN HEERDEN Did you then continue with the questioning? MR STRYDOM Capt Crafford continued, yes Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN May I just ask, what did you buy? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall what types of food we purchased, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Did it bother you when you arrived there and you saw that this man was tied to a tree? MR STRYDOM No, it did not bother me, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Before your departure there did you give any instructions to the black members? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Was it normal practice that they could use their own initiative in your absence? MR STRYDOM Capt Crafford at that stage was the Commander, Chairperson, and I assume that he would have given instructions to the other members. MR VAN HEERDEN Did you assume that he gave instructions that they had to assault Mandla? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, I cannot say that, I don't know. MR VAN HEERDEN You don't know. And when you started once again with the questioning, was this continuing the previous interrogation or did you touch on a new subject? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN You cannot recall the content of the interrogation. MR STRYDOM I cannot recall at all, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Why was it decided to hit him with the soda water bottle? MR STRYDOM To intimidate him and to break down his moral, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And just before that he indicated his cooperation? Before you went to purchase food it seems that there was no problem with his moral then. MR STRYDOM Apparently not, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Does it make sense to you if you look back? MR STRYDOM At this stage it does not make sense, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Does it make no sense? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN This trigger that was pulled by Capt Crafford, how far from Mandla's face was the pistol? MR STRYDOM It was right against his head with the barrel of the gun passed his head. MR VAN HEERDEN So it was right against his head? MR STRYDOM No, not against his head. I would say Crafford's hand, the width of Crafford's hand away from his head, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And then you struck him afterwards and he became unconscious and he had several injuries to his head. Did he then cooperate? MR STRYDOM I cannot recall, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN In your statement you have said that during this interrogation he had revealed information and several names to you. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And are you saying now that you cannot recall? MR STRYDOM I could not recall what information and what names he gave, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN But you confirm that he had indeed given names? MR STRYDOM Yes. MR VAN HEERDEN How long did you stay at the farm at times? MR STRYDOM As normal practice it may have been eight hours at a time, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And on my statement earlier when I asked you about the food you said you stayed at the farm. Did I understand you correctly? MR STRYDOM It was for a day. MR VAN HEERDEN Then you returned home to rest, or what procedure was followed? MR STRYDOM Yes, we went home to rest, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And when you arrived there the Sunday, did you want to continue with the questioning? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, I did not want to continue at all, I wanted to see how the man was doing, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN You see you say you wanted to see how the man was doing. MR STRYDOM Yes. MR VAN HEERDEN I assume that you were concerned about his condition. MR STRYDOM Yes, I was concerned about his condition, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN And he had been severely assaulted? MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON May I interpose, Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN Certainly, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON On this point Mr Strydom, in your written application you state the reason for coming back as having been to check the progress of the interrogation and not to check upon his injuries. MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson, I made a mistake there, but I was also concerned about the man's condition. CHAIRPERSON What mistake did you make there? MR STRYDOM In my statement I had said that I wanted to see what progress was being made with the interrogation, but in truth I wanted to see how the man was doing, how Mandla was doing, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Was this known to Capt Crafford, that you would be coming back to check on the state of his injuries? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, it was not known to him. CHAIRPERSON Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN Thank you, Chairperson. The statement was made earlier that you consumed liquor there that evening, is that correct? MR STRYDOM That is not correct, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Is that a lie? MR STRYDOM That is a lie, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Does that include yourself and Mr Crafford? MR STRYDOM Yes, that includes myself and Mr Crafford. MR VAN HEERDEN The notes that you made of the interrogation, did you give the notes to Capt Crafford when you saw him there that Sunday? MR STRYDOM No, I gave it to Capt Crafford the previous evening, Chairperson. MR VAN HEERDEN Did you tell Capt Prinsloo of the information which you had obtained? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson, I did not have the opportunity. MR VAN HEERDEN Why do you say that? MR STRYDOM Because the Sunday morning when I arrived at the farm, I found Capt Prinsloo there and he seemed very angry to me. He was very angry at myself and Crafford and I felt that there would be an argument and I climbed directly into my car and drove back to my house. CHAIRPERSON May I interpose, Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN Certainly, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON What words were used by Prinsloo to give you an impression that he was angry at you and Mr Crafford? MR STRYDOM His words were "Why did you assault this man in this manner?" And according to his facial expression I could see that he was extremely angry and I did not answer him because I was afraid that an argument would ensue and I decided to return, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Now what argument did you think would ensue, because you had interrogated the man under instructions from your superior, Mr Crafford? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I just felt that Capt Prinsloo was very angry, I saw he was angry and that it would cause a major argument and to prevent that I decided to depart. CHAIRPERSON Mr van Heerden? MR MALAN I beg your pardon, Chairperson. What argument would then have ensued? Because he asked you a question, he asked why did you assault him, why could you not answer him? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I could not answer him. The point is this, I know Capt Prinsloo very well and a fight might have followed. MR MALAN What type of fight, physically fighting with each other? MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR MALAN Would he have fought with you? MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR MALAN And physically struck you? MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR MALAN But he was satisfied that you just walked away. MR STRYDOM I think it was the best for me, Chairperson. MR MALAN And he does not call you back? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN Thank you, Chairperson. If you look back at that period of time, was it necessary according to you, to have killed Justice Mbizana? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I cannot comment on that. MR VAN HEERDEN Why not, why can you not comment? MR STRYDOM Because I don't have any knowledge of his killing. MR MALAN I beg your pardon, Mr van Heerden. Mr Strydom, the Monday, according to your application, you returned the Sunday and the Monday morning you have another conference and Mandla is not discussed again. MR STRYDOM Chairperson, that Monday Crafford and I received instructions from Brig Cronje to go to Swaziland. MR MALAN And you do not ask of anybody anything about Mandla, in spite of the fact that Prinsloo almost beat you up? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR MALAN Thank you. Thank you, Mr van Heerden. MR VAN HEERDEN You have now listened to the evidence thusfar, in the light of these circumstances as it was sketched, was it necessary to kill Justice Mbizana? MR DU PLESSIS But Madam Chair, I object against this. ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON Mr van Heerden, is his evidence that he killed Mr Mbizana? MR VAN HEERDEN No, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Yes. Put your question pointedly, limiting your question to what is within his knowledge. MR VAN HEERDEN I will do so, Chairperson. I've got no further questions. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN HEERDEN CHAIRPERSON Thank you. Mr du Plessis, do you wish to re-examine? ADV PRINSLOO Madam Chair, may I through the Committee put a single question to Mr Strydom which I omitted? It will be a single question. CHAIRPERSON You will be limited to one question. FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRINSLOO I appreciate it, thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, I put it to you that at conferences the investigations of cases were never discussed, but pieces of information, instructions, feedback and enquiries. What is your comment to this? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, as Mr Prinsloo had already said that at the conference the necessary was discussed, but if somebody was arrested then it was known to the unit. ADV PRINSLOO I leave it at that, Madam Chair, I'm indebted to the Committee. Thank you. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO CHAIRPERSON Did you want to take that further? ADV PRINSLOO What I've put to him, Madam Chair, is that none of the investigation was ever discussed at any of these conferences, it was limited to what I've put to him. CHAIRPERSON Yes, and he has responded to that. ADV PRINSLOO He's responded to that. CHAIRPERSON And you are satisfied. Thank you. MR DU PLESSIS Madam Chair, may I perhaps just come in here. I don't have clarity about the question and Capt Prinsloo is not going to testify again, but is the - may I enquire from my learned friend if the question is based on the premise that his client alleges that Capt Crafford never knew that Mandla was arrested and it was never told to him that Mandla was arrested, or it was never told to Mr Strydom that Mandla was arrested? ADV PRINSLOO With respect, Madam Chair, what I've put to him is the detail with regard to investigations, it was never discussed at any of these conferences as alluded to by Mr Strydom. That is the gist of it. CHAIRPERSON Mr du Plessis, I don't think we need to make any argument around this. MR DU PLESSIS I wanted to place ...(intervention) CHAIRPERSON I understand the question to be as a result of my questioning of Mr Strydom, when I wanted to find our on which facts they were able to interrogate Mr Mbizana, with Mr Crafford. MR DU PLESSIS Yes, Madam Chair, I raised the point because I'm going to argue this point as a further inherent improbability in his client's version, where he only put it and his client didn't testify it. May I be afforded the opportunity to re-examine? CHAIRPERSON Yes, you may proceed to re-examine. RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr Strydom, you directly acted under the command of Capt Crafford in the interrogation. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS And you executed his orders. MR STRYDOM That is correct. MR DU PLESSIS And you accepted that you had to execute his orders. MR STRYDOM That is correct, Chairperson. MR DU PLESSIS You had no reason to dispute his instructions. MR STRYDOM No reason at all. MR DU PLESSIS You have seen in the application that there is mention from the other persons, I think Mr Kruger says in his application that he was burnt on his buttocks. Is it possible? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, it is not possible that he was burnt on his buttocks. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. Then Mr Strydom, this particular evening when you undertook this interrogation, did you remain there for the evening or did you return at some stage? MR STRYDOM I did not remain there for the evening Chairperson, I returned home. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. And then - Chairperson, I'm going to put something which was conveyed to me by Brig Cronje during lunch time, which I didn't know about and which I didn't put to Capt Prinsloo, and it may be that some cross-examination may flow from that and I thought that I would lead that evidence in Brig Cronje's evidence, but I think it's important that that is put to this witness as well, just to place it on record now. CHAIRPERSON We'll allow you Mr du Plessis, though it is not part of re-examination. MR DU PLESSIS It is not, but will I be allowed to do that? CHAIRPERSON You are applying for special leave to do that, are you not? MR DU PLESSIS Yes. Otherwise I will lead that evidence when Brig Cronje testifies, but that's right at the end of the hearing and this may be important pertaining to a specific point that was made. CHAIRPERSON Yes, if we do so we'll have to allow the other legal representatives an opportunity to cross-examine. MR DU PLESSIS If they should want to do that. CHAIRPERSON Yes. MR DU PLESSIS I just want to raise it now instead of right at the end. Mr Strydom, Brig Cronje had during the lunch hour told me that he can recall that Capt Prinsloo complained about Capt Crafford, the fact that Capt Crafford had also interrogated and that was the reason why he sent you and Capt Crafford away the Monday, so that no confrontation would ensue. Did you have any knowledge about this? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I did not know of that. MR DU PLESSIS Very well. Thank you, Madam Chair, I just thought that I would like to place that on record now. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS CHAIRPERSON Yes. Mr Prinsloo, do you wish to cross-examine on the basis of what has been put to Mr Strydom by Mr du Plessis? ADV PRINSLOO Madam Chair, I will leave this for when Mr Cronje gives evidence. CHAIRPERSON Yes, thank you. ADV PRINSLOO Because it's basically hearsay what's been conveyed. NO QUESTIONS BY ADV PRINSLOO CHAIRPERSON Ms van der Walt? MS VAN DER WALT No questions, thanks. NO QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WALT CHAIRPERSON Is there any other legal representative who would like to put a question emanating from what has been put by Mr du Plessis to Mr Strydom? MR BOTHA No thank you, Madam Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA MR JOUBERT No thank you, Madam Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR JOUBERT CHAIRPERSON Mr Jansen? MR JANSEN No, nothing, thank you, Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR JANSEN CHAIRPERSON Mr van Heerden? MR VAN HEERDEN No questions, Madam Chair. NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN HEERDEN CHAIRPERSON Thank you. MR DU PLESSIS Thank you, Madam Chair, I have no further questions. CHAIRPERSON Thank you. MR MALAN Mr Strydom, you say you only participated in the interrogation once, but do you mean that only on the Saturday did you participate in the interrogation? MR STRYDOM Only the Saturday, Chairperson. MR MALAN But you are away from the farm and you returned, the assault part, was this part of the interrogation? MR STRYDOM Yes, it was part of the interrogation. MR MALAN Or was this to burning to intimidate him? Did you ask him questions while he was being assaulted there? MR STRYDOM I would put it as such, Chairperson, it was to intimidate him. MR MALAN It was not interrogation? MR STRYDOM No, at that stage it was not. MR MALAN It was a reckless senseless assault without gaining information? Or did you still take notes? MR STRYDOM At that stage we still took notes, Chairperson. MR MALAN Did you sit at a light and take notes? MR STRYDOM There was light, Chairperson. MR MALAN What type of light? MR STRYDOM A gas light. MR MALAN Because you see, you deny that alcohol was used, but you went you went and bought food. MR STRYDOM We went and bought food, Chairperson. MR MALAN To bring it back to the farm to eat it there? MR STRYDOM Yes. MR MALAN There was no food at the farm? MR STRYDOM We didn't have food there, Chairperson. MR MALAN Very well. And you say in your statement, and I refer to page 422, that the afternoon when you went to Pretoria to buy food it was late in the afternoon. MR STRYDOM Yes, late afternoon. MR MALAN In your evidence you said late afternoon. MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR MALAN And late afternoon, it's a winter's day, late afternoon is before 6 o'clock because 6 o'clock it gets dark and then it is night. MR STRYDOM It was after six. MR MALAN How long after six? MR STRYDOM It may have been six thirty, Chairperson. MR MALAN Let's make if six thirty. You drive to Pretoria from the farm which is there at Hammanskraal, that is about 20 minutes drive to Pretoria to buy food, if you wanted to buy food. MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. MR MALAN You buy food and then you return only 10 o'clock that evening according to your statement. MR STRYDOM Yes, Chairperson. MR MALAN And according to your scenario it's three and a half hours later. MR STRYDOM That's correct, Chairperson. MR MALAN Did you drink during that time? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR MALAN So why did you take three and a half hours to buy food? MR STRYDOM Chairperson, I can now recall that Sakkie Crafford went into the Zeerust flats and he spoke to people there, some of his friends that came from Kimberley and he spent some time there, then I met him there and then we went back to the farm there. MR MALAN Where were you while he was there? MR STRYDOM I waited in the vehicle, Chairperson. MR MALAN So why are you saying that you met him there again if you were waiting for him in the car? You did not leave there. MR STRYDOM No, I did not. MR MALAN How long did he spend with his friends? MR STRYDOM It may have been an hour, Chairperson. MR MALAN Did he not consume liquor there? MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR MALAN How are you so certain that he did not consume liquor? MR STRYDOM Because I would have smelt if he consumed liquor. MR MALAN Can you recall that? MR STRYDOM I can recall, Chairperson. MR MALAN You cannot recall the other things, but you can recall that he did not drink anything and you can recall that you did not smell any liquor. MR STRYDOM I would not say, but if he'd spoken to me I would have known, Chairperson. MR MALAN And you would have recalled it. MR STRYDOM I would have recalled it, yes. MR MALAN But the other things you concede that you may be mistaken and everything else is possibly otherwise, but you are entirely certain about this? MR STRYDOM I'm certain about this, Chairperson. MR MALAN Very well. You are entirely certain that Mandla was never undressed. MR STRYDOM I am entirely certain about that. MR MALAN In your presence? MR STRYDOM I'm certain. MR MALAN And the persons who say that are lying? MR STRYDOM They do not speak the truth, Chairperson. MR MALAN And no black member ever assaulted him in your presence? MR STRYDOM Not in my presence, Chairperson. MR MALAN So the black persons' assault was an inference you draw, not what you saw? MR STRYDOM That's correct. MR MALAN And no black member questioned him in your presence. MR STRYDOM No, Chairperson. MR MALAN Very well, thank you. Thank you, Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON Mr Strydom, you are excused as a witness. MR STRYDOM Thank you, Chairperson. WITNESS EXCUSED CHAIRPERSON Mr du Plessis, are you going to proceed with the next witness? MR DU PLESSIS Yes, Madam Chair. CHAIRPERSON And that being? MR DU PLESSIS That will be Mr Roodt. CHAIRPERSON Before he proceeds can we take a short adjournment to afford the translators an opportunity to have some fresh air. MR DU PLESSIS Please. COMMITTEE ADJOURNS