hrvtrans SUBMISSIONS, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, LEONARD KNIPE 1997-02-18 GUGULETU 7 2 https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=55161&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/hrvtrans/gug/knipe.htm MS WILDSCHUT Good afternoon Director Knipe you are the last person to be a witness in this Guguletu 7 matter. I will now ask advocate Potgieter to do this oath please. ADV POTGIETER Can you state your full names for the record please. LEONARD KNIPE Duly sworn states ADV POTGIETER You may be seated. MR KNIPE Thank you. MS WILDSCHUT Thank you very much journalist - photographers - Mr Gool thank you - Mr Jason thank you. ADV VAN ZYL MS WILDSCHUT Director Knipe you have a prepared statement which you would like to read into the record. MR KNIPE Correct, correct lady Chairman. MS WILDSCHUT Please proceed. MR KNIPE READS OUT HIS STATEMENT I, the undersigned LEONARD KNIPE do hereby state. 1. I am a Director in the South African Police Service, I have been a policeman for 31 years during which period I rose through the rank to my present rank and during which time I have always striven to police objectively without bias and professionalism. During my period of service, I have always openly advocated equality and non-radicalism, particularly within the Police Force, as it was then known. My advocating of these principles often brought me into conflict with elements within the organisation, which prejudiced me and which one resulted in my being suspended. 2. I wish to place on record that I have the utmost respect for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and especially the Chairman. I believe that it is imperative that the history of the country, no matter how hurtful it may be, be discovered and made known. I also believe that it is imperatively necessary that all peoples of our nation make peace with each other. Because of my beliefs, I will now and in the future strive to assist the Commission to achieve its goals and will answer any questions with openness and candour. It is for this reason that I am somewhat unhappy at the manner in which I have been summonsed to appear this august body, to provide evidence or to answer questions relating to the tragic death of seven men at Guguletu on the 3rd of March 1986. I deal with my feelings and unhappiness in paragraph 3 herein below. 3.1 At no time was any contact made with me by any investigators attached to this Commission before a notification in terms of Section 29 to appear before the Human Right Violation Committee, was dropped off at my office on the 12th of November 1996. In fact the notification for me to appear here today was the very first contact made with me. No prior interview was accorded me by any investigators of the Commission. 3.2 Had I been so contacted I would have related to any investigator the evidence which I am about to give. I have in fact related it before in open court, my evidence being subjected to cross-examination on that occasion. What I am about to say, I would say to anyone at any time without any form of compulsion being exercised upon me to do so. 3.3 At no time have I committed any act or omitted to do anything which could be remotely constructed as an abuse of power or a violation of human rights. Indeed, as will appear from what I say, I have to a certain extend suffered because of my principles. 3.4 The issuing of a notification on me, without prior approach to me, and the immediate thereafter issuing of a press statement, telling the world that I amongst others, was being summonsed to appear before the Human Rights Violation Committee has created the impression that I have in fact, in the past been guilty of human rights abuses. This has caused hurt to my loved ones, has prejudiced me and has led to false perceptions being created. I respectfully believe that this action taken while senior members of the Commission were out of the country, has in itself violated my human rights. 4. As far as the incident in question is concerned, I wish to state unequivocally and without fear of contradiction that I was not part of any planning of any of the actions which led to the tragic deaths of the seven young men. I did not conspire in any way with any person to take such action, in fact, I had no prior knowledge of the action. My sole involvement was that of an objective police investigator on the scene after the event, and was thus restricted to actions after the shooting on that day only. 5. In preparation for my appearance before this Commission, I have studied a copy of a statement that I submitted during the inquest investigation. I have read the Inquest Court judgement, although I wish to add that I did not give evidence before the Inquest Court, but only at the trial of Mr Tony Weaver. I have read a transcript of this evidence given by my during the trial of Mr Weaver. I wish to add that it is my sincere opinion that the decision to investigate Weaver was an abuse of power and that such investigation and prosecution should never have taken place. This belief was one of the reasons which led to me leaving Murder and Robbery Unit and taking an alternative position, which itself resulted in sever financial and personal loss for me. 6. I arrived at the scene at approximately 7:45 - 8:00 on the 3rd of March 1986. To the best of my recollection, I and other members of the Murder and Robbery Unit were mustering for parade when a police radio report of the shooting was broadcast. In consequence thereof, my colleagues and I hastened to the scene. I arrived to find members of the Security Police, the Riot Squat, the Guguletu Police, the Flying Squad and others on the scene. The area had already been cordoned off. Major Brits who was the senior rank in Murder and Robbery Officer at the scene was assigned to the investigation and I assisted him to the best of my ability with the preservation of the scene and the collection of evidence. My colleague and I, detective Warrant Officer Welcome Mbele, performed these task together. To the best of my recall, the only action taken by my which was not directly related to the investigation was taken in collaboration with the explosive expert on the scene, the then detective Warrant Officer Schalk van der Merwe. There was a reasonable fear that there might be an unexploded device under one of the bodies on the scene and a rope was attached to the belt of this victim. The body was then pulled over onto its back from a distance, for the purpose of safety only. Thereafter Warrant Officer Mbele and I went to each body, made notes of the positions in which the bodies lay, the clothing of the bodies, what weapons [if any] were in the deceased possession and what wound each deceased had sustained. I also searched each body and removed items of value such as jewelly, money and correspondence. Items removed from each body were placed in individual transparent plastic bags. As standard procedure, I wore gloves. Later that day I handed all the exhibits and the records of observations to Major Brits. I went about investigating the matter on the scene as I would investigate any other violent crime. I acted objectively, without preconceived notions and, I respectfully believed professionally. 7. Whilst I was at the scene more and more senior officers arrived the then Divisional Investigations Officer. The scene was photographed and videotaped. A helicopter hovered overhead. The traffic noise from the nearby freeway and the noise on the scene was excessive and disturbing. 8. At approximately 12:00 after all investigations had been completed and in full view of local bystanders, media representatives and colleagues, I instructed that blood be washed from the streets. My sole motivation for doing this was in the belief in the dignity of death. I had previously experienced dogs arriving on the scene of a violent crime, licking the blood. This I did not wish to happen. I acted out of this motive of respect for the dead and their loved ones only when giving this instruction and seeing that it was carried out, which it was, publicly and openly. 9. I left the scene about half an hour later and had no further involvement in the investigation. I am unable to comment on the investigation or the manner in which it was conducted. 10. In the spirit of reconciliation, I would like to add that I regard it as a tragedy that seven young men died as a result of the evil of a political system which caused so much pain and suffering to all the peoples of our country. In addition, I could so easily have lost colleagues on that day during the fire fight which I am given to understand took place between the security forces and the deceased. If I had been empowered and in a position to do so, I would have taken steps to avoid the tragedy. I personally regard it as unfortunate that I was not able to do so. 11. I have considerable experience of the pain and anguish which is suffered by the loved ones of victims of violence. I can therefore appreciate the suffering endured by the families of the seven young men in question and wish that could have been averted. I extend my sympathy to those who were affected by the occurrences of the day in question. Thank you. ADV VAN ZYL MS WILDSCHUT I would just like to point out that I will now hand the chair over to Mr Dumisa Ntsebeza. ADV NTSEBEZA Thank you Commissioner Wildschut for holding the fort in my absence. I have taken note of your remarks advocate Van Zyl. Any questions that are going to be put to this witness oh! I am made to understand that advocate Potgieter is going to be leading the questioning of this witness - advocate Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER Thank you Chairperson, Mr Knipe are you comfortable. MR KNIPE Pardon? ADV POTGIETER Are you comfortable? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER I see that you are sweating profusely. MR KNIPE Because of the lights. ADV NTSEBEZA Order - order please. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Perfectly. ADV POTGIETER Good, could we just first of all try to perhaps understand and if possible meet your difficulties as it is pointed out in your evidence in chief about having to appear at these proceedings. MR KNIPE I have no problems in appearing before these proceedings. I have a problem in the manner in which I was subpoenaed to appear before the proceedings. ADV POTGIETER Ja. MR KNIPE The connotation, the perceptions that have been created is that I committed murder that was what the [indistinct] articles that were written in our daily newspapers, was that I was one of the seven people who were into confess to the murders of seven young men, that is the unfortunate perceptions that went out because of the actions of the Committee. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Well I can assure you they are there. ADV POTGIETER There was an allegation that you are linked to the murder of these seven people. MR KNIPE Quite correct - it appeared in the Burger. ADV POTGIETER And are you somehow linking the Commission to that - to those allegations. MR KNIPE No I am not linking the Commission to it, I am saying that the manner in which I was brought before the Commission created this perception within the press. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE That you for the compliment of being a law man mnr Advocate. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Do you - do you understand that there is this principal of transparency about the work of this Commission and that the concept of doing our work publicly - to share the information that we obtained and to try and give answers to people who are questing for some information, is really an underlying sort of bottom line in a way for the work of the Commission. MR KNIPE Commissioner Potgieter I believe that many other people have appeared before similar commissions without being subpoenaed. People that have committed gross human rights abuses, people that when their stories are told, makes one revolt with revoltion, that came before commissions without being subpoenaed. I am fully aware of that, I am fully aware of the importance of this Commission and I think that is being conveyed in my statement. ADV POTGIETER But you see [intervention] MR KNIPE That is my perception and I am afraid that perception will always be there. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE That is being subpoenaed to appear here - not to be here, I would have come here at a telephone call I would have appeared. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I think with the greatest respect there is a huge difference between my colleagues that have appeared before this august body and myself. I was not involved in the shooting of seven young men. I have been lumped by the media as being party of that group, the media have not the sense to realise that there is a difference. I have been branded in the media as part of the group of people that shot and killed seven people, that is my objection. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Sure - so you should be happy to be here I assume. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Now I just want to - to just see whether I understand insofar as the Commission is concerned and the way in which this matter has been dealt with what your - the basis of your complaints are. I think if I look at your statement you seem to feel that there should have been a prior interview with you. MR KNIPE Quite so. ADV POTGIETER Before today. MR KNIPE Quite so. ADV POTGIETER Would you have added anything new to what you are giving to us today. MR KNIPE Well I believe if the - if there was expertise on the part of the investigator, I might have been able to give information dealing with other matters which is being investigated by the Commission and I place myself at the availability of your investigators to hold a proper interview with me. ADV POTGIETER Now that was the first issue, I am just trying to understand what the grounds of your dissatisfaction is and then you also seemed to say that you see this as a form of compulsion. If I read paragraph 3.2 of your statement correctly you conclude that paragraph with the following sentence. What I am about to say I would say to anyone at anytime without any form of compulsion being exercised upon me so to do. MR KNIPE I believe that the subpoena is a form of compulsion. ADV POTGIETER So you feel you - you are here under some duress under some - some compulsion as you put it. MR KNIPE I would have been here out of my own free will, without the need of a subpoena being issued against me. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE To be subpoenaed - to make a public statement that the man is being subpoenaed to appear before a human rights commission, creates obviously the impression that he has committed some or other human rights abuse. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I can only reiterate that I would have appeared before this Commission willingly - I found it in affront for somebody to come to my office and drop of a subpoena without the courtesy of a phone call without the courtesy of a hello, that a subpoena is dropped, just dropped with my secretary to appear before this body. I have never treated anyone like that in my life. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Completely. ADV POTGIETER All right there we can learn I mean we can talk about that. MR KNIPE Thank you. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Thank you. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Commissioner Potgieter then I suggest that we make available to you copies of the newspaper reports that appeared and then I think the Commission itself can see what sort of rubbish was written. ADV POTGIETER Ja, that seems to be a debate that is between yourself and the media. MR KNIPE But that is as a result of the serving of the subpoena Mr Chairman. ADV POTGIETER At no time have I committed any act or omitted to do anything which could remote to be construed as a an abusive power of violation or human rights. I trust that you do accept that, that is not the suggestion here, we certainly have never suggested that you have committed anything. We are here to look into this incident. MR KNIPE Mr Chairman I think one of the major problems to reiterate is that when one drafts a subpoena - sorry - an affidavit one is doing so blind, one receives a subpoena to appear before this body, one is not afforded even a telephone call to explain what the nature - what is required of you. If you remember I entered into correspondence trying to determine what was required of me. I do believe that I should have been afforded a visitation from an investigator to determine whether I was prepared to make a statement - whatever the case may be. ADV POTGIETER And its - its never crossed your mind to approach the Commission yourself. MR KNIPE I have - I [intervention] ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I have on two occasions corresponded with the Commission. ADV POTGIETER Have you - have you volunteered information? MR KNIPE No in so much words no, I - affidavit was before the Commission now for several months already. I would have expected somebody to have approached me. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I - I corresponded with yourselves on the 14th of the 11th. ADV POTGIETER But did you - did you tender information - did you tender assistance? MR KNIPE Should I read to you what I said? ADV POTGIETER Well if it will answer - if it will help us, if it will answer the question. Did you tender information there in that - in those correspondence? MR KNIPE No in so many words no. ADV POTGIETER Okay now perhaps just to round this off, in paragraph 3.4 I have some difficulty in understanding what you are actually conveying. Your - the very last sentence reads as follows: I respectfully believe that this action taken while senior members of the Commission were out of the country, has in itself violated my human rights. What does that mean? MR KNIPE The Archbishop was out of the country when the subpoena was served on me. ADV POTGIETER So - so well I am just trying to understand what you are suggesting so are you suggesting there are senior members first of all - there are senior members of the Commission. MR KNIPE Just say that again. ADV POTGIETER Are you suggesting first of all that one finds such animals as senior members of the Commission. MR KNIPE The Archbishop is the Chairman of the Commission. ADV POTGIETER Chairperson yes MR KNIPE Chairperson. ADV POTGIETER Yes. MR KNIPE And he was out of the country at the time. ADV POTGIETER So - so you actually saying here that this was done whilst the Chairperson was out of the country - Archbishop Tutu was out of the country. MR KNIPE The subpoena was issued to me while the Chairman was out of the country. ADV POTGIETER What is the difficulty around that? MR KNIPE In other words I do not include the Archbishop in any way in the preceding paragraphs. ADV POTGIETER So are you suggesting that some other members of the Commission acted irregularly or what? MR KNIPE Not - I am suggesting that the Archbishop did not issue the subpoena against me, he was out of the country. ADV POTGIETER But I mean what difference does it make to the subpoena and the process whether the Chairperson is here or there or where ever. MR KNIPE It makes a difference to me. ADV POTGIETER ADV NTSEBEZA So I will please again plead with us all to observe strict decorum - Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE No I am not suggesting that - I am just saying that the subpoena was issued when the Archbishop was out of the country. ADV POTGIETER And does that in your view impact at all on the issuing of this subpoena? MR KNIPE No the issuing of the subpoena is obviously still a legal document. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Is it - I am sorry I am trying to understand that, is it a perception that this subpoena was sneaked out of the Commission whilst the Archbishop was gone and served on you. MR KNIPE Not at all. ADV POTGIETER What is - what is the perception? MR KNIPE My perception is that maybe if the Archbishop was here it may not have been done. ADV POTGIETER It may not have been done - you may not have been subpoenaed at all? MR KNIPE Not in the manner in which I was no. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Absolutely nothing - nothing at all. ADV POTGIETER And you happy to be here this afternoon. MR KNIPE Quite content - except for the lights. ADV POTGIETER Now insofar as the planning of this incident was concerned, what was your knowledge about this? MR KNIPE None whatsoever. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE None whatsoever. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Yes. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I hope I was a successful policeman. ADV POTGIETER Now as such - I mean as part of the command structure of Murder and Robbery, were you senior to Captain Kleyn or what was the position? MR KNIPE We were identical in rank - equal in rank. ADV POTGIETER Equal in rank. And was - who was in charge - who was in overall - in overall charge of the unit? MR KNIPE On the day that this occurred, the new commanding officer now General Visser, Commissioner Visser was to arrive I think from Potchefstroom - he was to assume command of the Unit. And at the time when the incident occurred, Visser had not yet stepped off the plane, Major Brits was in charge. ADV POTGIETER Major Brits - now indications are that around the 27th of February - a few days before the actual incident, there were already plans being formulated in regard to this - to this incident and Murder and Robbery was - was part of the planning even at that stage. Are you suggesting that your colleagues in the command structure had sidelined you. MR KNIPE I am not suggesting anything I am telling the Commission that I had no prior knowledge. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Yes. ADV POTGIETER Was that [intervention] MR KNIPE I think - I think if I might just explain that. ADV POTGIETER Sure. MR KNIPE I had fallen foul during my career with the Security Police there was a dossier on me held by the Security Police. The Security Police and I did not work in close relationship with each other, only subsequently those wounds were healed. ADV POTGIETER So was there a close relation between the Security Police and Murder and Robbery? MR KNIPE Not really no - no. No - on occasions but I would not term it - term it close co-operation no - close co-operation would have been with Forensic - with Flying Squad, those were far closer co-operations much closer co-operations with the Riot Unit - there is obviously inter co-operation between all sections within the Police Force but there was no special nexus between Security Cape Town and Murder and Robbery Cape Town. The was a far closer nexus with other departments or other sections. ADV POTGIETER ADV VAN ZYL ADV POTGIETER Ja. ADV NTSEBEZA Advocate Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER ADV VAN ZYL ADV NTSEBEZA Advocate Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER ADV NTSEBEZA Yes. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE That is correct. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Now would it be - would it be fair to suggest that the situation was such that it was felt that the police were not in control of the situation in the Western Cape as a result of the extend of this sort of incident etcetera. MR KNIPE Of what incident? ADV POTGIETER Incidents - incidences of this nature that I have referred to - unrest - attacks on the police - attacks on structures that represent official power, that sort of thing - official authority. MR KNIPE Mr Potgieter without being flipped I think that most people would have precede we were in better control then than we are now. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER But I am asking you about that - about that stage and the - I am asking you to respond to what I am putting to you. MR KNIPE I am responding to what you are putting to me. ADV POTGIETER Are you suggesting that the police were - there was no basis for a suggestion that the police were not in control of the situation in the Western Cape? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Now to be more specific on that on the townships particularly - so-called black areas. MR KNIPE I think - I think those were difficult years in the townships, as I said they were volatile years. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA If I can enter here - is it not so to your own recollection that as a consequence of the unrest situation - the Government of the day had even declared a State of Emergency. MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA I see - advocate Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER Thank you Chairperson - let me ask you this, was there not concern amongst the higher echelons of the police about the situation in the Western Cape in the townships - in the black areas? And the view that something has to be done in order to put an end to what was regarded as an unacceptable unrest situation and so forth, particularly also with attacks on the police? MR KNIPE That might be - I was a captain at that stage I would be able to answer that question more fully today with the seniority that I have now, but then I was a Captain - those were not sort of things that was discussed with Captains. ADV POTGIETER Even - even if you are part of the command structure of Murder and Robbery which is a key unit. MR KNIPE It was a key unit dealing with criminality. ADV POTGIETER Well were you not part of the sort of - the total plan to fight lawlessness in the Western Cape or did you leave that to other - other colleagues to do? MR KNIPE Murder and Robbery had a predetermined manifested and they investigated in accordance with that, unless instructed otherwise by top brass. We had a defined mandate and that was a pretty restrictive mandate, it was actually a mandate which was quite sickening in the old days - we would only investigate murders where the victims were white. Those were the sort of mandates we had at a stage. So that was what you - you were doing you would - you would investigate where the victim was white. MR KNIPE At one stage yes. ADV POTGIETER Did you do that yourself? MR KNIPE Yes and I agitated that, that instruction be changed. ADV POTGIETER Let me be a bit more specific have you ever been present at a function at Robben Island. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Never been to Robben Island - no hang on I think when I was a boy scout - I think before Robben Island was a prison - many-many years ago. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Never. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Can you recall how you became aware of Vlakplaas? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER What was it that you heard about Vlakplaas? MR KNIPE That there was this farm where they had turned ANC terrorist which had now joined the Police Force and they were used for gathering of information and covert operations etcetera - etcetera. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Or - or in fact during this incident. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Now you have done some investigations around this incident. MR KNIPE Limited. ADV POTGIETER In the course of those investigations - would it have come to your knowledge that Vlakplaas was involved or there was a Vlakplaas involvement in this incident. MR KNIPE Again very difficult to answer that question. I can recall meeting a chap called Bellingham on the scene of the crime that day or the scene of the shooting correction - the scene of the shooting that day. I found the man a bit up noxious and I remember asking where does he fit into the picture, where does he come from. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I also think that the investigation was of sub standard I was alarmed that the day after the shooting that the firearms were still lying around the offices. The investigation was not of the standard expected of Murder and Robbery and I took a conscious decision and I left the Unit. ADV POTGIETER Now these reservations that you - that you express have you mentioned that when you were testifying about this incident in court. MR KNIPE No I was not asked about it. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE No - no - I left because of a personal reservation - I did not agree that Murder and Robbery should be investigate themselves. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Yes. ADV POTGIETER Where did you do that? MR KNIPE When I left Murder and Robbery. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I was giving evidence under oath and I answered all the questions put to me honestly. ADV POTGIETER Although you thought that the charge against Mr Weaver was an abuse of power. MR KNIPE Ja it was a mistake. ADV POTGIETER Well you - not a mistake - you put it much - much stronger here. MR KNIPE Yes it was an abusive power, it was a mistake. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I was called by the State. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Mr Weaver was acquitted. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Why - why did you not offer to act as a witness for the defence for example. MR KNIPE If - if I had been asked the questions which you are asking now, I would have answered them in exactly the same manner. ADV POTGIETER ADV NTSEBEZA Now Director Knipe I hear you when you say a witness is a witness that comes to Court to assist the Court to come to a balanced verdict. Now but it is so as a State witness that you are being called to support a case brought by the State against Mr Weaver, is that right. MR KNIPE Correct. ADV NTSEBEZA That the aim was certainly for the prosecution to obtain a conviction is that right? MR KNIPE That is correct. ADV NTSEBEZA And that as you would like us to understand now, you were giving evidence in a manner that would expose the truth without necessarily wishing to proceed against Mr Weaver - you had no interest in him being convicted - you only wanted to expose the truth by your testimony is that right. MR KNIPE I was - I was questioned if I remember correctly about the cleaning of the road and one or other points and I answered those questions honestly, that was the limited of the evidence which I was called upon to give. ADV NTSEBEZA Yes no - no I appreciate that, but what I understand you to be saying to us, is that your intention in giving evidence was not necessarily to cause Mr Weaver to be convicted - it was to assist the Court to come to a balanced verdict. MR KNIPE That is correct. ADV NTSEBEZA If your interest was merely [intervention] MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA MR KNIPE I was a Captain - South Africa was then the South Africa of old - I would have been a Captain today if I had made that statement. ADV NTSEBEZA Are you saying therefore that in the interest of your own career advancement you are prepared to sacrifice what was agonising you on the alter of that experience. MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA I am going a step further because this is where we are now, are you saying you were afraid to volunteer your views about how the prosecution of [indistinct] was an abuse of power, because it might have jeopardised your career. MR KNIPE No I am not saying that, I am saying that, that is a possibility. If I had been asked directly I would have given the evidence. ADV NTSEBEZA Then put it the other way, are you saying that you deliberately refrained from expressing your views because to have volunteered your views about how it was an abuse to charge Weaver would have jeopardised your career. MR KNIPE Are you saying to us that even though you felt at the end that it was an abuse to charge Weaver, you none the less decided not to volunteer that opinion because it might have jeopardised your career. MR KNIPE I was asked to give evidence on fact - not opinion. ADV NTSEBEZA No we have gone beyond that, you have just said to us here - you would have been a Captain even today if you had volunteered that sort of information. I just want to clarify that reply. MR KNIPE You are quite [intervention] ADV NTSEBEZA Are you then saying because you knew what would have befallen you in those days, if you had volunteered opinions, you deliberately refrained from doing so even though you felt so at the time. MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA MR KNIPE Well perhaps Mr Chairman I should try to explain it more fully to you. What I am saying is that if I had been asked I would have answered it, I asked all questions put to me to the best of my ability - I did not give opinions. ADV NTSEBEZA My subsequent questions have been a clarification of that reply and I am asking whether therefore you felt that in the interest of your own career, you would rather keep your views to yourself than hazard them at that sort of inquiry. MR KNIPE ADV NTSEBEZA Advocate Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER Thank you Chairperson - did you - did you raise your difficulties with the investigation at the Weaver trial. MR KNIPE No. ADV POTGIETER Why not? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Yes. MR KNIPE And I gave evidence on that. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I believe that it would have been more appropriate if I had been called to the Inquest Court to give that sort of evidence. ADV POTGIETER I [intervention] MR KNIPE Surely - surely that was the forum where that evidence should have been given. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE No I - I think we have a difference of opinion Mr Weaver was charged on a separate case to the Inquest - there were two separate cases - in entirety - Mr Weaver was alleged to have made statements about the Police Force which were untrue - as I understood it. And I was called to give evidence pertaining to the washing the blood off the street. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I would have thought so yes. ADV POTGIETER Now you have made a statement for the purposes of the Inquest not so. MR KNIPE It was made pertaining to what I did on the scene. ADV POTGIETER Yes for the purposes of the Inquest. MR KNIPE Correct. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I was not called to give evidence - when that statement was made advocate Potgieter, it was made before all the who and cry took place. When - when the - shall we call the bubble burst - and the original inquest failed, because of very substandard investigation it was re-assigned to different people and I was perfectly satisfied that, that investigation was done competently. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE But the reservations came afterwards Mr Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE None whatsoever, I was satisfied than when the Inquest Magistrate made his findings and that the Attorney General instructed a new investigation to be held - that fairness was being perpetrated. ADV POTGIETER Ja but that was - those are subsequent things Director Knipe - I am talking about incidents happens - now you are making statements for the purposes of an inquest. MR KNIPE Yes. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Which took place over a period of time. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE The first inquest was held after I had been transferred from Murder and Robbery - I had no idea what was going on, I left Murder and Robbery. ADV POTGIETER At [intervention] ADV POTGIETER At sorry - I am sorry. MR KNIPE If I may finish - then I heard that the thing had gone wrong - and I think I was in Durban when that took place, I was in contact with Colonel Segal who was then entrusted to the investigation. And I satisfied myself in conversations with him that the investigation was being done properly. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE With hind sight possibly. ADV POTGIETER It has never occurred to you to do that. MR KNIPE But when things went wrong, it was clear to me that the authorities have taken sufficient actions to correct the inadequacies that were there. ADV POTGIETER Now did that bother you? MR KNIPE And also my reservations that I had that a Unit was investigating himself, had been removed by the "independent investigation" by Segal and Lottering. ADV POTGIETER Now the subsequent investigation was purely by chance - purely for [indistinct] not so, there was never - there was never any prospect of a second inquest not so. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER No but after - after the first inquest - after the Magistrate made his findings in respect of that, that was really the end of the matter, the docket was closed then - in respect of that matter - no so. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Not necessarily - no necessarily. ADV POTGIETER So did you think well in spite of that finding that nobody is responsible there is going to be a subsequent one and that is going to make up for the short comings of the first one. MR KNIPE I never said - no I never said that I was aware of the findings of the first inquest - I was unaware of when that one was completed. ADV POTGIETER Or you were never aware of the [intervention] MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Quite correct. ADV POTGIETER Were you not part of that? MR KNIPE No. ADV POTGIETER Are you sure about that? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER I am - I am advised that contact was made with advocate Rossouw as you know is now retired. MR KNIPE By whom? ADV POTGIETER And - by this Commission and he seemed to recollect that you were part of that. MR KNIPE No that is mistaken - what year was that sir? ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE But I was not directly involved in the docket as such. ADV POTGIETER In fact perhaps in the interim just to be of some assistance I am instructed - advised that the - that, that probe was started the very day after Mr Weavers acquittal so that if you could be of some assistance, perhaps you can apply your mind to it. MR KNIPE The date of Mr Weavers acquittal was? ADV POTGIETER The day - the day after his acquittal. MR KNIPE And the date was? ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Again it is very difficult to be adamant - and dogmatic about time frames I seem to have a recall that we were mustard for parade when a radio report had come through stating that Murder and Robbery chaps had been involved in a shooting, and my recall is that we all left our offices at Bishop Lavis and travelled through to Guguletu. ADV POTGIETER And I know that you were - you were asked this before as well when you testified, but your initial indication in your statements was that you arrived at about 7:35. MR KNIPE Very difficult around about 7:45 - 8:00. ADV POTGIETER But your - your very first statement we got it somewhere here - is soon after the incident, that placed it at approximately 7:35. MR KNIPE 7? ADV POTGIETER 35. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Ja I would have expected that as well to be the case. Now while you were on the scene was there any shooting that was going on. MR KNIPE I did not hear anything no. ADV POTGIETER If there was shooting going on you - you must of heard it not so? MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER So if you had arrived at approximately 7:35 you would have been present on the scene when there were still shooting going on. MR KNIPE I did not hear any shooting. ADV POTGIETER As I say you can take that on board and consider that. MR KNIPE I have considered it because that questions has been put to me earlier and previously I cannot remember any shooting. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE They were all placed in plastic bags labelled in other words - I can remember the one gentleman had muti around his neck and one had documents and the one had a firearm etcetera - etcetera. Everything collected from each corpse was placed into individual plastic bags - labelled and handed to Major Brits. ADV POTGIETER And you handed it to Major Brits? MR KNIPE At the scene. ADV POTGIETER At the scene. MR KNIPE At the scene. ADV POTGIETER Now what normally happens with those Exhibits from there onwards? MR KNIPE Those Exhibits should have been handed into the SAP 13 at Guguletu. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Well I think I have already been reasonably outspoken that I do not believe that the initial investigation was as thorough as it should have been and that would have been a mistake. ADV POTGIETER Was it as bad as all that, that an Exhibit that was collected from the person of - people who are alleged to have been involved in attempted murders and so on, on the police, was just - just disappeared somewhere. MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Ja no-no I am just talking about the personal, we did eventually find records of the arms but they were handed in some days later. MR KNIPE Yes. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER So it must have been an alarmingly poor investigation not so? MR KNIPE I think - I think that is - that is common knowledge, I think one only has to look at the lambasting that Major Brits received from Magistrate Hoffman to conceive that. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE Without being disrespectful surely that should be put to him. ADV POTGIETER Now but what is - have you got a view on this? I mean you seemed to have been a policeman who was very concerned about the image of the police and you in fact [intervention] MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER And would you have expected it from an experienced person like Major Brits? MR KNIPE No. ADV POTGIETER Now given the evidence that we got now that Vlakplaas [intervention] MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER Given that whole - this whole sort of scenario - bad investigation - Vlakplaas indication - it looks as if people have been shot almost in cold blood - evidence is planted - some disappear what is your reaction to all this, how does it sound to you, how does it strike you? MR KNIPE On the scene I did believe that a hand grenade had been thrown - from what I saw - my personal observations - I believed that a hand grenade had been thrown - of the corpses were armed. I believe that a very serious warning light flashed when a gentleman by the name of General apparently came forward, I have already expressed my opinion that I do not think the investigation was of suitable calibre. ADV POTGIETER So in your view there - there might be merit in - in really looking at this quite critically again - this entire incident. MR KNIPE I have no problem with that Mr Potgieter. ADV POTGIETER Now assume that is the scenario that we got here, what is your attitude in regard to the policeman who have been involved and responsible, I mean are those - I just want to complete - are those the type of policeman that we should see in the South African Police Services. MR KNIPE And if the perpetrators are identified and a prima facie case is made out against them. That they should suffer the full consequences of their actions. And obviously if convicted such people have no place in the Police Service. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I think Mr Potgieter you must appreciate that I am a criminal detective, working with criminality, and I see things in black and white. The scenario sketched to me I think that is the way I would answer it - if it is your brief to make recommendations, if there is evidence to substantiate what you say - then I think that would be a fair finding. I also believe that if what you say should be true, then I would probably recommend that people afford themselves the opportunity to seek amnesty. ADV POTGIETER I just - just one final thing as I say look there are so many things that can we actually discuss and so on, but we will more than likely pick up on it again, this - just this one thing that came up as well, where it appears as if this was an operation that was intentionally done by white officers, it seems as if - you know purposely white police officers were chosen to form part of the - of this operation. I mean have you got any comments on that sort of thing? MR KNIPE I arrived at the scene with my partner who happened to be a black man. And we conducted our work together as a team as we normally did. ADV POTGIETER MR KNIPE I am just saying from the prospective where I am - I arrived at the scene, with my partner and we did our job. ADV POTGIETER Director I think at this stage I should call a halt I know the time is going to run out on us, but for the moment those are the questions that I wanted to raise Chairperson. ADV NTSEBEZA Thank you advocate Potgieter. Any other questions from the panel - Pumla. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA Thank you Chairperson, and good afternoon to you Mr Knipe, you presented yourself earlier on in your - in your written statement as a man of principal - you also described the investigation into this matter as having been sub standards and unprofessional. Now when you look back, how would you have done things differently had you been in charge of the operation. MR KNIPE I would have ensured that statements were taken from all the persons, I would have ensured that residua tests were taken from the hands of all the participants. I would have ensured that firearms allegedly used were all seized and sent for ballistic examination. I would have ensured that when evidence contrary to the police evidence was made available, that perhaps objectivity should have been displayed and not subjectively. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA MR KNIPE If I understand your question correctly. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA MR KNIPE No. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA Well can I - can you allow me to paraphrase because what you said is on record I will paraphrase the Chairperson was asking you questions about what you said and what you should have said in a court of law and your response was that it was something to do with the realities of the time. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I understand that, what I am - you were expressing is you, I am not challenging your statement at all. I wish you to understand that, you were expressing an opinion and I am similarly wondering whether in fact you are not expressing a further opinion and saying that it was difficult for police officers to do something that was consistent with what their moral beliefs were or with what they believed in their conscience, is that what you suggesting? MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA Exactly - so that difficulty reflects in fact in the way in which it was then difficult for you in a court of law to go according to your beliefs you stated in your statements that you a man of believe of principal and you were concerned about some of the things that were happening within this investigation. But it was difficult for you because the expectations that prevailed at the time, did you not encourage you to express your independent view. In other words did not encourage you to act according to your conscience. MR KNIPE Your statement is correct to a degree, it is not - it is not as strongly as what you put it - I understand what you say, I think there were limitations placed upon how far one could sometimes go within a certain ambit. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I suppose maybe I should just tell you where I am coming from, I often wonder about the general mind sets of law enforcers or people who were working for law enforcement. I just often sometimes wonder what their mind sets was. And I was driven to my question by some of the comments you made and wondered if perhaps this is what was happening with you every time that you were caught up in a system that expected you to behave in a particular way while in fact you had other views or believes. MR KNIPE And - and there was strong indoctrination of course there was as on the other side there was indoctrination. The tragedy of South African society was basically that, surely and of course that affected people from all walks of life, we all had perceptions which might have been wrong. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA You have answered my question thank you - I will move on to another question. In your work was it the first time in your work as - in your unit - was it the first time, was the investigation you were doing with this case, the first time you involved in an investigation. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA You - you were an investigator of this case after the shooting at Guguletu, you were one of the investigators. MR KNIPE No I think your interpretation and mine of an investigator might be different. I arrived on the scene and I have reasonable [indistinct] and experience from the scene and one of the things that I have tried to make it my duty to do is to have professional conduct on a scene of crime wearing gloves, putting Exhibits in plastic bags etcetera, etcetera. Those are things that I have tried to implement throughout my career in the Police Force and that is what I did there. But Fanie Brits was appointed on the scene by I think the divisional head of the CID who was then General Van der Westhuizen as the investigator, I merely helped him to do the task as described and then on own initiative washed the blood off the street. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA So you were assisting the investigator. MR KNIPE That would be correct. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA My question really was whether you had been involved in investigations in other cases other than the case of the Guguletu 7 - that was my question. MR KNIPE Sorry I misunderstood you - all my life. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA All your life - during investigations do you also take - make sure that police officers and other people were involved - who are involved in a crime submits their statements, do you also - are you also responsible for that? MR KNIPE As the investigating officer? MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA As an investigator? MR KNIPE Yes. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA So you would - you would make sure that people make statements. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I just wanted to establish if you would take statements. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA And you would - you would feel somewhat responsible about the process of the case as the unfolding of the case of the case that you investigating, you would somehow feel responsible you want to know what happens at every stage of the case since you are the investigator - of a case - of a criminal ordinary case that you doing - you would feel connected to the case to make sure that all your investigation - the material that you bring to the court is in order, is there and you somewhat feel connected to the case because of the investigator. MR KNIPE That is the task of the investigator is to place all the material evidence before a court. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA What sense of responsibility do you feel about the investigation of this case, [indistinct] you had a part in the investigation - what sense of responsibility do you feel about the outcome of the findings, the process of the investigation as it relates to the matter of the Guguletu 7. MR KNIPE I believe that when the investigation was entrusted to Lottering and Segal, that a proper investigation was conducted. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA When you were involved - you are happy and you feel that as part of the team whatever it is that you are involved in you feel that as far as you are concerned, everything was done properly. MR KNIPE Again when Segal and Lottering were assigned to the investigation. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA Now you were part of this investigation I know that you were a part - only a part so obviously you are a part of the total picture when findings are made. When statements are given, or are made - are taken - whatever within a particular defined parameter some police officers, some people at the scene whoever else was involved but you were also in a way aware that certain policeman made statements and you are part of that as well in the sense that you knew that there were certain police officers who made statements. MR KNIPE I - my involvement with this investigation seized the day I left the scene of crime until I subsequently had discussions with Segal. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I am not sure if [intervention] MR KNIPE And I think I might have affidavited one or two statements - the normal course of things one is at the office, and you affidavit a statement. And that is probably the sum total, I never saw the docket, I never read the docket it was entrusted to my senior. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I thought you was speaking English. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA Well just that when you see I am - one of the things I am wondering about you were part of this investigation, it was folded and finished and completed whatever, whenever it was. And you were there and you knew about the outcome and last year in November when we heard - we had a hearing at the Commission, Mr Lazaro gave public evidence - I mean gave his testimony in public and contradicted your colleagues - [indistinct] that he made a statement to him - and I am wondering as a person who was involved in that investigation, what - how did you feel how this was part of your - of your brief, you were involved in it, it was part of your investigation - what did you do, you heard it - you were sitting there and a man comes in, in public in and an official - in front of an official body and you were part of the investigation team. What - what - how did you feel about that? MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I think [intervention] MR KNIPE I think - I think to me if I might just say to me the - the most damming remark in this entire inquisition that has taken place was the admission by Liebenberg that when the Security Police could not deal with the problem in Cape Town, they called in other people. Now that, that was news to me really that took me completely and utterly by surprise, that phased me. I had difficulty with that remark. MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA He associated them with having met them in a shebeen - that part is hand written and that is how it is, my question really was about your role in the investigation and how you felt if a part of your investigation seemed to have been in question in that way. MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA MR KNIPE MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA I am equally appalled myself that you as a senior member of your division can come to this Commission and tell us that an investigation after an events in which seven men were killed was sub standard and unprofessional, I am equally appalled thank you. ADV NTSEBEZA Ms Burton. MS BURTON MR KNIPE Correct. MS BURTON And he instructed you to take certain actions. MR KNIPE Correct. MS BURTON But he was in charge of the investigation is that correct. MR KNIPE Correct. MS BURTON He has said that he did not arrive on the scene until 8:03 I think, I speak under correction, could that tally with your account of the timing? MR KNIPE My time could be wrong. MS BURTON But it is correct that he was already on the scene and when you arrived you were told that he was in charge and [intervention] MR KNIPE My recall is when I arrived there, I remember seeing Brits - Brits from our Unit, Mbele and I arrived together - yes Brits was on the scene where I got there. MS BURTON MR KNIPE MS BURTON No - no - no I said plastic bags. MR KNIPE Sorry I thought you said black bags. MS BURTON No. MR KNIPE MS BURTON Have you got a sketch plan in front of you. MR KNIPE I believe that would have probably have been Vehicle H. MS BURTON Marked H right. MR KNIPE That was a Kombi where people had been in that were shocked, there was a body lying next to the vehicle and there was a tremendous amount of blood that is the blood that I washed from the street. MS BURTON Right that was Mr Konile. MR KNIPE And then I can remember the Vehicle A if that is the vehicle that were Brazelle was in. MS BURTON MR KNIPE Now those are the only two vehicles that I can recall. MS BURTON I wanted to ask you about the vehicle [intervention] MR KNIPE MS BURTON MR KNIPE Perhaps if you could enlighten me what type of vehicle that was, I might be able to assist you. MS BURTON I think that was also a Kombi - am I - can I just check with my fellow Commissioners - that was the Kombi which it is alleged that Mbelo was in. MR KNIPE MS BURTON H is the Kombi I believe that was alleged to have been stolen and did you have to follow up any of that information? MR KNIPE No. MS BURTON No - thank you. ADV NTSEBEZA Thank you Ms Burton, anymore questions from the panel - advocate Van Zyl. ADV VAN ZYL Thank you Chairperson - Inspector Knipe you told the Commission that you were mustered that morning at Murder and Robbery at about 7:30 is that correct? MR KNIPE That is correct. ADV VAN ZYL You know Sergeant Tommy Hendricks. MR KNIPE I know Tommy Hendricks well. ADV VAN ZYL Was he also a member of Murder and Robbery at the time? MR KNIPE He was. ADV VAN ZYL And do you know whether he was mustered with you that morning? MR KNIPE I cannot recall that - I presume he must have been. ADV VAN ZYL The mustering normally if you go on duty in the morning is everybody is suppose to be there. MR KNIPE That is - well expect for the members who are out on particular assignments. ADV VAN ZYL Thank you Mr Chairman I have no further questions for Director Knipe. ADV NTSEBEZA MR KNIPE Thank you. ADV NTSEBEZA And without saying that we will not use a subpoena again, we - we might have to try another method in view of your remarks, thank you. MR KNIPE A phone call sir and I will be here. ADV NTSEBEZA These proceedings are now adjourned. It then remains for me to do the necessary namely to express my sincerest gratitude to all those who have made these proceedings the success that they have been. In particular I must thank the general public for the controlled way in which they conducted themselves during the course of these proceedings. Although I have had occasion to [indistinct] one or two cell phones for users thereof , generally the conduct of the public was such as it should be expected from a public in the conditions of this nature. I am also asked to thank Telkom and which I do, I am not particularly aware in what respect Telkom comes for special mention. But sometimes when you are the Chair you just do as you are told which is what I am doing. But from me I must indicate that the families who have come here, and have in spite of the pain that this obviously evokes, been able to sit through and listen they are thanked for having come and in the true spirit and tradition of what the Truth and Reconciliation Commission stands for, one would hope that this process to the extend that it exposes some truths whichever way the truth exposes itself as - will ultimately lead to healing - will ultimately lead to reconciliation. And without the victims and survivors families and the witnesses in the form of the police who were involved on this day in question, we shall never know, it should never be forgotten that we were not there, and we can only know what happened when we weight the testimony of those who have been involved. And lastly but not in the least - thank are due to the ministry of safety and security who have provided the necessary security and I would like to be able to think that much of the tranquillity with which this proceedings were held, and the utmost fear that could easily and potentially have been out of hand but which otherwise was a calm one and conducive for everybody to be able to speak their minds has been largely due to the fact that people came here in the fair secure knowledge that they would be safe in their bodies. That is the long list that I have found and at the end of a weary day, let me thank everybody and let me declare these proceedings to be adjourned.