decisions AMNESTY DECISIONS 2000-11-27 CAPE TOWN VOICE MORRIS SAMBO AM 1192/96 REFUSED https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=59197&t=&tab=hearings https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/decisions/2000/ac200216.htm DECISION _______________________________________________________ This application flows from the killing of W/O D W Van der Spuy a member of the motor vehicle crime investigation section of the South African Police in or near Komatipoort Mpumalanga on 29 October 1992. Originally the applicant had only applied for amnesty for the murder of Van der Spuy. Obstructing the course of justice, illegal possession of a firearm and illegal possession of ammunition. There was no mentioned of the attempted murder. In this regard it is significant that he was never charged with attempted murder but only the other offences in respect of which he applied for amnesty and of which he was convicted and sentenced to forty years imprisonment. This leads to an inference that the attempted murder is something knew introduced by the applicant to favour his amnesty application. In his written application, the applicant stated that he thought the two plain-clothes policemen who come to his home in a tow truck were thieves who wanted to steal from him. When questioned at the hearing he attributed this to a misunderstanding between him and the person who assisted him in filling out the application form. He also explained that he did not mean thieves but criminals because he regarded all policemen as criminals. It is significant that at the criminal trial he also stated that he thought they were there to steal. Although he testified at the amnesty hearing that he had lied at the criminal trial, the evidence at the trail is confirmed by the statement in his application form and leads to an inference that this probably the true state of affairs. Furthermore, the applicant conceded, after his rather belated claim that there was a general instruction to kill policemen, that he knew of no policeman who had been killed either by him or anybody under his command. This in the light of the many inconsistencies, contradictions and the differing versions of the applicant as set out above, the committee is of the view that the applicant has failed to make full disclosure of all relevant facts and accordingly the application is REFUSED. Despite our refusal of this application, the committee is of the view that in the light of the continued and considerable harassment that the applicant was subjected to and particularly in the light of the extremely harsh sentence, that the applicant received this is an appropriate case for executive intervention. Accordingly, we recommend that the ministries of Justice and Correctional Services investigate the matter with a view to affording the applicant an appropriate reduction in sentence. SIGNED AT CAPE TOWN ON THIS THE 27th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2000 ________________________ KHAMPEPE S A J ________________________ ADV F J BOSMAN ___________________________MR I LAX