S v Ndikwetepo and Others (2) (CC 61 of 1992) [1992] NAHC 4 (24 August 1992)

THE S T A TE vs P A U L US N D I K W E T E PO AND 5 O T H ER CC 61/92 M u l l e r, A. J. 1 9 9 2 / 0 8 / 24 and 25 C R I M I N AL L A W. - v a r i o us s e r i o us c h a r g es of R o b b e ry w i th a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c e s, a t t e m p t ed m u r d er e t c. - several a c c u s ed involved in d i f f e r e nt i n c i d e n t s. - s o m m on p u r p o se in r e s p e ct of a p a r t i c u l ar i n c i d e n t. - d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o ns - law. - d i s c u s s ed and a p p l i ed - i d e n t i f i c a t i on of s u s p e c t s. - i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e s. IN T HE H I GH C O U RT OF NAMIBIA In t he m a t t er b e t w e en T HE S T A TE v e r s us 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. PAULUS N D I K W E T E PO P R I M US A N G U LA M A T H E US TJAPA M W O O MA N G H I H A L E M H O TE M I C H A EL A N G U LA V E N A S I US A M E HO M A R T IN KADWIKA C O R A M: MULLER, A . J. and 2 A S S E S S O R S: M r . J. Karuaihe and Ms E . K e r a m e n. H e a rd o n: 1992.04.23 - 1992.08.24 D e l i v e r ed o n: 1992.08.24 J U D G M E NT M U L L E R, A . J. : Six accused a p p e a r ed in t h is c a se on 15 c h a r g es w h i ch v a r i ed from robbery w i th a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es to escape from lawful c u s t o d y. O r i g i n a l ly 7 a c c u s ed w e re supposed to stand t r i al on t h e se c h a r g es b ut a c c u s ed number 2 escaped and w h en t he t r i al s t a r t ed on t he 23rd A p r il 1992 only accused numbers 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 w e re a r r a i g n ed on these c h a r g e s. Mr D F S m a l l, appeared on behalf of the S t a te and Mr E. K a s u to on behalf of three of the a c c u s e d. T he r e m a i n i ng t h r ee a c c u s ed w e re not legally r e p r e s e n t ed but as c o u n s el w as a v a i l a b le to act on i n s t r u c t i o ns of t he L e g al A id B o a rd on b e h a lf of them, the m a t t er stood d o w n. A f t er a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 3, 4 and-5 also indicated that t h ey are p r e p a r ed to accept legal r e p r e s e n t a t i on a p p o i n t ed by the L e g al A id B o a rd as w as t he p o s i t i on in respect of t he o t h er t h r ee a c c u s e d. At t he resumption of t he t r i al Mr G r o b l er a p p e a r ed on t he i n s t r u c t i o ns of the L e g al A id Board on b e h a lf of a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1, 4 and 5, w h i le Mr K a s u to r e p r e s e n t ed a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 3, 6 and 7, also i n s t r u c t ed by the L e g al A id B o a r d. T he S t a te asked for the s e p a r a t i on of t r i a ls in r e s p e ct of a c c u s ed number 2 and t he o t h er accused in t e r ms of s e c t i on 157(2) of t he C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A c t, N o . 51 of 1 9 7 7. T h is a p p l i c a t i on w as granted by the C o u r t. A ll t he a c c u s ed e x p r e s s ed t h e ir satisfaction w i th t h e ir c o u n s el a p p o i n t ed on t h e ir behalf and the c h a r g es w e re put to t he a c c u s e d. A c c u s ed number 1 pleaded not guilty to c h a r g es 1 to 1 5. In r e s p e ct of c h a r ge N o . 12 a c c u s ed number 1 a d m i t t ed t h at he fired a shot in the d i r e c t i on of Mr De L a n g e, t he c o m p l a i n a nt in that m a t t e r, and hit Mr De L a n g e' s c h e e k, but d e n i ed any intention to kill Mr De L a n g e. His d e f e n ce w as o ne of s e l f - d e f e n c e. The Court put t he a d m i s s i o ns and d e f e n ce w h i ch w e re put forward on his b e h a lf by his c o u n s el to a c c u s ed number 1 and he c o n f i r m ed it as c o r r e c t. A c c u s ed number 3 pleaded not g u i l ty and m a de no a d m i s s i o n s. A c c u s ed number 4 p l e a d ed not g u i l ty to all c h a r g es - 1 - 13 and m a de no a d m i s s i o n s. A c c u s ed number 5 p l e a d ed not guilty to c h a r g es 1 to 13 and m a de no a d m i s s i o n s. A c c u s ed n u m b e rs 6 and 7 p l e a d ed not guilty but m a de t he f o l l o w i ng a d m i s s i o ns in t e r ms of s e c t i on 220 of t he C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A c t. In respect of c h a r ge N o . 1 1, t h ey said that they w e re p r e s e nt on t he d a te and p l a ce in q u e s t i on and t h at they f u r t h er admitted that t h ey w e re p r e s e nt w h en a c c u s ed number 1 fired a shot at the c o m p l a i n a n t, Mr De L a n g e. T h is w as c o n f i r m ed by b o th a c c u s e d. T h is t r i al involved a number of r o b b e r i es c o n d u c t ed d u r i ng t he p e r i od from t he 29th D e c e m b er 1990 to 24th M a r ch 1991 in t he d i s t r i c ts of O m a r u r u, O t j i w a r o n g o, O k a h a n d ja and O u t jo in t he R e p u b l ic of N a m i b i a. D u r i ng t he c o u r se of t he i n c i d e n ts that led to t h e se c h a r g es a number of o t h er o f f e n c es w e re a l l e g e d ly a l so c o m m i t t ed by t he a c c u s ed or some of them. As t h is is a v e ry serious and c o m p l i c a t ed c a se i n v o l v i ng a w i de r a n ge of c h a r g es in r e s p e ct of o f f e n s es c o m m i t t ed at d i f f e r e nt t i m es and i n v o l v i ng a n u m b er of a c c u s e d, I shall d e al w i th t he e v i d e n ce of t he c o m p l a i n a n ts in respect of t he d i f f e r e nt c h a r g es s e p a r a t e ly and t h en w i th the e v i d e n ce by o t h er w i t n e s s es r e l a t i ng to t h e se c h a r g e s. In r e s p e ct of each and e v e ry d i f f e r e nt i n c i d e nt t he S t a te a l l e g ed that the accused a c t ed w i th c o m m on p u r p o s e. C H A R G ES 1 A ND 2: T h e se c h a r g es are the f o l l o w i n g: C H A R GE 1; IN T H AT on or about the 29th December 1990 and at or n e ar farm O N D U R U G U EA in the district of OMARURU t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the intention of forcing h er i n to s u b m i s s i o n, a s s a u l t ed G O T T F R I E DE M A R T HA B R I G I T TA G R A M O W S KY by k i c k i ng her, t h r o t t l i ng her, t h r e a t e n i ng h er w i th a f i r e - a rm and h i t t i ng her w i th c l e n c h ed fists and u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the intent to steal t o ok from her t he i t e ms m e n t i o n ed in A n n e x u re 1, the p r o p e r ty of or in t he l a w f ul p o s s e s s i on of t he said G O T T F R I E DE M A R T HA B R I G I T TA G R A M O W S K Y. A nd it is f u r t h er alleged that a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in s e c t i on 1 of A ct 51 of 1977 are p r e s e nt in t h at t he a c c u s ed a n d / or an a c c o m p l i ce w a s / w e r e, b e f o r e, a f t er or d u r i ng t he c o m m i s s i on of the c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o n s, n a m e l y, a fire-arm and a k n i f e. C H A R GE 2; It is alleged t h at on or about the 29th D e c e m b er 1990 and at or n e ar farm O N D U R U G U EA in the d i s t r i ct of O M A R U RU t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly a s s a u l t ed E L I Z A B E TH K A HL by p u s h i ng and kicking her w i th b o o t ed feet w i th i n t e nt to do t he said E L I Z A B E TH KAHL g r i e v o us b o d i ly h a r m. T he f o l l o w i ng w i t n e s s es t e s t i f i ed in respect of t h e se t wo c h a r g es and I shall r e f er h e r e in further to the w i t n e s s es only by t h e ir family n a m e. Dr A . J . C . C u r r ie t e s t i f i ed t h at on the 30th December 1990 he e x a m i n ed b o th G r a m o w s ky and K a h l. In respect of t he p a t i e nt G r a m o w s k y, w ho w as a 62 y e ar old w h i te f e m a l e, a c c o r d i ng to h is n o te at the t i m e, she had been in a severe p s y c h o l o g i c al s h o c k. He found spattered b l o o d - s t a i ns on t he front as w e ll as t he b a ck of her b l o u s e, her left c h e ek w as swollen w i th b r u i s i ng of m o st of t he skin, w h i le b o th eyes w e re b l o o d s h ot w i th s u b - c o n j u n c t i v al haemorrhages of the right e y e. S he a l so had an a b r a s i on on the right chin and on the b a se of t he l e f t - s i de of the neck w as a h o r i z o n t al w h e el and a b r a s i on and t h e re w e re also deep b r u i s i ng and a s u p e r f i c i al b r u i se on the left thoracic m a r g in i n t e r i o r l y. Her r i g ht u p p er f o r e - a rm showed superficial b r u i s i ng w i th m o st of t he skin and a m i n or laceration on the skin of the r i g ht m i d- f o r e a r m. T h e re w e re also bruising of t he skin all o v er t he left f o r e - a rm d o r s al and left dorsal of her left hand w i th an a b r a s i on over the w r i s t. Her right shoulder w as s w o l l en and t e n d e r. A c c o r d i ng to him these i n j u r i es that he f o u nd w as a d i r e ct result of being m a n h a n d l e d, shaken a r o u nd and p r o b a b ly hit w i th a flat hand or the b a ck of a hand. T he i n j u r i es w e re not serious but t he severity t h e r e of c a u s e d, a c c o r d i ng to the doctor, severe p s y c h o l o g i c al t r a u m a. A c c o r d i ng to the doctor the a b r a s i on and w h e el o v er t he n e ck and throat area could have been c a u s ed by a r o pe b u rn or p e r h a ps t h r o t t l i ng w i th the p a t i e n t 's c l o t h es by d r a w i ng it tight a c r o ss her t h r o a t. In r e s p e ct of t he patient K a h l, w ho w as 84 y e a rs old at t he t i m e, t he d o c t or found her infirm and w i th t he need of a s s i s t a n ce in w a l k i n g, w h i ch w as due to her a g e. Her left k n ee w as slightly swollen w i th a 15 c e n t i m e t re b r u i se and she had e x t e n s i ve superficial b r u i s i ng of the skin o v er t he r i g ht lower fore-arm and w r i st onto t he d o r s al a r ea of t he r i g ht h a n d. She also had e x t e n s i ve b r u i s i ng of t he left w r i st and d o r s al area of her left hand. T h e re w e re a l so b r u i s es of skin and deep tissues of her left e l b ow and she w as in great p s y c h o l o g i c al shock. T he d o c t or a l so i m p u t ed t h e se i n j u r i es to assault and m a n h a n d l i n g. In r e s p e ct of M rs Kahl's i n t e l l e c t u al p o w e rs t he d o c t or s u b m i t t ed that, according to him, she is senile and w o u ld not be a suitable w i t n e ss as a result of t h a t. She w as n ot c a l l ed to t e s t i f y. M rs G r a m o w s ky testified that on t he e v e n i ng of t he 2 9 th D e c e m b er she and her elderly m o t h e r, M rs E l i z a b e th K a h l, w e re sitting on the v e r a n d ah of the f a r m h o u s e. S he and h er m o t h er w e re living alone on the farm a f t er her f a t h er d i ed and she had joined her m o t h er there a p p r o x i m a t e ly t wo y e a rs b e f o re the incident. She had a 9 mm r e v o l v e r, w h i ch c o u ld a l so u se shotgun p e l l e t s, on a c h a ir next to her as t h e re w e re m a ny snakes in the v i c i n i t y. It w as full m o on and she k n ew t he exact time b e c a u se her m o t h er asked her t he t i me and she saw on her w a t ch that it w as 2 0 h 3 0. M rs G r a m o w s k y' s cat w as alerted by something and she used t he t o r ch to l o ok a r o u nd in the v i c i n i ty of a L a n d r o v er p a r k ed o u t s i de t he h o u s e. T wo p e r s o ns suddenly jumped onto t he s t o ep and o ne g r a b b ed her on her left arm and the o t h er on her r i g ht a r m. T he o ne on the right, w h i ch she later i d e n t i f i ed as a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 and w i th w h i ch i d e n t i f i c a t i on I s h a ll l a t er d e al h e r e in m o re extensively, shouted "police, w h e re is t he m o n e y ". He let go of her arm and g r a b b ed her in front of h er shirt, hit her in the face and a g a in asked w h e re is t he m o n e y. His o t h er hand w as over her m o u t h. B e c a u se of t h at and shock she could not a n s w e r. M rs G r a m o w s ky s t r u g g l ed w i th t h is m an w h e r e u p on he again a s k ed "where is t he m o n e y, I am g o i ng to kill y o u ". She a l so n o t i c ed s u d d e n ly t h at a t h i rd p e r s on stood in front of h e r, h o l d i ng h er o wn p e t r o l e um lamp in one hand and a p i s t ol p o i n t ed at h er in t he o t h er hand. W h en t h e ir small dog a t t e m p t ed to a t t a ck M rs G r a m o w s k y 's assailant on her r i g ht he i n s t r u c t ed t he t h i rd p e r s on to kill the dog. T he t h i rd p e r s on t h en n o t i c ed t he r e v o l v er on the c h a ir and w h i le t h ey spoke a l a n g u a ge w h i ch she could not u n d e r s t a n d, he p i c k ed up t he r e v o l v e r. At that time her m o t h e r, M rs K a h l, stood up and a p p r o a c h ed them. T h e re w as a further d i s c u s s i on b e t w e en t he a s s a i l a n ts and t he third p e r s on started p u s h i ng her m o t h er a r o u n d. M rs G r a m o w s ky attempted to t a lk to t h em in H e r e ro by t e l l i ng t h em that her m o t h er is old and sick and s h o u ld be left a l o n e. W h en t he dog again started b a r k i ng M rs G r a m o w s k y 's a s s a i l a nt on her right ordered that the dog be k i l l e d. T h is a s s a i l a nt still had M rs G r a m o w s ky on her s h i r t - c o l l ar and t h en p ut a k n i fe to her throat and repeated h is r e q u e s t: "where is t he m o n e y ". B e c a u se he now held the k n i fe in his o t h er h a nd and t h is hand w as not over her m o u th a n y m o r e, she c o u ld t a lk to h im and said there w as no m o n e y. S he w as p i c k ed up from t he c h a ir and the p e r s on on her left r e m o v ed her g o l d en w r i s t- w a t c h. She didn't see t h is p e r s on a g a i n. F r om h e re she w as p u s h ed b a c k w a r ds and had to w a lk b a c k w a r ds into t he h o u se w h e re she r e a l i s ed that t he b a t h r o om light w as o n. She w as hit in the face by her assailant and he still u s ed t he k n i fe p u s h i ng it against her t h r o a t. She attempted to b l u ff h im w h en he asked for t he light in the b e d r o om by saying t h at t he b u lb w as b r o k e n. At t h is stage the o t h er p e r s o n, d e s c r i b ed e a r l i er as the third p e r s o n, also e n t e r ed t he b e d r o om and he used his lighter to search t he room. M rs G r a m o w s k y 's r a d io and h u n t i n g - k n i fe w e re t a k e n. S he w as v e ry a f r a id that t h ey w o u ld n o t i ce her r i f l es w h i ch w e re b e h i nd t he c u r t a i n. She t o ok R 30 out of her p u r se and g a ve it to him w h i ch a p p a r e n t ly a n n o y ed her a s s a i l a nt and he a s k ed for m o re m o n e y. She w as p u s h ed out of t he r o om o n to a n o t h er v e r a n d ah w h i ch w as an e n c l o s ed little v e r a n d a h, w h e re she t o ok R 1 70 out of an e n v e l o pe and h a n d ed it to h er a s s a i l a n t. S he w as again hit in t he face and lost h er g l a s s e s. Her a s s a i l a nt again shook her and put t he k n i fe a g a i n st her t h r o at and asked for t he r i f l e s, o t h e r w i se he w o u ld shoot and kill h e r. M rs G r a m o w s ky said t h at h er r i f l es w e re in O m a r u r u. She w as then p u s h ed into t he b a t h r o om w h e re she noticed her m o t h er w as lying on t he f l o or w i th t he t h i rd p e r s on kicking her w i th his feet. At t h is stage M rs G r a m o w s k y, w ho w as t e s t i f y i ng in a v e ry c l e ar and d i r e ct m a n n e r, b e c a me o v e r w h e l m ed e m o t i o n a l ly and t he C o u rt had to a d j o u rn to a f f o rd her the o p p o r t u n i ty to c a lm d o w n. A f t er the r e s u m p t i on of t he e v i d e n ce she said that h er a s s a i l a n t, w h om she i d e n t i f i ed as a c c u s ed number 3, w as not i n v o l v ed in any a s s a u lt on her m o t h e r, but that it w as o n ly t he t h i rd p e r s on w ho a s s a u l t ed h e r. As a result of t h is a s s a u lt M rs K a hl is in a bad m e n t al as w e ll as p h y s i c al c o n d i t i on and is c o n s t a n t ly in fear of anybody and a n y t h i n g. M rs G r a m o w s ky attempted to stop the third p e r s on a s s a u l t i ng h er m o t h er by saying that - God w i ll punish him and that he s h o u ld leave the old lady a l o n e. A c c u s ed number 3 w as still c h o k i ng her and w h en she w as a g a in a s k ed for the guns w h i ch she repeated w as in O m a r u r u, a c c u s ed number 3 t h r e a t e n ed to kill her, w h e r e u p on she said - "Go a h e ad and kill m e ". She could see in his e y es t h at she p r o b a b ly m a de a m i s t a ke and then attempted to d i v e rt h is a t t e n t i on by showing them liquor that w as kept by her f a t h er in t he b a t h r o om b e h i nd the c u r t a i n. A l t h o u gh they i n s p e c t ed it, t h ey d i d n 't take any of t he l i q u o r. M rs G r a m o w s ky w as a g a in p u s h ed into the s i t t i n g - r o om and w as f u r t h er a s s a u l t e d. She w as asked w h e re the t e l e p h o ne is and w h en she i n d i c a t ed the next room she w as pushed into that r o om and a s k ed w h e re the light switch w a s. A f t er the light w as s w i t c h ed on accused number 3 t o ok a knife from his p o c k et and cut t he t e l e p h o ne w i r e s. She w as then p u s h ed b a c k w a r ds a g a in i n to t he p r e v i o us room. She w as again asked for t he r i f l es and w as pushed into a n o t h er room w h e re t he t h i rd p e r s on a l so entered and t o ok b l a n k e ts and a s e w i n g - m a c h i n e. S he n o t i c ed that the c u p b o a rd d o o rs w e re o p e n. She w as p u s h ed b a ck in the hallway and into the k i t c h e n. She w as a l so a s k ed for the keys of t he L a n d r o v er w h i ch she h a n d ed o v er to a c c u s ed number 3. In the kitchen t he fridge w as o p en and t he third p e r s on w as taking t h i n gs out of t he f r i d g e. M rs G r a m o w s ky said that she noticed that h er a s s a i l a nt and the third p e r s on b e c a me very r e s t l e s s. W h i le t h ey w e re in the k i t c h en the d o gs of the w o r k e rs s t a r t ed b a r k i ng and t he third person ran out onto the v e r a n d a h. S he w as a g a in hit by accused number 3 in the face, w h e r e u p on he p u s h ed her and also ran out. A f t er t h i s, M rs G r a m o w s ky f r a n t i c a l ly switched on the yard light, closed the d o o rs and fetched t he r i f le w i th w h i ch she shot three shots r a p i d l y. She t o ok t he other rifles w i th her into t he b a t h r o om but c o u l d n 't l o ck the door as the lock had already b e en t u r n ed but t he key w as m i s s i n g. She m a n a g ed to drag her old m o t h er w ho w as v e ry heavy to her b e d r o om and spent the rest of t he night m o n i t o r i ng every w i n d ow w i th her rifle in fear of t he r e t u rn of t he a t t a c k e r s. T he next m o r n i ng at a quarter past five her w o r k e rs t u r n ed up and m e n t i o n ed that they heard three shots at t en p a st n i ne t he p r e v i o us evening. M rs Gramowsky put h er m o t h er into h er o t h er car and drove to Omaruru w h e re she r e p o r t ed t he i n c i d e nt to the police and they w e re taken to t he d o c t or for m e d i c al e x a m i n a t i o n s. In r e s p e ct of the identification parade M rs G r a m o w s ky t e s t i f i ed t h at she w as taken from Omaruru to O k a h a n d ja by t wo p o l i c e m en and at O k a h a n d ja she w as t a k en to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on room where she w as instructed in r e s p e ct of t he p r o c e d u re of the identification p a r a d e. She w a l k ed p a st e v e ry p e r s on and inspected everyone c a r e f u l l y, t a k i ng h er t i m e. A l t h o u gh she immediately recognised a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 she p a s s ed h im in order to prolong his n e r v o u s n e ss and t h en r e t u r n ed i n d i c a t i ng him by p u t t i ng her hand on his s h o u l d e r, w h e r e u p on a p h o t o, that w as handed in as an e x h i b i t, had b e en t a k e n. S he said she w as one hundred p e r c e nt sure and c e r t a in that accused number 3 w as the p e r s on w ho w as on h er right on the v e r a n d ah and throughout r e m a i n ed w i th her and a s s a u l t ed h e r. She said she also r e c o g n i s ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 5 as b e i ng the third person w ho a s s a u l t ed her m o t h e r, but b e c a u se she had a little doubt she did not i d e n t i fy h im on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade but said that she is c e r t a in t h at he w as her m o t h e r 's assailant. She said at t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade she w as 9 8% c e r t a in but g a ve h im t he b e n e f it of t he doubt. Mrs Gramowsky v e h e m e n t ly d e n i ed t h at a n y b o dy t a l k ed to her in her p r e s e n c e, as w as put to h er b e f o re t he identification parade in respect of c e r t a in s u s p e c ts and m e n t i o n i ng a person w i th the c l o t h i ng t h at a c c u s ed number 3 had on. She also a t t e n d ed an e a r l i er i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade in O u t jo d u r i ng w h i ch no i d e n t i f i c a t i on w as m a de by h e r. T he c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on of Mrs G r a m o w s ky m a i n ly t u r n ed a r o u nd t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade in respect of accused n u m b er 3 as w e ll as accused number 5. S e r g e a nt C h r i s t i a an Johannes C l a a s s en t e s t i f i ed t h at on t he 30th D e c e m b er 1990 when he w as stationed at K a l k f e ld he w as sent to the farm of Mrs G r a m o w s ky in O m a r u ru d i s t r i ct to t a ke p h o t o g r a p h s. He identified Exhibit 0 as a b u n d le p h o t o g r a p hs and a key to the p h o t o g r a p hs of w h i ch he w as t he p h o t o g r a p h e r. He dealt w i th each p h o to and t he p l a ce w h e re it w as t a k en as indicated to h im by M rs G r a m o w s ky a nd r e f e r r ed to the key that he c o m p i l ed of t h e se p h o t o s. He a l so c o n f i r m ed a rough sketch plan of the h o u se of M rs G r a m o w s ky that he had drawn up w i th every room i n d i c a t ed by number and c e r t a in specific p o i n ts i n d i c a t ed to h im by M rs G r a m o w s ky as it appears on t he key and also r e l a t ed t h e se p o i n ts to c e r t a in p h o t o g r a p hs by n u m b e r. T he p h o t os w e re t a k en on t he 30th December 1990, a f t er the i n c i d e n t. C H A R G ES 6 A ND 7; T he i n c i d e nt that o c c u r r ed on the 9th M a r ch 1991 in O t j i w a r o n go involving Mr John Henry K r i el and his w i fe M rs D o r e en K r i el lead to c h a r g es 6 and 7. T h e se c h a r g es a re t he f o l l o w i n g: C H A R GE 6: It is alleged that on or about t he 9th M a r ch 1991 and at or near O t j i w a r o n go in the d i s t r i ct of O t j i w a r o n go t he a c c u s ed unlawfully and w i th the i n t e n t i on of f o r c i ng t h em into submission, a s s a u l t e d / t h r e a t e n ed to a s s a u lt J o hn H e n ry K r i el and Doreen K r i el by t h r e a t e n i ng t h em w i th a f i r e a rm and a panga and t y i ng them up and u n l a w f u l ly and w i th intent to steal t o ok from t h em t he items m e n t i o n ed in A n n e x u re 3 to the c h a r ge sheet, the p r o p e r ty of or in t he lawful p o s s e s s i on of the said John H e n ry K r i el and D o r e en K r i e l. It is further alleged that a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in section 1 of Act 51 of 1977 are p r e s e nt in t h at t he a c c u s ed and/or an a c c o m p l i ce w a s / w e r e, b e f o r e, a f t er or d u r i ng the commission of the c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o n s, namely, a firearm and a p a n g a. C H A R GE 7: It is alleged that upon or about 9 M a r ch 1991 a nd at or n e ar O t j i w a r o n go in t he d i s t r i ct of O t j i w a r o n go t he a c c u s ed w r o n g f u l ly and u n l a w f u l l y, not b e i ng m e m b e rs of t he N a m i b i an P o l i ce did by w o r d s, conduct or d e m e a n o ur p r e t e nd that t h ey are m e m b e rs of t he N a m i b i an P o l i c e. C h a r ge 7 is a c o n t r a v e n t i on of section 33(a) of A ct 19 of 1990, n a m e ly i m p e r s o n a t i ng a p o l i c e m a n. S e c t i on 33(a) of t he said A ct reads as f o l l o w s: " 3 3. A ny p e r s on - (a) not b e i ng a m e m b e r, w ho by w o r d s, c o n d u ct or d e m e a n o ur p r e t e n ds that he or she is a m e m b e r; or (b) w ho - (i) p e r s u a d es any m e m b er to omit to c a r ry out h is or her duty or to do any act in c o n f l i ct w i th his or her duty; or (ii) is an a c c o m p l i ce to the c o m m i s s i on of any act w h e r e by any lawful o r d er given to a m e m b e r, or any p r o v i s i on of t h is A c t, m ay be e v a d e d, shall be guilty of an o f f e n ce and liable on c o n v i c t i on to a fine not e x c e e d i ng R4 000 or to imprisonment for a p e r i od not e x c e e d i ng 12 m o n t hs or to b o th such fine and such i m p r i s o n m e n t ". In r e s p e ct of t h e se c h a r g es the t wo m a in w i t n e s s es w e re c a l l ed to t e s t i f y, namely Mr John H e n ry K r i el and his w i fe D o r e en K r i el to w h om I shall r e f er further h e r e in as Mr and M rs K r i el r e s p e c t i v e l y. Mr K r i el t e s t i f i ed that on t he p a r t i c u l ar d a y, w h i ch w as a S a t u r d a y, he w as b u sy w o r k i ng in his y a rd m i x i ng c o n c r e te and that he w as a s s i s t ed by h is w i f e, M rs D o r e en K r i e l. He noticed three b l a ck m e n, w e l l- d r e s s ed w ho a p p r o a c h ed his front g a t e. He then w e nt up to t h em and one of them, w h i ch he later identified as a c c u s ed number 1, showed him a p i e ce of p a p er w h i ch he c o u l d n 't r e ad b e c a u se t he w o r ds w e re w r i t t en t oo c l o s e ly t o g e t h er and he d id not h a ve his g l a s s es o n. H e, h o w e v e r, m a n a g ed to m a ke out t he w o r ds at t he b o t t om of the piece of p a p er w h i ch seems to be t he N a m i b i an P o l i c e. A l t h o u gh he did not m e n t i on t h is in his e x a m i n a t i o n - i n - c h i ef he w as a d a m a nt in c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on that he w as also at that time i n f o r m ed by t h e se m en that t h ey w e re in fact from the N a m i b i an P o l i c e. I s h o u ld p a u se h e re for a m o m e nt to m e n t i on that d u r i ng t he c o u r se of Mr K r i e l "s e v i d e n ce t h r ee i n t e r p r e t e rs f r om A f r i k a a ns to E n g l i sh and v i ce v e r sa w e re used. A l t h o u gh it a p p e a r ed that Mr K r i el w as in fact v e ry fluent in E n g l i sh he p r e f e r r e d, as he w as e n t i t l ed to d o, to t e s t i fy in A f r i k a a n s. D u r i ng t he c o u r se of t he i n t e r p r e t a t i on by t he first i n t e r p r e t er it b e c a me c l e ar that this i n t e r p r e t er d id not in fact i n t e r p r et all t he w o r ds or the exact w o r ds u s ed by t he w i t n e ss or Mr S m a l l, on behalf of the S t a t e. As a r e s u lt of t h is a further i n t e r p r e t er w as used w ho b e c a me ill and t h is r e s u l t ed in a t h i rd i n t e r p r e t er being u s e d. Mr K r i el w as i n v o l v ed for m a ny y e a rs in s e m i - p r e c i o us s t o n es and h as a p p a r e n t ly a good k n o w l e d ge of it to such an e x t e nt that p e o p l e, i n c l u d i ng b l a ck p e o p l e, often a p p r o a c h ed h im to get h is a d v i ce on d i f f e r e nt s t o n e s. He also h e ld a p r o s p e c t i ng l i c e n ce and w as involved in the p r o s p e c t i ng and m i n i ng of s e m i - p r e c i o us s t o n e s. Mr K r i el w ho w as u n d er the i m p r e s s i on that these p e o p le w e re in fact from the N a m i b i an Police and w h en they m e n t i o n ed t h at t h ey had a problem, he thought that it m ay i n v o l ve o ne of h is w o r k e rs and invited them into the y a r d. W h i l st s p e a k i ng to t h em at the gate and also during w h at o c c u r r ed h e r e a f t er a t h i rd p e r s on dressed in a light grey suit a l w a ys r e m a i n ed in t he b a c k g r o u n d. The t h r ee men w i th t he t h i rd in t he b a c k g r o u n d, entered the yard w i th Mr K r i e l. A c c u s ed n u m b er 1 g r e e t ed M rs K r i el w i th the hand and t h ey t h en p r o c e e d ed to t he b a ck v e r a n d a h. At the v e r a n d ah Mr K r i el a g a in a s k ed for the p i e ce of paper and then asked w hy t h e re w as no o f f i c i al stamp from the p o l i ce on it. His w i fe a l so said t h at she w o u ld r a t h er want a p o l i ce o f f i c er in u n i f o rm to c o me to t h e ir h o u se and explain w h at it w as all a b o u t. T h ey w e re t h en b o th ordered into the house and e n t e r ed t he k i t c h en w i th t wo of the p e r s o ns behind them. T h ey sat at t he t a b le and Mr K r i el offered t h em coffee or t e a. At t h is s t a ge he w as accused of dealing illegally in d i a m o n ds or s o m e t h i ng like t h a t. Mr Kriel told them that he h as a p r o s p e c t i ve l i c e n ce and m o v ed to the lounge w h e re he s h o w ed t h em h is c o l l e c t i on of semi-precious s t o n e s. It w as c l e ar to h im t h at t h ey w e re not interested in t h a t. T h ey r e t u r n ed to t he k i t c h en w h e re he sat d o wn on the edge of t he t a b l e. He a l so n o t i c ed that one of the p e r s o n s, w h om he l a t er i d e n t i f i ed as a c c u s ed number 1, stayed w i th h im and t he o t h er w h om he identified as accused number 6 r e m a i n ed w i th h is w i f e. A c c u s ed number 1 t o ok a p i s t ol from his p o c k et w h i ch he p o i n t ed b e t w e en Mr K r i e l 's eyes and said t h at he h as f u ll right from the N a m i b i an P o l i ce to shoot h im d e ad on t he s p o t. They w e re t h en requested to hold t h e ir h a n ds in t he a i r. A c c u s ed number 1 t h e r e u p on t o ok p i e c es of p r e - c ut n y l on p l a s t ic rope from his pocket and a c c u s ed n u m b er 6 t i ed b o th h is and his w i f e 's hands b e h i nd t h e ir b a c k s. T h ey w e re a s k ed for m o n ey and w e re t a k en to t he m a in b e d r o o m. T h ey w e re t o ld that there must be m o n ey in the h o u s e. In t he b e d r o om Mr K r i el indicated w i th his head w h e re h is r i f le w as in a b ag next to the c u p b o a r d. T he rifle w as t a k en out of t he b ag by accused number 1 and t h r o wn o n to t he b ed and r o l l ed into a duvet or a b e d s p r e a d. T h is r i f le w as i d e n t i f i ed as Exhibit 2 and c o n t a i n ed a B u s h n e ll t e l e s c o p e. A c c u s ed number 1 asked for further f i r e - a r ms w h e r e u p on Mr K r i el i n d i c a t ed that there w as a r e v o l v er in t he c u p b o a rd in a b ox w i th c a r t r i d g e s. That w as t a k en out and t he r e v o l v er in i ts h o l d er w i th a leather belt t o g e t h er w i th q u i te a n u m b er of c a r t r i d g es for t he r e v o l v er w e re t a k en by t he a s s a i l a n t s. The rifle w as taken by accused n u m b er 1 and t he r e v o l v er put into Mr K r i e l 's b r i e f c a se a f t er t he c o n t e n ts t h e r e of w e re thrown out. Mr K r i el i d e n t i f i ed t he r e v o l v er as h is .38 S p e c i al N o r ma r e v o l v er and it w as h a n d ed in as E x h i b it 3. Mr Kriel said that he c o u ld n o t i ce t h at h is w i f e 's face w as w h i te and that she w as in f e a r. At t h at stage a c c u s ed number 6, w ho then had a p a n ga in h is h a nd w h i ch Mr Kriel didn't notice b e f o r e, d r ew his f i n g er a c r o ss his t h r o at indicating that t h e ir t h r o a ts w o u ld be s l i t. T h ey w e re taken out of the room and on t h e ir w ay h is d a u g h t e r 's radio c a s s e t te p l a y er w as also t a k en from h er r o o m. In fear of t h e ir lives and w h en again a s k ed for m o n ey M rs K r i el showed them w h e re her p u r se w as in t he k i t c h en a nd a p p r o x i m a t e ly R120 in notes w e re t a k en from i t. T h ey w e re a g a in r e t u r n ed to the b e d r o om and an attempt w as m a de to l o ck t h em into the t o i l e t, but b e c a u se t h e re w e re no k e ys they w e re t a k en into her d a u g h t e r 's room and held t h e re by a c c u s ed number 6. They w e re t h en held c a p t i ve in t h e ir d a u g h t e r 's b e d r o om by accused number 6 w i th t he p a n g a, w h i le a c c u s ed number 1 w as a p p a r e n t ly r e m o v i ng t he p r o p e r ty that w as t a k en from t he h o u s e. W h en Mr K r i el a t t e m p t ed to u n t ie his hands accused number 6 w a r n ed him and he c o u ld n o t i ce that a c c u s ed number 6 started to p a n i c. T h ey w e re t a k en again to the k i t c h en and from t h e re i n to t he g a r a ge and w h e re they w e re l o c k e d - u p. A c c o r d i ng to Mr K r i el on s e v e r al o c c a s i o ns and again in t he g a r a ge t h ey t h o u g ht t h ey w o u ld be k i l l e d. In t he g a r a ge M rs K r i el m a n a g ed to u n t ie her h a n ds and w i th t he aid of a nail she a l so a s s i s t ed her h u s b a nd to get himself u n t i e d. Mr K r i el t h en m a n a g ed to get out of t he garage and a s c e r t a i n ed that t he a s s a i l a n ts had left, w h e r e u p on he w e nt to t he t e l e p h o ne t he p o l i ce but found that t he m o u t h p i e ce of the p h o ne w as not t h e r e. He t h en found that the t e l e p h o ne w i re b e t w e en t he m o u t h p i e ce and t he t e l e p h o ne w as c u t. He saw one of his n e i g h b o u rs g e t t i ng into his c ar and a s k ed him to c a ll t he p o l i c e. He then w e nt to fetch his w i fe and w i t h in t en m i n u t es t he p o l i ce a r r i v e d. The p o l i ce e x a m i n ed t he h o u se and t o ok statements from himself and M rs K r i e l. Mr K r i el a l so t e s t i f i ed that he and his w i fe a t t e n d ed an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. At t h is p a r a de he i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 and w as v e ry p o s i t i ve that they w e re in fact t h e ir a s s a i l a n ts on t he 9th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. T he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as held on the 2nd A p r il 1 9 9 1. B e f o re t h at Mr K r i el a l so a t t e n d ed a n o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de but n o ne of t he a s s a i l a n ts w e re present at that p a r a d e. Mr K r i el w as s e v e r e ly c r o s s - e x a m i n ed in respect of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. A c c o r d i ng to Mr K r i el he met Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and his w i f e, w h om he k n o w s, also o u t s i de the p o l i ce b u i l d i ng and t h ey g r e e t ed each o t h er but did not t a lk about t he v a r i o us i n c i d e n ts that they w e re involved in as t h e re w as no t i me for it. He and his w i fe w e re immediately s e p a r a t ed and t a k en to s e p a r a te r o o m s. F r om t h is room he w as t a k en to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on room w h e re he w as i n s t r u c t ed in respect of t he p r o c e d u re of an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. He i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed number 1 as t he p e r s on w ho did m o st of the t a l k i ng and w ho t o ok most of the i n i t i a t i ve on the 9th M a r ch 1991 and also accused number 6 as a p e r s on w ho had t he p a n ga and w ho w as m a i n ly w i th his w i f e. Mr K r i el d e n i ed that he w as told a n y t h i ng during the c o u r se of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de or b e f o re it by any of the p o l i ce o f f i c e rs or that he c o u ld not i d e n t i fy any of the a s s a i l a n ts and w as t h en c a l l ed to r e t u rn to the i d e n t i f i c a t i on room w h e r e a f t er he i d e n t i f i ed b o th of them. Mr K r i el also c o n f i r m ed A n n e x u re 3 to t he c h a r ge sheet as being the list of items t a k en from h is h o u s e. M rs K r i el t e s t i f i ed in E n g l i s h. She said on t he said d a te she a s s i s t ed her husband w h e re they w e re d o i ng c o n c r e te w o rk in t h e ir y a r d. She noticed t h r ee b l a ck m en a p p r o a c h i ng t h e ir g a te and that her husband w e nt up to t h e m. S he c o u ld not h e ar w h at they w e re saying but saw that a p i e ce of p a p er w as s h o wn to her h u s b a n d. Her husband then invited them in and t he t a l l er p e r s on g r e e t ed her w i th the hand. They t h en w e nt to t he b a ck v e r a n d ah w h e re Mr K r i el again looked at t he p i e ce of p a p er and a s k ed w hy t h e re w as no o f f i c i al stamp on it. S he also asked that u n i f o rm p o l i c e m en should c o me to t h e ir h o u s e. They w e re t h en told that they do not w a nt to c o - o p e r a te and w e re p u s h ed into the k i t c h e n. In t he k i t c h en her h u s b a nd w as accused of i l l e g a l ly d e a l i ng in d i a m o n ds w h e r e u p on t h ey w e nt to t he lounge w h e re t he s t o ne c o l l e c t i on w as shown to the two m en and they r e t u r n ed to t he k i t c h e n. She a l so m e n t i o n ed that a t h i rd p e r s on w as a l w a ys in the b a c k g r o u nd but did not e n t er the h o u s e. In t he k i t c h en her husband w e nt to sit on the c o r n er of t he t a b le w h e r e u p on the o ne p e r s on t o ok out a gun and p o i n t ed it at h er h u s b a nd and said that he w as from the N a m i b i an P o l i ce and t h at he w o u ld kill her husband b e c a u se he w as e n t i t l ed to do i t. T h ey w e re t h en t i ed up by t he shorter a s s a i l a nt and t a k en to the m a in b e d r o o m. Here she also d e s c r i b ed t h at t he a s s a i l a n ts asked for m o n ey and f i r e - a r ms and that h er h u s b a nd i n d i c a t ed w h e re his r i f le w a s, w h i ch w as t a k en by t he t a l l er p e r s on and put on the bed. She a l so d e s c r i b ed t h at t h ey w a n t ed m o n ey and that she then gave them the m o n ey t h at w as in her purse in t he k i t c h e n, from w h i ch they t o ok o n ly t he n o t es in an amount of R 1 2 0. They r e t u r n ed to t he b e d r o om and the a s s a i l a n ts insisted that they w a nt f u r t h er f i r e - a r m s, w h e r e u p on her husband i n d i c a t ed w h e re h is r e v o l v er w a s. T he r e v o l v er i n c l u d i ng the leather h o l s t er and t he c a r t r i d g es w e re t a k en and put into her h u s b a n d 's b r i e f c a s e. S he n o t i c ed that a c c u s ed number 6 p u l l ed a p a n ga out from t he b a ck of his shirt and w i th that he i n d i c a t ed that t h e ir t h r o a ts w o u ld be c u t. She said that she w as v e ry a f r a id and that she feared for her l i f e. A c c o r d i ng to h e r, her h u s b a nd seemed m u ch c a l m e r. M rs K r i el a l so testified that her d a u g h t e r 's r a d io w as t a k en and that a c c u s ed number 1 carried the p r o p e r ty out of t he h o u se w h i le accused number 6 held them c a p t i ve in h er d a u g h t e r 's b e d r o o m. She also said that an attempt w as m a de to l o ck t h em into the toilet, but b e c a u se t h e re w as no k ey it w as not p o s s i b l e. They w e re then taken to t he g a r a ge w h en a c c u s ed number 1 returned and locked t h em i n to t he g a r a ge w h e re she m a n a g ed to untie her hands and a s s i s t ed her h u s b a nd in g e t t i ng him u n t i e d. Her husband t h en m a n a g ed to get out of the garage and that the police c a me w i t h in t en m i n u t e s, w ho examined the house and t o ok s t a t e m e n ts from t h e m. M rs K r i el t e s t i f i ed that she also attended an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de but w as too afraid to look into the faces of t he p e o p le t h e r e. She w as in fact so terrified d u r i ng t he c o u r se of t he e v e n ts of the 9th M a r ch 1991 that she c o u ld not c o n c e n t r a te on their faces and as a result c o u ld not i d e n t i fy a n y o ne at the identification p a r a d e. C H A R G ES 3,4 A ND 5 T he i n c i d e n ts that led to these charges o c c u r r ed on t he 3rd F e b r u a ry 1 9 9 1. The charges are as f o l l o w s: C H A R GE 3: It is alleged that upon or about 3 F e b r u a ry 1991 and at or near farm 0 K 0 S 0 N G 0 M I N G0 in the d i s t r i ct of O T J I W A R O N GO the said accused did u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly b r e ak and enter the h o u se of H I N R I CH R E I N H A RD S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E RG w i th intent to rob and d id t h en u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the intention of forcing t h em i n to s u b m i s s i o n, assault HINRICH R E I N H A RD S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E R G, A N N E L I SE S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E RG and ILSE M E R C K E NS by h i t t i ng t h em w i th sticks and p a n g as and t h r e a t e n i ng t h em w i th a f i r e a rm and unlawfully and w i th intent to steal t o ok f r om t h em t he items m e n t i o n ed in A n n e x u re 2 h e r e to t he p r o p e r ty o f / or in the lawful p o s s e s s i on of the said H I N R I CH R E I N H A RD S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E R G, A N N E L I SE S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E RG and ILSE M E R C K E N S. A nd that a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in s e c t i on 1 of A ct 51 of 1977 are present in that t he a c c u s ed a n d / or an a c c o m p l i ce w a s / w e re b e f o r e, after or d u r i ng t he c o m m i s s i on of t he c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o ns n a m e l y, s t i c k s, p a n g as and firearm. C H A R GE 4: It is alleged that on or about 3 F e b r u a ry 1991 and at or n e ar farm O K O S O N G O M I N GO in the d i s t r i ct of O T J I W A R O N GO t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly a s s a u l t ed A N N E L I SE S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E RG by hitting her w i th sticks and p a n g as w i th intent to do the said A N N E L I SE S C H N E I D E R - W A T E R B E RG g r i e v o us b o d i ly harm. C H A R GE 5: It is alleged that on or about 3 F e b r u a ry 1991 and at or n e ar farm O K O S O N G O M I N GO in the d i s t r i ct of O T J I W A R O N GO t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly a s s a u l t ed ILSE M E R C K E NS by hitting her w i th sticks and p a n g as w i th i n t e nt to do the said ILSE M E R C K E NS g r i e v o us b o d i ly harm. The m a in w i t n e s s es w ho t e s t i f i ed in r e s p e ct of t h e se t h r ee c h a r g es for the State w e re M rs A n n e l i se S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and Mr Hinrich R e i n h a rd S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg t e s t i f i ed that on t he night of t he 3rd F e b r u a ry 1991 she, her husband and her e l d e r ly m o t h er of 81 y e a rs w e re w a t c h i ng t e l e v i s i on in t he t e l e v i s i o n - r o om of the f a r m h o u se w h en four m en suddenly e n t e r ed t he room. O ne had a p i s t ol in his hand and the o t h e rs w e re a r m ed w i th p a n g as and s t i c k s. They t o ok in a v e ry t h r e a t e n i ng p o s i t i o n. The one w i th the p i s t ol t h r e a t e n ed Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg that they w o u ld be killed if they do not do w h at t h e se p e r s o ns requested of them. T he one w i th t he p i s t ol also had a single shell in his hand to e m p h a s i ze t he t h r e a t. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as then hit by one of t he a s s a i l a n ts m o re than once and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g' s aged m o t h e r, M rs M e r c k e n s, w as also hit w i th a stick, w h e r e a f t er she h e r s e lf w as hit on her knees and shins w i th a s t i c k. T he a s s a i l a n ts repeatedly r e q u e s t ed m o n e y. T h e ir h a n ds w e re tied w i th electric c a b l es and they w e re t a k en to t he o f f i ce w h e re they w e re r e q u e s t ed to hand over t he k e ys of t he s a fe as w e ll as the g u n - s a f e. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as hit a g a in and fell to the ground and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg t h o u g ht he w as not alive a n y m o r e. Her m o t h er w as a l so f u r t h er assaulted and also fell d o w n. She h e r s e lf sat in an o f f i ce c h a ir and w as t h r e a t e n ed by one of t he a s s a i l a n ts u s i ng one of their own shotguns w h i ch he p o i n t ed at h e r. In the m e a n t i me the safe w as opened and t he j e w e l l e ry as w e ll as o t h er v a l u a b l es w e re t a k en w h i le they heard some of t he p e o p le w e re busy r a n s a c k i ng the rest of the h o u s e. O ne of t he a s s a i l a n ts f r e q u e n t ly e n t e r ed the room and t h en s t u ck one of Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g 's k n i v es into t he d e sk s a y i n g: "You fucking b o e rs have to be k i l l e d ". A ll t he r i f l es w e re t a k en to t he b e d r o om and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as r e q u e s t ed to hand o v er t he keys for t he c a r. As t he k e ys w e re u s u a l ly h i d d en in the c a rs she w e nt out w i th some of t he a s s a i l a n ts but c o u l d n 't find the k e y. She r e t u r n ed and w as t a k en b a ck into the h o u se a f t er t h ey heard t he farm m a n a g er r e t u r n i ng t h r o u gh t he gate and t he a s s a i l a n ts w i th her b e c a me n e r v o us and e x c i t ed and started t a l k i ng to e a ch o t h er in a l a n g u a ge w h i ch w as n e i t h er A f r i k a a n s, E n g l i sh or H e r e r o. She w as t a k en to t he o f f i ce w h e re she w as left for a few m o m e n ts a l o ne w i th her h u s b a n d. She found that he w as still a l i ve and she asked for t he k e ys w h i ch he handed to her and w h i ch she put on t he t a b l e. T h is w as t h en t a k en by one of t he a s s a i l a n ts w ho w as at that stage in a h u r r y. T he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r gs and M rs M e r c k e ns w e re t a k en to t he b a t h r o om w h e re t h e ir hands w e re r e - t i ed b e h i nd t h e ir b a c k s. T h ey w e re locked into the b a t h r o om and h e a rd the a s s a i l a n ts p a c k i ng t h i n g s. A f t er a p p r o x i m a t e ly 20 m i n u t es e v e r y t h i ng w as q u i e t. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg t e s t i f i ed that her h a n ds b e c a me v e ry p a i n f ul but her h u s b a nd m a n a g ed to cut t he c a b l es that tied his hands w i th s c i s s o rs and then a l so freed h e r s e lf and her m o t h e r. A c c o r d i ng to h e r, her m o t h er w as b l e e d i ng p r o f u s e l y. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg m a n a g ed to get out t h r o u gh the b a t h r o o m - w i n d ow and apparently w e nt to c a ll for h e l p. W h en he r e t u r n ed the b a t h r o o m - d o or w as u n l o c k e d. A c c o r d i ng to M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg four a s s a i l a n ts e n t e r ed i n i t i a l ly but w e re later joined by a fifth p e r s on and she a l so b e c a me a w a re of a sixth p e r s on w h om she d i d n 't see o u t s i de w h en she w as taken by the a s s a i l a n ts to t he c a r. On t he p h o t os c o n t a i n ed in Exhibit F, M rs S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg i n d i c a t ed b l o o d - s m e a rs and stains in t he b a t h r o om c a u s ed by t he b l e e d i ng of her m o t h er and her h u s b a n d. S he a l so i d e n t i f i ed the sticks used to assault t h em on t he p h o t os in that b u n d l e. She herself c o u ld not i d e n t i fy a n y o ne at t he first i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de in O t j i w a r o n g o, but at t he s e c o nd i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de she identified a c c u s ed n u m b er 1. As she could not bring herself to put her h a nd on a c c u s ed number 1's shoulder she indicated him w i th a s t i ck at t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. At O k a h a n d ja she a t t e n d ed a further i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w h e re she i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3 by u s i ng a r u l er to p o i nt h im o u t. She also i d e n t i f i ed a body at the m o r t u a ry as b e i ng t he p e r s on w ho had the p i s t ol the e v e n i ng of t he i n c i d e nt at t h e ir f a r m h o u s e. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as c r o s s - e x a m i n ed m a i n ly in respect of her i d e n t i f i c a t i on of a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 3 and on the features that m a de t h em i d e n t i f i a b le to h e r. She r e m a i n ed adamant that a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 3 w e re in fact part of the a s s a i l a n ts t h at e v e n i n g. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg testified that three p e o p le i n i t i a l ly e n t e r ed the h o u se that p a r t i c u l ar evening, that t h ey w e re t h r e a t e n ed and all of them assaulted. A c c o r d i ng to h im he m ay h a ve b e c o me semi-unconscious a f t er the second b l ow to h is h e a d. He w as taken last from the T . V . - r o om to t he o f f i ce and on t he w ay he w as hit again against t he h e ad and a l so a s s a u l t ed further in the o f f i c e. As he t h o u g ht it w o u ld be b e t t er to pretend that he w as u n c o n s c i o us a f t er b e i ng a s s a u l t ed in the office he fell down and r e m a i n ed s t i ll on t he g r o u n d. From the p o s i t i on that he w as l y i ng on t he g r o u nd he c o u ld notice the a s s a i l a n ts emptying t he s a f es but c o u ld not see w h at happened behind his b a ck w h e re t he d e s ks w e r e. He s u p p o r t ed h is w i f e 's evidence that she w as t a k en out to t he c ar and that w h en she returned she o b t a i n ed t he k e ys from him. He noticed w h i le he was lying on t he g r o u nd t h at t he a s s a i l a n ts w a l k ed in and out of the room and w as o n ce a l so t o ld by accused number 3 that "they as 'boere' m u st be k i l l e d ". He a l so c o n f i r m ed that their hands w e re t i ed w i th e l e c t r ic w i r e. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg identified the items on A n n e x u re 2 of t he c h a r ge sheet as being the p r o p e r ty stolen to t he v a l ue of a p p r o x i m a t e ly R70 000.00 and c o n t a i n i ng m a ny r i f l es and h a n d - g u n s. He also identified E x h i b i ts 7, 8 and 9 b e i ng f i r e - a r ms stolen that evening but r e c o v e r ed by t he p o l i c e. He a l so i d e n t i f i ed Exhibit 10 w h i ch is a b r o k en g a s - p i s t ol t a k en that e v e n i n g. He then also related w h at o c c u r r ed a f t er t he a s s a i l a n ts t o ok them to t he b a t h r o om and l o c k ed t he d o or w h e r e a f t er they left. A c c o r d i ng to Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg he found the w i r es of the t e l e p h o n es in t he h o u se cut and had to go to his shop from w h e re he c a l l ed h is f o r e m an and the p o l i c e. E a r ly in the m o r n i ng the police arrived and t h ey l o o k ed for t r a c k s. He also testified that t he c o r p se of t he p e r s on in t he m o r t u a ry has been the one that had t he p i s t ol t h at e v e n i n g. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg further i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 at t he second identification p a r a de at O t j i w a r o n go as b e i ng one of the assailants w h i le he a l so c o u ld not i d e n t i fy anyone at the first i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O t j i w a r o n g o. At O k a h a n d ja he identified accused number 3 and a p e r s on w ho had a v e ry prominent Roman type nose and w as a p p a r e n t ly a c c u s ed number 2 w ho w as not present in t h is c o u r t. He a l so a d m i t t ed that he m a de a m i s t a ke in i d e n t i f y i ng a n o t h er p e r s on at O k a h a n d ja w ho w as not one of the a s s a i l a n ts t h at n i g ht and said that he identified him b e c a u se he w as i n v o l v ed in another criminal activity and c o n s e q u e n t ly m a de a m i s t a k e. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as mainly c r o s s - e x a m i n ed in r e s p e ct of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parades and the i d e n t i f i c a t i on of a c c u s ed numbers 1 and 3 at those p a r a d es as w e ll as t he p e r s on w h om he had m i s t a k e n ly identified as b e i ng one of t he a s s a i l a n t s. He w as also c r o s s - e x a m i n ed in r e s p e ct of t h e ir f e a t u r es and other m e a ns of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n. A l t h o u gh he c o u ld not d e s c r i be any special features in r e s p e ct of t he accused identified, he remain adamant that he had t he o p p o r t u n i ty to see their faces and that he did r e c o g n i se them. M rs M e r c k e ns did not t e s t i f y. Dr E. A. G a e r t n er testified that he a t t e n d ed to Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg as w e ll as M rs M e r c k e ns and e x a m i n ed t h em t he day after the incident at O t j i w a r o n g o. A c c o r d i ng to him, Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as in pain and his c l o t h i ng w as b l o o d - s t a i n e d. He had a t r a u m a t ic b u r s i t is of t he left e l b ow and t wo large lacerations on the c r o wn of h is s k u l l, m e a s u r i ng 14 cm and 8 cm in length, r e s p e c t i v e l y. T h e re w e re no f r a c t u r es but there w as a swelling and t e n d e r n e ss o v er t he right k n e e. The w o u n ds on t he head w e re s u t u r ed and t he d o c t or suggested that the w o u n ds w e re c a u s ed by a blunt object like a stick. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g, 55 y e a rs old, w e re found by t he d o c t or in a shocked and p a i n f ul c o n d i t i o n. Her c l o t h i ng w as b l o o d - s t a i n e d. She had a t r a m l i ne e c c h y m o s is o v er t he w r i s ts and b l e e d i ng over the left knee and left l o w er leg and her left thumb of the right w r i s t. T he left k n ee w as also s w o l l e n. There w e re no f r a c t u r e s. She w as a p p a r e n t ly hit by a b l u nt object like a s t i c k. T he t r a m l i ne e c c h y m o s is o v er the w r i s ts w e re caused by b e i ng tied or h e ld f i r m l y, a c c o r d i ng to t he d o c t o r. M rs M e r c k e ns w as an old w o m an w h o se c l o t h es w e re b l o o d stained and w ho w e re shocked and in p a i n. She had a b r u i s i ng of t he left f o r e - a rm and her right e l b ow and also t r a m l i ne e c c h y m o s is of the right w r i st as w e ll as a 4 cm l a c e r a t i on o v er t he left e l b o w. There w as an open c o m p l i c a t ed f r a c t u re of t he u l na on the right e l b o w. T h is c o u ld a l so h a ve b e en c a u s ed by an assault w i th a stick and the t r a m l i ne e c c h y m o s is over t he w r i st by b e i ng t i e d - up w i th an e l e c t r ic w i r e. T he d o c t or did not t h i nk that the f r a c t u re of t he right e l b ow w as c a u s ed by s p o n t a n e o us falling but r a t h er by an a s s a u lt u s i ng a s u b s t a n t i al amount of f o r c e. C H A R G ES 8 A ND 9; T he i n c i d e nt w h i ch r e s u l t ed in t h e se c h a r g es o c c u r r ed at t he farm O T J O N Z O N D J A TI in the O k a h a n d ja d i s t r i ct of Mr H A R O LD G U N N AR V O I G TS on t he 16th of M a r ch 1991, late in t he a f t e r n o o n. T h e se c h a r g es reads as f o l l o w s: C H A R GE 8: It is alleged that on or about 16 M a r ch 1991 and at or n e ar farm O T J O N Z O N D J A TI in t he d i s t r i ct of O k a h a n d ja t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the i n t e n t i on of forcing h im i n to s u b m i s s i o n, a s s a u l t ed H A R O LD GUNNAR V O I G TS by h i t t i ng h im w i th a hammer and w r e s t l i ng w i th h im and u n l a w f u l ly and w i th t he intent to steal t o ok from him 1 x 9 mm C2 p i s t ol w i th a v a l ue of a p p r o x i m a t e ly R 9 0 0 . 00 t he p r o p e r ty of or in t he l a w f ul p o s s e s s i on of the said H A R O LD G U N N AR V O I G T S. It is f u r t h er alleged that a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in s e c t i on 1 of Act 51 of 1977 are present in t h at t he a c c u s ed a n d / or an a c c o m p l i ce w a s / w e r e, b e f o r e, a f t er or d u r i ng t he c o m m i s s i on of the c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o n s, namely a hammer and f i r e - a r m s. C H A R GE 9; It is alleged that on or about 16 M a r ch 1991 and at or n e ar farm O T J O N Z O N J A TI in the d i s t r i ct of O k a h a n d ja t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly attempted to k i ll H A R O LD G U N N AR V O I G TS by shooting at h im w i th a fire-arm. In r e s p e ct of t h e se c h a r g es Mr V o i g t s, his w i f e, a n e i g h b o ur Mr U . J . J . B a r th as w e ll as Dr S. D. Hanekom t e s t i f i e d. Mr V o i g ts t e s t i f i ed that he and his family had a b r a ai t h at e v e n i ng and w h en his w i fe w a n t ed to b a th the c h i l d r en it w as found t h at t h e re w as no w a t e r, w h e r e u p on he w e nt w i th t wo of h is e l d er c h i l d r en to a p u m p. On his w ay three p e o p le a p p r o a c h ed h im near his front g a t e, one rolling a m o t or v e h i c le t y r e, followed by t wo o t h e r s. They w e re v e ry f r i e n d ly and asked for help and tools to fix the t y r e. Mr V o i g ts got out of t he c a r, asked them to wait and w e nt i n to h is h o u s e. He told his w i fe that his s e m i - a u t o m a t ic r i f le stood next to t he t e l e p h o n e, put on his own p i s t ol and t o ok a h a m m er and t y re lever to t he three p e o p l e. He then w e nt to t he e n g i ne but found that t he handle w i th w h i ch it has to be s t a r t ed w as not t h e r e. He r e t u r n ed to the house and w e nt i n s i de to look for t he h a n d le in the w o r k s h o p. O ne of t he m en a p p r o a c h ed him and asked for a n o t h er t y re l e v e r. Mr V o i g ts t o ok a n o t h er t y re lever and w h en he a p p r o a c h ed t h em w h e re t h ey w e re busy fixing the t y re he found that t wo p e r s o ns w e re busy w i th it but three o t h e rs stood a r o u nd w i t h o ut a s s i s t i n g. He w as suddenly attacked and felt t h at s o m e b o dy r e m o v ed his p i s t ol from b e h i nd w h i le he w as a l so hit w i th w h at he suspected w as a hammer on his f o r e h e a d. T h ey p u l l ed h im down to the ground and one sat on his left a rm and o ne on his right arm w h i le a third one sat on h is s t o m a ch p o i n t i ng a p i s t ol to his head. In the p r o c e ss Mr V o i g ts c a l l ed loudly his w i f e 's name t w i c e. B o th of t he o t h er t wo p e o p le sitting on his arms had h a n d - w e a p o n s. T he m an on h is s t o m a ch asked "him w h e re are the r i f l e s, w h e re is t he m o n e y ", w h i le the m an on his right shouted "Shoot h im d e a d, shoot h im d e a d ". He identified the m an on his s t o m a ch as t he p e r s on w ho w as later shot and the m an on his r i g ht as a c c u s ed n u m b er 3. In that p a r t i c u l ar moment he h e a rd t wo shots f r om t he d i r e c t i on of t he h o u s e. His a s s a i l a n ts w e re s u r p r i s ed and t a l k ed in Ovambo w i th each o t h e r. T h ey got up and Mr V o i g ts k i c k ed the m an on his stomach from h im and s t a r t ed to r un to t he h o u s e. He saw his w i fe c o m i ng t o w a r ds h im and on his w ay heard other shots w h i ch did not s o u nd like r i f le shots but like that of a h a n d - w e a p o n. Mr V o i g ts t o ok t he r i f le from his w i f e, fired a number of shots in t he d i r e c t i on of a p e r s on running away. He then w e nt i n to t he h o u s e, put off the lights and locked the d o o r s. He p h o n ed t he p o l i ce and one of his n e i g h b o u r s, Mr B a r t h, a l so i n t e r v e n ed on t he farm-line w h e r e u p on Mr V o i g ts a s k ed h im to c o me to h is h o me b e c a u se they had been attacked. W h en Mr B a r th arrived at his home he informed Mr V o i g ts of a w h i te Isuzu b a k k ie w h i ch w as parked on the road t h at l e a ds to t he h o m e s t e a d. Mr V o i g ts handed him a shotgun and a s k ed Mr B a r th to shoot the tyres of the v e h i c le to i m m o b i l i se i t. W h en Mr B a r th r e t u r n ed Mr V o i g ts w ho w as c o n v i n c ed t h at he m ay h a ve hit somebody w a n t ed to go out to a s s i st t h is p e r s o n. Mr B a r th and his w i fe tried to p e r s u a de h im not to go b ut a f t er a p p r o x i m a t e ly four to five m i n u t es he and Mr B a r th w e nt out and w h en he heard a v o i ce in t he d a r k n e ss c a l l i ng for w a t er and help Mr V o i g ts told him that he w as a f r a id w h en he approach him, he m ay be shot. T he m an a s s u r ed him that he has thrown his f i r e - a rm a w a y. Mr V o i g ts and Mr B a r t h, w ho had obtained f l a s h l i g h t s, a p p r o a c h ed t h is p e r s on and found him lying on his stomach, w o u n d ed h i gh up in his left leg w h i ch w as swollen almost d o u b le t he s i z e. T h is c o u ld be seen w h en Mr V o i g ts removed t he p e r s o n 's t r o u s e r s. T he p o l i ce arrived and investigated the s c e n e. Mr V o i g ts i d e n t i f i ed Exhibit 1 as his pistol and also t e s t i f i ed t h at he a t t e n d ed an identification p a r a d e, a p p r o x i m a t e ly f o ur d a ys a f t er the incident but w as so o v e r c o me by e m o t i on and shock that he could not look at the faces of the p e o p le and w e nt out w i t h o ut identifying a n y o n e. He later a t t e n d ed a n o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade w h e re he i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed number 3. He w as almost certain that accused n u m b er 5 w as also p r e s e nt during the incident but b e c a u se he w as not o ne h u n d r ed percent certain he did not identify him. Mr V o i g ts also identified accused number 4 as b e i ng o ne of his a s s a i l a n t s. A c c u s ed number 3 w a s, a c c o r d i ng to him, t he p e r s on w ho sat on his right hand d u r i ng the i n c i d e nt a nd he w as a l so the person w ho told t he o t h e rs to shoot Mr V o i g t s. Mr V o i g ts also d e s c r i b es the p l a ce w h e re t he i n c i d e nt t o ok place as being a p p r o x i m a t e ly u n d er a l i g ht w h i ch enabled him to see the faces of his a s s a i l a n t s. Mr V o i g ts w as m a i n ly cross-examined in respect of h is i d e n t i f i c a t i on of accused numbers 3 and 4 and t he fact t h at he w as not emotionally able to i d e n t i fy a n y o ne at t he first i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. M rs S i t ta Elke V o i g ts t e s t i f i ed that a f t er the b r a ai t h at e v e n i ng she w a n t ed to bath t he y o u n g e st child but t h e re w e re p r o b l e ms w i th the w a t er and her h u s b a nd w e nt to t he e n g i n e. She n o t i c ed the three p e r s o ns a p p r o a c h i ng and her h u s b a nd t a l k i ng to them. She said that her h u s b a nd r e t u r n ed and m e n t i o n ed to her that he did not t r u st them and t o ld h er w h e re t he semi-automatic r i f le w a s, standing next to t he t e l e p h o n e. He t o ok his p i s t ol and w e nt out a g a i n. H er h u s b a nd later returned and w as looking for the h a n d le of t he e n g i ne and told her that t he p e o p le seemed okay but t h at t h ey still need m o re tools to r e p a ir the t y r e. S he had a l r e a dy finished bathing her y o u n g e st child and h e a rd h er h u s b a nd shouting and c a l l i ng her n a me from o u t s i de w h e r e u p on she t o ok the rifle and went out of t he h o u s e. She saw t h at t h e ir y o u ng son w as still in t he c a r. She c o c k ed t he r i f le and shot over the heads of t wo p e o p le r u n n i ng a w ay in t he d i r e c t i on of the car w h e re her son w a s. She fired a n o t h er shot. She heard t wo shots w h i ch sounded that t h ey w e re c o m i ng from a h a n d g u n. Her h u s b a nd c a me running t o w a r ds h er and t o ld her that his p i s t ol w as t a k en a w a y. She h a n d ed h im t he r i f le and told him w h e re the t wo s u s p e c ts w e nt b e h i nd t he v e h i c l e. She ran into the h o u s e, tried to c a ll h er n e i g h b o u rs and t he p o l i ce and heard her h u s b a nd f i r i ng a n u m b er of s h o t s. He then e n t e r ed t he h o u s e. S he a l so t e s t i f i ed that she attended t wo i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es at O k a h a n d ja but could not identify a n y o n e. She w as not c r o s s- e x a m i n ed at a l l. Mr U we B a r th t e s t i f i ed that he heard shots that p a r t i c u l ar e v e n i ng c o m i ng from the d i r e c t i on of Mr V o i g t s' farm w h i ch is not far from his farm. He first heard r i f le shots and then t h e r e a f t er shots from a h a n d - g u n. He t h en h e a rd a number of shots coming from a s e m i - a u t o m a t ic r i f l e. He t o ok the t e l e p h o ne and heard that Mr V o i g ts w as b u sy t r y i ng to get hold of the p o l i ce t h r o u gh t he Post O f f i c e. Mr B a r th asked h im w h at h a p p e n ed and he w as t o ld that he w as b e en o v e r p o w e r ed by five or six p e r s o ns and w as asked to c o me and assist him. Mr B a r th t o ok his r i f le and extra b u l l e ts and w e nt o v er to Mr V o i g t s' h o u s e. On t he road from t he m a in road to Mr V o i g t s' h o u se he found a w h i te Isuzu b a k k ie and w h en he m et Mr and M rs V o i g ts o u t s i de the house he i n f o r m ed him of t h is and he w as a s k ed by Mr V o i g ts to shoot and d a m a ge the t y r es of t he v e h i c le and w as h a n d ed Mr V o i g t s' s h o t g un for that p u r p o s e. T h is is he did and he returned to Mr V o i g t s' h o u s e. He a l so d e s c r i b ed Mr V o i g t s' c o n d i t i o n. B o th of t he V o i g t s' had to be c a l m ed d o w n. Mr V o i g t s' T-shirt w as t o r n, he had a b ig s w e l l i ng on his forehead and his left c h e ek w as b l e e d i n g. He a l so n o t i c ed a r e v o l v er h o l s t er on Mr V o i g t s' s i d e. He and Mr V o i g ts left the h o u se a f t er they h e a rd somebody s h o u t i n g. They t o ok a strong f l a s h - l i g ht and found a p e r s on lying on his s t o m a c h. He c o u ld see that t h is p e r s on w as s e r i o u s ly injured w h en Mr V o i g ts p u l l ed his p a n ts d o w n. T he p o l i ce a r r i v ed and the incident w as r e l a t ed to t he p o l i c e. Mr B a r th w as r e q u e s t ed to a s s i st in b r i n g i ng t he Isuzu b a k k ie into Mr V o i g t s' yard, w h i ch he did by t o w i ng it w i th his L a n d c r u i s e r. He i d e n t i f i ed t h is b a k k ie from t he p h o t os in E x h i b it C. D r . S . D. H a n e k om of O k a h a n d ja t e s t i f i ed that he e x a m i n ed Mr H . G . V o i g ts on the 17th M a r ch 1991 at O k a h a n d ja S t a te H o s p i t a l. His g e n e r al p h y s i c al p o w e rs and state of h e a l th w e re n o r m a l. His T-shirt w as torn and there w as m ud on t he T - s h i r t. His left b u t t o ck and t he left side of his ribs w e re b r u i s ed and had a b r a s i o ns as w e l l. His left knee w as s w o l l en and t h e re w e re a b r a s i o ns over his left and right h a n d s, o v er t he k n u c k l e s. His ribs w e re very t e n d e r. T h e re w e re t wo s u p e r f i c i al c u t s, one on t he forehead and one on t he left side of the c h e e k. T h e se injuries w e re c a u s ed by t he u se of blunt o b j e c t s. Dr H a n e k om also i d e n t i f i ed t he i n j u r i es on t he p h o t o g r a p h s, c o n t a i n ed in E x h i b it C and in p a r t i c u l ar p h o t os 2,12 to 1 4. In respect of t he s w o l l en f o r e h e ad t he d o c t or suggested that q u i te a lot of force w as n e e d ed to c a u se that i n j u r y. C H A R G ES 1 0 , 1 1 , 12 A ND 1 3; T h e se c h a r g es r e l a te to the i n c i d e n ts that o c c u r r ed on t he 24th M a r ch 1991 on the farm K h a i r ob in the district of O u t jo and i n v o l v i ng Mr and M rs De L a n g e. C H A R GE 1 0: It is alleged that on or about t he 24th M a r ch 1991 and at or n e ar farm K H A I R OB in the district of O u t jo t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the intention of forcing her into s u b m i s s i o n, a s s a u l t e d / t h r e a t e n ed to assault P E T R O N E L LA DE L A N GE by h i t t i ng her against t he legs and t h r e a t e n i ng h er w i th a k n i fe and firearms and u n l a w f u l ly and w i th t he i n t e nt to s t e al t o ok from her 1 x 7,64 M a u s er rifle w i th t e l e s c o pe and 5 c a r t r i d g es (value R2 000,00) and a x 9 mm Colt p i s t ol w i th 45 c a r t r i d g es (value Rl 500,00) the p r o p e r ty of or in t he l a w f ul p o s s e s s i on of the said P E T R O N E L LA DE L A N G E. It is further alleged that aggravating c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in s e c t i on 1 of Act 51 of 1977 are p r e s e nt in t h at t he a c c u s ed a n / or an accomplice w a s / w e r e, b e f o r e, a f t er or d u r i ng t he c o m m i s s i on of the c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o n s, namely f i r e a r m s, sticks and a k n i f e. C H A R GE 11; It is alleged that on or about 24 M a r ch 1991 and at or n e ar farm KRAI ROB in the district of O U T JO t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and w i th the intention of forcing h im i n to s u b m i s s i o n, a s s a u l t e d / t h r e a t e n ed to assault S T E F A N US J A C O B US DE L A N GE by shooting him w i th a firearm and h i t t i ng h im w i th s t i c ks and u n l a w f u l ly and w i th intent to steal t o ok from h im 1 x R o l ex w a t ch (valued Rl 5 0 0 , 0 0 ), 1 x B a l o g r af b a l l p o i nt p en (value R 2 0 , 0 0) and 1 x knife (value R 2 0 , 0 0) t he p r o p e r ty of or in the lawful p o s s e s s i on of the said S T E F A N US J A C O B US DE L A N G E. It is further alleged that aggravating c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in section 1 of Act 51 of 1977 are p r e s e nt in t h at t he a c c u s ed a n d / or an accomplice w a s / w e r e, b e f o r e, a f t er or d u r i ng the commission of the c r i m e, in p o s s e s s i on of d a n g e r o us w e a p o n s, namely, a firearm and s t i c k s. C H A R GE 12; It is alleged that on or about 24 M a r ch 1991 a nd at or n e ar farm K H A I R OB in the district of O U T JO t he a c c u s ed u n l a w f u l ly and intentionally attempted to k i ll S T E F A N US J A C O B US DE LANGE by shooting him w i th a firearm in t he f a c e. C H A R GE 13; It is alleged that upon or about t he 2 4 th day of M a r ch 1991 and at or near farm K H A I R OB in t he d i s t r i ct of O U T JO t he accused did u n l a w f u l ly and i n t e n t i o n a l ly steal s t o c k, to wit two sheep w i th a v a l ue of R 3 0 0 . 00 t he p r o p e r ty o f / or in t he lawful p o s s e s s i on of STEFANUS J A C O B US DE L A N G E. Mr S t e f a n us Jacobus De L a n g e, the owner of t he farm K h a i r o b, w ho is 70 y e a rs of age testified that a c c u s ed n u m b er 7, to w h om he referred as M a r t i n, w as employed by h im on T h u r s d ay t he 7th of M a r c h, w h en he and his w i fe w e nt to O u t jo and w as a p p r o a c h ed by the said accused number 7 in front of t he P o st O f f i c e, asking for w o rk on a farm. He t o ok a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 to h is r e s i d e n ce in O u t jo w h e re he c o l l e c t ed his p e r s o n al b e l o n g i n gs and that a f t e r n o on they went to t he farm. T he f o l l o w i ng day accused number 7 did not do m u ch as he a s k ed p e r m i s s i on to clean the w o r k e r 's house w h i ch w as so d i r t y, a c c o r d i ng to accused number 7, that it looked as if p i gs s t a y ed in the h o u s e. T he next m o r n i n g, the S a t u r d a y, accused number 7 w o r k ed on t he farm and received his r a t i o ns for the w e e k. H o w e v e r, on t he next m o r n i ng when Mr De L a n ge c a l l ed him to a s s i st w i th t he s h e e p, accused number 7 w as g o n e. Mr De L a n ge further t e s t i f i ed that on the m o r n i ng of t he 2 4 th of M a r ch 1991 he and his w i fe w e nt to t he s h e e p - k r a al just a f t er eight w h e re his w i fe accused him of not l o o k i ng p r o p e r ly a f t er the sheep the p r e v i o us e v e n i ng as she saw o ne of t he sheep outside the k r a a l. On i n v e s t i g a t i on it w as found that there w e re w o ol on the u p p er part of t he fence and on a recount it w as e s t a b l i s h ed that one s h e ep w as in fact m i s s i n g. A f t er t h is w as d i s c o v e r ed Mr De L a n ge a l so n o t i c ed footprints of at least t h r ee p e r s o ns in t he v i c i n i ty of t he kraal w h i ch he e n c i r c l ed w i th his w a l k i n g - s t i ck to i d e n t i fy t h em later to the p o l i c e. W h i le he w as still b u sy letting the sheep out of the g a te for t he day he n o t i c ed a b l a ck m an on the s o u t h w e s t e rn side still o u t s i de t he n e a r e st fence and w h en he looked around he saw a n o t h er m an n e ar t he w a t e r - t r o u gh on the e a s t e rn s i d e. He w e nt to his w i fe to t e ll her to run home as he immediately t h o u g ht of w h at h a p p e n ed to other farmers like Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and Mr V o i g ts of w h o se attacks he had read a b o u t. He said t h at t he m an n e ar the w a t e r - t r o u gh had his hand in front of h is f a ce and he c o u ld not r e c o g n i se him. A f t er he t o ld his w i fe to run h o me he turned around, t he m an w h om he saw first on t he s o u t h w e s t e rn side w as a l r e a dy inside t he fence and a p p r o a c h i ng him. At that stage one of the De L a n g e 's d o g s, a R o t t w e i l e r / D o b e r m a nn c r o s s i n g, came r u n n i ng from t he s i de of t he house to the person w ho a p p r o a c h ed Mr De L a n g e. Mr De L a n ge said that nothing else w as spoken e x c e pt t h at he t o ld t he m an a p p r o a c h i ng him to lie d o wn and k e ep s t i ll and then t he dog w o u ld not a t t a ck him, as he k n ew t he d og w o u ld c e r t a i n ly a t t a ck him. T h is p e r s on ignored t h is i n s t r u c t i on and p u l l ed out a firearm w h i ch looked like a .22 t a r g et s h o o t i ng r e v o l v er w h i ch he p o i n t ed at t he d og and fired a shot in his d i r e c t i o n. The d og t h en stood s t i l l. Mr De L a n ge w ho w as not far from this p e r s on at t h at p o i nt in t i m e, t o ok his w a l k i n g - s t i ck by the lower p o i n t, a p p r o a c h ed the p e r s on and hit at him. He said he a i m ed at h is face and w a n t ed to k n o ck him o u t. It must be m e n t i o n ed that Mr De L a n ge at that stage w as r e c o v e r i ng from a k n ee o p e r a t i on and needed to w a lk w i th t he aid of a w a l k i n g- s t i c k. He is not c e r t a in w h e re he hit the p e r s on but t he w a l k i n g - s t i ck b r o ke and he w as in a f r a c t i on of a s e c o nd t h e r e a f t er shot in t he f a c e. He fell d o wn and d o e s n 't k n ow h ow long he w as u n c o n s c i o us but w h en he c a me to he w as hit w i th s o m e t h i ng from b e h i nd on the b a ck of his head. As he k n ew of only t h is p e r s on w h om he i d e n t i f i ed as a c c u s ed number 1 in his v i c i n i ty at that t i me he a s s u m ed that it w as a c c u s ed number 1 w ho had hit h im w i th t he r e v o l v e r. He t h en b e c a me u n c o n s c i o us and w h en he w o ke up e v e r y t h i ng w as s i l e n t. He t u r n ed himself over and n o t i c ed a p e r s on s i t t i ng a p p r o x i m a t e ly ten m e t r es from h im on t he w a t e r - t r o u g h. T h is p e r s on had a b e a r d. Mr De L a n ge p r e t e n d ed to be still u n c o n s c i o u s. A p e r s on a p p r o a c h ed him and p u l l ed h is R o l ex w a t ch form his left arm, t o ok his s p e c t a c l es from his shirt p o c k et and t h r ew it away and f u r t h er emptied all h is p o c k e t s. He later m i s s ed his p o c k e t - k n i f e. In the p r o c e ss he w as t u r n ed o n to his s t o m a c h. He h e a rd somebody c a l l i ng from t he h o u s e. T he p e r s on w ho s e a r c h ed him r e s p o n d ed in a l a n g u a ge that he c o u ld not u n d e r s t a nd and t h ey c o m m u n i c a t ed w i th e a ch o t h e r. A f t er a w h i le it w as silent and he d o es not k n ow w h e t h er he lost h is c o n s c i o u s n e ss a g a i n, but w h en he later looked a r o u nd h im he did not see anybody and c o u ld not get up and had to c r a wl to t he fence w h e re he p u l l ed himself up and w i th the aid of a p i e ce of iron w a l k ed to t he h o u s e. He did not find h is w i fe in t he h o u se and d i s c o v e r ed that his Colt p i s t ol w i th l e a t h er h o l s t er and belt in w h i ch there w e re 45 r o u n ds of a m m u n i t i o n, w e re m i s s i ng as w e ll as his 7.64 r i f l e. A f t er t a k i ng the d u p l i c a te keys of his v e h i c le he d r o ve in t he d i r e c t i on of his n e i g h b o u r 's farm. On t he w ay he saw h is w i fe t r y i ng to hide w h en he a p p r o a c h ed and c a l l i ng "please leave me a l o n e ". She did not r e c o g n i se him and he c a l m ed her d o wn and got her into the c a r. He d r o ve up to t he h o m e s t e ad of the n e i g h b o u rs from w h e re he w as t a k en by a m b u l a n ce to O u t jo and from there to M e d i c i ty H o s p i t al in W i n d h o e k. His w i fe d i s c o v e r ed in hospital that his body w as b l ue from his w a i st up to his neck w h i ch must h a ve b e en c a u s ed by a s s a u l t s. He himself did not feel any p a in b e c a u se he w as u n d er t r e a t m e nt w i th a n a e s t h e t i c s. As a r e s u lt of the i n j u r i es inflicted upon Mr De L a n ge t he left side of his face is p e r m a n e n t ly d a m a g e d. He c a n n ot shut h is left eye and the w h o le left side of his face is p a r t i a l ly p a r a l y s e d. T h is w as clearly v i s i b le to the C o u rt w h en Mr De L a n ge t o ok off his glasses that t he w h o le left side of h is face from the eye w as d r o o p i ng d o w n w a r ds and t h at t he eye w as nearly c l o s e d. He still has pain in h is s h o u l d e rs and e x p e r i e n c es p r o b l e ms w i th his left k n ee and h is e l b o w. He also e x p e r i e n c es d i f f i c u l ty w i th h e a r i ng a f t er t he incident and his sense of b a l a n ce has b e en i m p a i r e d. Mr De L a n ge i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b it 14 and Exhibit 12 as b e i ng t he r e v o l v er and rifle that w e re taken from his h o u se w h i ch e x h i b i ts w e re h a n d ed into C o u r t. The t e l e s c o pe of t he r i f le w as d a m a g ed w h en it w as returned to him. T he r i f le w i th t e l e s c o p e 's v a l ue w as given by Mr De Lange as R2 000 and t h at of t he Colt p i s t ol Rl 500 and the w a t ch that w as t a k en from h is arm has the similar v a l u e. His b a l l p o i nt p en and p o c k e t - k n i fe that he lost w e re evaluated by h im at R 20 e a c h. T he w a l k i n g - s t i ck w as handed into Court as E x h i b it 15 and it w as c l e ar that he w as b r o k en a p p r o x i m a t e ly 7 to 8 c e n t i m e t r es from t he h a n d l e. A further piece of iron t h at w as p r e s u m a b ly used in the attack w as handed in a l s o. An o r yx h o rn w i th a sharpened point w as handed in and d e s c r i b ed by Mr De L a n ge as an object that he noticed a f t er a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 had left his s e r v i c e. C r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on of Mr De Lange w as m a i n ly d i r e c t ed at w h at o c c u r r ed w h en he w as a p p r o a c h ed by accused numbers 1,6 and 7 w ho a d m i t t ed at the stage of p l e a d i ng that t h ey w e re p r e s e nt on t he farm as w e ll as that accused n u m b er 1 did admit t h at he shot at Mr De Lange in s e l f - d e f e n c e. A c c u s ed n u m b er 7 alleged in statements m a de by c o u n s el t h at he w as in fact employed by Mr De Lange from J a n u a ry to A p r il 1990 and b e c a u se he w as never paid d e s p i te p r o m i s es he left Mr De L a n g e 's employ. He approached him again on t he 7th of M a r ch 1991 to repeat his request for his salary t h at w as not p a id to h im and w as then taken w i th a further p r o m i se by Mr De L a n ge b a ck to t he farm. W h en he d i s c o v e r ed that n o t h i ng w o u ld c o me from t h is p r o m i se to pay his o u t s t a n d i ng s a l a r y, he left on the Sunday m o r n i ng and r e t u r n ed w i th t wo f r i e n ds on t he m o r n i ng of the 24th of M a r ch 1991 to a sk for h is o u t s t a n d i ng salary. It w as also put to Mr De L a n ge t h at s i n ce A p r il 1990 until the 7th of M a r ch 1991 the p o l i ce in fact c a l l ed Mr De Lange on several o c c a s i o ns to e n q u i re in r e s p e ct of this outstanding salary. Mr De L a n ge a d a m a n t ly d e n i ed all these allegations and said that he e v er e m p l o y ed a c c u s ed number 7 in the past and saw him only for t he f i r st t i me on the 7th March 1991 w h en he employed him. He a l so d e n i ed that he owes accused number 7 a n y t h i n g. T he v e r s i on of the accused put to Mr De L a n ge in r e s p e ct of w h at o c c u r r ed w h en they approached him and a f t e r w a r d s, w h i ch he d e n i e d, w as t he following: The t h r ee a c c u s ed w e nt to t he h o m e s t e ad and according to accused number 7 w a i t ed o u t s i de b e c a u se they w e re afraid of the d o gs u n t il t he De L a n g e 's c a me out of the house and w e re on t h e ir w ay to t he k r a a l. T h ey t h en p e a c e f u l ly approached Mr De L a n ge and a c c o r d i ng to A c c u s ed number 1 b o th the dogs started c h a r g i ng at t h e m. Mr De L a n ge then said "lie down y o ur k a f f i r s, w h at do y ou w a nt on my farm", he also said, "sa, c a t ch him, c a t ch h i m ". A c c u s ed number 1 then told him that they c a me in p e a ce a nd w a n t ed to talk to him and that he should stop h is d o g s. Mr De L a n ge replied by saying, "you k a f f i rs don't p a ss t h r o u gh my farm" and at t he same time e n c o u r a g ed the d o gs by s a y i n g, "sa, c a t ch him". Accused number 1 said he t h en p i c k ed up s t o n es to defend himself against the d o g s. Mr De L a n ge t h en a p p r o a c h ed accused number 1 and hit him w i th t he w a l k i n g- s t i ck o v er his n o s e. This caused b l e e d i ng and p a i n. At t h at stage he pulled out his r e v o l v er and shot t wo s h o ts b e t w e en the d o gs to frighten them a w a y. He t h en w a n t ed to shoot next to Mr De L a n ge to frighten h im and d e f e nd h i m s e lf b e f o re he is hit again but b e c a u se Mr De L a n ge m u st h a ve m o v ed t he shot hit Mr De L a n ge in the c h e e k. It w as f u r t h er put t h at accused number 1 w i ll say that he had no i n t e n t i on to shoot Mr De L a n ge or the d o g s. A f t er Mr De Lange fell down he shouted to his w i f e, "run to t he h o u se and fetch the gun and shoot t he k a f f i r s ". M rs De L a n ge then responded that they should p l e a se not h a rm t h em as she does not have any p r o b l e ms w i th him, "it is o n ly t he o u b a as that has p r o b l e ms b e c a u se he d i s l i k es b l a ck p e o p le and he often killed b l a ck p e o p le and b u r i ed t h em on t he farm". A c c u s ed number 6 then asked her w h e re t he g u ns t h at t he o u b a as used to kill t he b l a ck p e o p le w i th w e r e, w h e r e u p on M rs De L a n ge replied that it is in t he house and t h at he should come along and she w i ll h a nd it o v er to him. A c c o r d i ng to accused number 1, a c c u s ed number 6 a c c o m p a n i ed M rs De L a n ge to the house and he and a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 s t a y ed b e h i n d. It w as further put on behalf of a c c u s ed number 1 t h at a c c u s ed number 6 returned w i th t wo g u ns and a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 t h en said that he w i ll take the t wo g u ns in v i ew of t he n o n - p a y m e nt of his salary and sell t h e m. T h ey t h en l e f t. A c c u s ed number 1 d e n i es that he t o ok a n y t h i ng from Mr De L a n ge or stole the sheep. Mr De L a n ge denied all these s t a t e m e n t s. On b e h a lf of accused numbers 6 and 7 it w as a l so put to Mr De L a n ge that t h ey a p p r o a c h ed him p e a c e f u l ly in o r d er to o b t a in accused number 7' s o u t s t a n d i ng salary on the 24th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. T h ey also r e p e a t ed the statements m a de on b e h a lf of a c c u s ed number 1 of the r e f e r e n ce to them and further put it to Mr De L a n ge that they w e re w i th accused number 1 but a l i t t le bit b e h i nd him. A p p a r e n t ly they did not see h ow t he shooting incident exactly o c c u r r ed and a p p r o a c h ed M rs De L a n ge as a result of her i n v i t a t i on a f t er t he a l l e g ed a l l e g a t i on that she w i ll hand the rifles o v e r. It w as put to Mr De L a n ge that accused number 7 in fact t o ok t he r i f l es for t wo r e a s o ns n a m e l y, (1) That they w o u ld not be shot at w h en t h ey leave and (2) as a sort of security for h is o u t s t a n d i ng p a y m e n t. They d e n i ed that they t o ok t he r i f l es t h e m s e l v es and that it w as handed over to t h em by M rs De L a n ge v o l u n t a r i l y. M rs P e t r o n e l la A l e t ta de L a n ge t e s t i f i ed and a l so d e n i ed that a c c u s ed number 7 e i t h er w o r k ed on the farm p r e v i o u s ly p r i or to t he 7th M a r ch 1991 or that her h u s b a nd owed h im a ny s a l a r y. She c o n f i r m ed her h u s b a n d 's e v i d e n ce that he a p p r o a c h ed t h em on t he 7th M a r ch 1991 in front of the P o st O f f i ce and asked for w o rk and that he had left t h e ir e m p l oy on S u n d ay the 10th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. She also c o n f i r m ed that t h ey w e nt to t he s h e e p - k r a al the m o r n i ng of t he 24th M a r ch 1991 and h ow it w as d i s c o v e r ed that one sheep w as m i s s i n g. S he said t h at she saw t h r ee m en r u n n i ng from the b u s h es in t he d i r e c t i on of her h u s b a n d. She w as so shocked that she c o u ld not say or do a n y t h i n g. At that t i me her h u s b a nd w as w a l k i ng in front of t he sheep t o w a r ds the g a te to open it for t he s h e ep and she w as some d i s t a n ce away. Her h u s b a nd c a me w a l k i ng t o w a r ds her and indicated to her to run to t he h o u se and w h i le she w as r u n n i ng she heard her h u s b a nd s a y i n g, "if t he dog storms at y ou fall down and lie s t i ll and t he d og w i ll not b i te y o u ." She then saw accused n u m b er 1 p u l l i ng out a r e v o l v er and shooting at the d o g, w h e r e u p on she c a l l e d, "don't kill my d o g ". She did not r e c o g n i se a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 but w h en she heard another shot and saw h er h u s b a nd f a l l i ng d o w n, accused No 6 w as suddenly at her s i de at t he small g a te w h e re he t o ok her by the arm and said, "I w a nt y o ur m o n ey and y o ur r i f l e s ". She w as then t a k en to t he h o u se and on t he w ay she felt somebody b e a t i ng her on her l o w er legs from b e h i n d. She assumed it w as accused n u m b er 1 but did not see his f a c e. She did not see w i th w h at he hit h er but a s s u m ed that it w as something like a s t i c k. S he said that if it had been accused number 7 she w o u ld h a ve r e c o g n i s ed him. She w as taken into the house and to t he b e d r o om w h e re she showed him her h u s b a n d 's r i f l e. He t o ok it and w h en he t u r n ed around he saw her h u s b a n d 's r e v o l v er in t he h o l s t er and a t t a c h ed to a leather belt on the c u p b o a r d, w h i ch he a l so t o o k. They returned to the k i t c h en w h e re t h ey found a c c u s ed number 1 w i p i ng blood from his face w i th a k i t c h en t o w e l. A c c u s ed n u m b er 6 t o ok the rifle and r e v o l v e r, ran out of t he h o u se t o w a r ds t he kraal w h i le accused number 1 t o ok h er to t he s t o ep w h e re he kept p o i n t i ng the p i s t o l, as he d id in t he k i t c h e n, in her d i r e c t i on and told her that t h ey a re from t he p o l i c e. At that t i me t he t e l e p h o ne rang and a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 e n q u i r ed w h e re it w a s. She indicated that it w as i n s i de t he h o u se and w h en he w e nt in she ran out of t he h o u se in the o p p o s i te d i r e c t i on of the k r a a l, t h r o u gh t he b u s h es t o w a r ds t h e ir n e i g h b o u r 's h o u s e. On the w ay a v e h i c le a p p r o a c h ed her and she tried to h i d e. She t h en saw it w as her n e i g h b o u r. She asked him to call t he p o l i ce a nd b e c a u se t he dog w h i ch w as running w i th her he did not w a nt to get into t he v e h i c l e, she remained w a l k i ng w h i le he d r o ve a w a y. It w as at that stage that her husband, w h om she d id not r e c o g n i se at first, found her and t o ok her to t he n e i g h b o u r 's h o u s e. C r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on w as m a i n ly c o n c e n t r a t ed on the d i f f e r e nt v e r s i o ns of M rs De Lange and her husband of h ow m a ny p e o p le a p p r o a c h ed t h e m, the w ay and the d i r e c t i on from w h i ch t h ey w e re a p p r o a c h e d. She explained it by saying that she w as some d i s t a n ce from her husband and that she d o es not k n ow e x a c t ly w h en he saw these a s s a i l a n t s. She also c o n c e d ed t h at she and h er husband talked about this d i f f e r e n ce and t h at she k n ew that he saw only two p e o p le and she saw t h r e e, as he t o ld her that in h o s p i t a l. The same s t a t e m e n ts w e re m a de on b e h a lf of accused number 1 to M rs De L a n ge as had b e en m a de to h er husband. She also denied it. N e a r ly a ll t he s t a t e m e n ts m a de on behalf of accused numbers 6 a nd 7 w e re a l so m a de on behalf of them w h i ch M rs De L a n ge a l so d e n i e d. Dr W . E . B i r k e n s t o ck testified that on the 25th M a r ch 1991 he e x a m i n ed Mr De L a n ge at M e d i c i ty H o s p i t a l, W i n d h o ek and found h im in a state of shock, severely b r u i s ed a b o ut t he face w i th bleeding u n d er the skin and further s e v e re b r u i s i ng over the neck, shoulders and b a c k, as w e ll as t he b a ck of t he head. His left leg had a c o n t u s i on just b e l ow t he k n ee on the lateral side and t h e re w as a l a c e r a t i on of h is right ear w h i ch w as very d e ep and a f u r t h er l a c e r a t i on a c r o ss t he dorsum of his right hand and left e l b o w. H o w e v e r, t he most severe injury w as a g u n - s h ot w o u nd w h i ch e n t e r ed his left cheek just lateral to t he n o se and e x i t ed b e h i nd the left ear. It w as also found on i n v e s t i g a t i on that t h e re w as a compound fracture of t he m a x i l l a. T he left j a w b o ne w as broken just in front of t he ear and f o r e i gn b o d i e s, apparently parts of the b u l l e t, w e re s c a t t e r ed w i t h in his f a c e. Subsequent e x a m i n a t i on p r o v ed t h at t h e re w as a c t u al destruction of the nerve in t he left side of t he f a c e. A c c o r d i ng to the d o c t o r, the injury w as c a u s ed by a s m a l l i sh c a l i b re bullet. The doctor d e s c r i b ed t he i n j u r i es and in p a r t i c u l ar the gun-shot w o u nd as v e ry s e r i o us and had t he t r a ck of the bullet diverted slightly it w o u ld h a ve b e en f a t a l. The laceration of the right ear w as a s e p a r a te injury from the gun-shot w o u nd and w as c a u s ed by a s h a rp o b j e ct as w e ll as that on the right hand and t he r i g ht e l b o w. T h e se w e re deep w o u n d s. Mr De L a n ge w as h o s p i t a l i s ed u n t il t he 8th of A p r i l, after w h i ch t he w o u n ds w e re r e a s o n a b ly healed. The injury to the left side of t he f a ce c a u s ed p e r m a n e nt damage and he is u n a b le to o p en or c l o se his left e y e. The fibula w h i ch had a c r a c k ed f r a c t u re b e l ow t he left k n ee w as also c a u s ed by blunt force w i th s o m e t h i ng like a s t i c k. The doctor further t e s t i f i ed t h at h is i m p r e s s i on w as that the b r u i s es on the lower n e c k, s h o u l d e rs and k n ee w e re caused by v a r i o us b l o ws w i th a b l u nt i n s t r u m e nt in the r e g i on of t he n e ck and s h o u l d er a r e a, w h i le t he one on the knee a p p e a r ed to have b e en c a u s ed by one b l o w. W a r r a nt O f f i c er A . J. B l a a uw t e s t i f i ed that he w as s t a t i o n ed at W i n d h o ek attached to the F i n g e r p r i nt O f f i ce and t h at he t o ok t he p h o t os that form part of E x h i b it E E. T h e se p h o t os w e re t a k en on the farm of Mr De L a n ge in the O u t jo d i s t r i c t. He also c o m p i l ed a key to t he p h o t os and e x p l a i n ed t he p h o t os and the key in e v i d e n c e. T he p h o t os n u m b e r ed 9 to 17 w e re not t a k en by him but by S e r g e a nt V an L i ll w ho s u b s e q u e n t ly left the N a m i b i an P o l i ce F o r ce w h i ch p h o t os are also i n c l u d ed in Exhibit E E. T he p o i n ts shown on t he p h o t os t a k en by W a r r a nt O f f i c er B l a a uw w e re i n d i c a t ed to h im by Mr De L a n ge on the 27th N o v e m b er 1 9 9 1, the d a te w h en t he p h o t os w e re t a k e n. C e r t a in o t h er p o i n t s, namely G, N, 0 and T w e re i n d i c a t ed by M rs De Lange on the same d a te to W a r r a nt O f f i c er B l a a u w. T h is c o n c l u d es the e v i d e n ce in respect of the d i f f e r e nt i n c i d e n ts by t he c l a i m a n ts and t he d o c t o r 's in r e s p e ct of t he first 13 c h a r g e s. I shall now deal w i th t he o t h er e v i d e n ce p r e s e n t ed by the S t a t e. Mr M a t h i as M a u l t i u s, a t e a c h er from O t j i w a r o n g o, t e s t i f i ed that P r i m us A n g u l a, w ho w as o r i g i n a l ly accused n u m b er 2, but w ho e s c a p ed b e f o re t h is t r i al started, a p p r o a c h ed h im on t he 28th M a r ch 1991, looking for a lift to O s h a k a t i. He o b t a i n ed a lift w i th Mr M a u l t i u s' b r o t h e r, S a g a r ia K a t u pa and left a p i s t ol for s a f e k e e p i ng w i th Mr M a u l t i u s. On the 29th M a r ch 1991 W a r r a n t - O f f i c er N g o s hi c o l l e c t ed t h is p i s t ol from Mr M a u l t i us w h i ch w as h a n d ed in as E x h i b it 1 t o g e t h er w i th 12 c a r t r i d g e s. T h is p i s t o l, E x h i b it 1, w i th the same number w as later i d e n t i f i ed by Mr G u n n ar V o i g ts as b e i ng h is p i s t ol w h i ch w as t a k en away from him w h en he w as a s s a u l t ed on h is farm on t he 16th M a r ch 1991 and w h i ch p i s t ol w as a l so t he subject m a t t er of c h a r ge 8. C o n s t a b le C o r n e l i us H i n d j ou w as on d u ty at the O t j i w a r o n go P o l i ce S t a t i on on t he 25th M ay 1991 as c h a r ge o f f i ce s e r g e a n t. He c a me on d u ty at half past one u n t il half past n i n e. He w as r e l i e v ed by C o n s t a b le S e v e r u s. At that t i me t h e re w e re a number of p e r s o ns held in c u s t o dy in t he p o l i ce c e l l s. T h is included accused number 1. He also i d e n t i f i ed a w a r r a nt of d e t e n t i on h a n d ed in as E x h i b it V in r e s p e ct of a c c u s ed n u m b er 1. A c c o r d i ng to n o r m al p r o c e d u re w h en a n o t h er p e r s on t a k es o v er as c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant t he p e r s o ns held in c u s t o dy must also to be c o u n t e d, h a n d ed over and t h is is t h en r e c o r d e d. C o n s t a b le H i n d j ou and C o n s t a b le S e v e r us w e nt to t he c e l ls and to the third cell w h i ch w as d i v i d ed in t wo p a r ts w i th t h r ee p e o p le sleeping in t he front p a r t. C o n stable S e v e r us entered the c e ll w i th C o n s t a b le H i n d j ou r e m a i n i ng at t he d o o r. T wo p r i s o n e r s, i n c l u d i ng a c c u s ed number 1 ran o u t. C o n s t a b le H i n d j ou m a n a g ed to get hold of t he o t h er p e r s on w h i ch he i d e n t i f i ed as P r i m us A n g u l a, a c c u s ed number 2, w ho is not p r e s e nt at t h is h e a r i ng and he forced h im b a ck into the c e l l. T h ey locked the d o or and p u r s u ed a c c u s ed number 1, w ho jumped over a w a ll and e s c a p e d. C o n s t a b le Josef S e v e r us t e s t i f i ed that he had to t a ke o v er as c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant on the 25th May 1991 from C o n s t a b le H i n d j ou and that as part of t he p r o c e d u re they had to c o u nt t he p r i s o n e r s. He c o n f i r m ed C o n s t a b le H i n d j o u "s e v i d e n ce that in t he third cell w h i le he w as c o u n t i ng t he p r i s o n e rs and w a l k i ng t o w a r ds t he d o or d i v i d i ng the t wo p a r ts of t he c e l l, t wo p r i s o n e rs ran o u t. C o n s t a b le H i n d j ou m a n a g ed to a p p r e h e nd o n e, namely Primus A n g u l a, locked h im up in t he c e ll and they p u r s u ed accused number 1 w ho m a n a g ed to e s c a pe by c l i m b i ng o v er t he w a l l. T h e se t wo w i t n e s s es t e s t i f i ed in respect of c h a r ge 15, n a m e ly e s c a pe from lawful c u s t o dy and i n v o l v i ng only accused n u m b er 1. C o n s t a b le S e v e r us also t e s t i f i ed that he w as on d u ty on t he 27th M a r ch 1991 at the p o l i ce station in O t j i w a r o n go w h en c e r t a in e x h i b i ts w e re handed in and e n t e r ed i n to t he exhibit b o o k, Pol 7. T h e se w e a p o ns w e re handed in by C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo and S e r g e a nt S h i t o l e po and w e re a 7.9 M a u s er r i f le N o. 38090 w i th a t e l e s c o pe as w e ll as a L i ma 9 mm p i s t ol w i th number 7 0 L / 1 1 2 70 t o g e t h er w i th 8 rounds of a m m u n i t i o n. C o n s t a b le S e v e r us also i d e n t i f i ed t h e se t wo w e a p o ns as b e i ng r e s p e c t i v e ly Exhibit N o s. 2 and 3 w h i ch w e re i n d i c a t ed on a c o py of t he P o l. 7 r e g i s t er and h a n d ed in as E x h i b it W. Mr J . H . K r i el i d e n t i f i ed these t wo w e a p o ns as b e i ng t h o se t h at w e re stolen from h im on the 9th M a r ch 1991 at his h o u se in O t j i w a r o n go i n v o l v i ng c h a r ge 6. W a r r a nt O f f i c er Deon M a r a is w ho w as at that time a t t a c h ed to t he i n v e s t i g a t i on branch of the N a m i b i an P o l i ce at O t j i w a r o n g o, t e s t i f i ed in respect of c h a r g es 10 to 13 and 14 as w e ll as c h a r g es 6 and 7. He w as on duty on t he 2 7 th M a r ch 1991 and accompanied a number of p o l i ce o f f i c e rs to a c e r t a in h o u se 0/94 in the O r w e t o v e ni t o w n s h i p. It w as in t he e a r ly e v e n i n g. They found accused number 1 and a c c u s ed n u m b er 6 in t he h o u s e. A l t h o u gh W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is w as not in c h a r ge of the i n v e s t i g a t i on he assisted in t he s e a r ch of t he h o u se and in p a r t i c u l ar t he p r o p e r ty of a c c u s ed n u m b er 1. A f t er nothing w as found in t he house t he o u t s i de r o om or t o i l et as it became k n o wn later, w as s e a r c h ed a f t er t he c o n t e n ts of the toilet w e re t a k en o u t s i d e. A r i f l e, w r a p p ed in d a rk b r o wn t r o u s e rs and a piece of p l a s t ic w as found i n s i de t h is t o i l e t. T he p e r s o ns in t he h o u se w e re a s k ed to t a ke t h e ir own p e r s o n al b e l o n g i n gs and k e ep t h at w i th t h e m. T he inhabitants of t he house w e re t h en t a k en to t he p o l i ce s t a t i o n. A c c o r d i ng to W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is in e v i d e n ce e l i c i t ed by c o u n s el in c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 w e re first t a k en to t he office of I n s p e c t or V i s s er w h e re t h e ir personal b e l o n g i n gs and the e x h i b i ts w e re sorted o u t. W a r r a nt Officer M a r a is found during t he s e a r ch of a c c u s ed number 1' s b e l o n g i n gs in a b l a ck i m i t a t i on l e a t h er bag a document w h i ch referred to him by n a m e. In t h is bag w e re also 6 rounds of 12 b o re shotgun c a r t r i d g es w h i ch w e re i d e n t i f i ed by W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is and h a n d ed i n. T h e se c a r t r i d g es are the subject m a t t er of c h a r ge 1 4. He w as not involved in the search of the o t h er a c c u s e d s' b e l o n g i n g s. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is w as asked by c o u n s el for a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 w h e t h er accused number 1 m a de any s t a t e m e nt to h im and he then c o n f i r m ed that accused n u m b er 1 i d e n t i f i ed the brown trousers in w h i ch the r i f l e, w h i ch w as found in the outside room, had b e en w r a p p e d, as h is p r o p e r t y. The accused w e re then b o o k ed and t he c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant had to enter t h e ir b e l o n g i n gs i n to t he P o l. 7 as w e ll as another police r e g i s t er in respect of p e r s o n al i t e ms t h at are not relevant to the i n v e s t i g a t i on and not e x p e c t ed to b e c o me e x h i b i t s. T h e se items are t h en n o r m a l ly l o c k ed into a room for that p u r p o se and the k e ys k e pt by t he o f f i c e r - i n - c h a r ge of the p o l i ce s t a t i o n. A c c o r d i ng to Warrant Officer M a r a i s, accused n u m b e rs 1 and 6 w e re removed for further i n v e s t i g a t i on in r e s p e ct of a n o t h er incident to Outjo Police S t a t i o n. On t he 26th A p r il 1991 a further search of t he o u t s i de r o om or t o i l et w as conducted after Sergeant H e r r i d ge of t he O u t jo P o l i ce c o n t a c t ed Warrant O f f i c er M a r a is and i n f o r m ed h im that a c c u s ed number 1 w a n t ed to point out a f u r t h er f i r e - a rm but w o u ld do so only at a t i me w h en nobody e l se w o u ld see t h is and only in the p r e s e n ce of S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is w as i n f o r m ed t h at t he fire-arm to be pointed out w as o ne w i th w h i ch a c c u s ed number 1 shot Mr De L a n ge on t he farm K h a i r o b. It w as t h en arranged by Sergeant H e r r i d ge t h at he w o u ld a r r i ve w i th accused number 1 at O t j i w a r o n go at a q u a r t er to six on t he m o r n i ng of the 26th A p r il 1991, w h i ch he d i d. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s, Sergeant H e r r i d ge and an i n t e r p r e t er t h en w e nt to the same h o u s e, namely house N o. 0/94 in O r w e t o v e n i, w h e re the w e a p on w as r e c o v e r ed in t he t o i l e t. T h ey a p p r o a c h ed the house q u i e t ly and w e nt d i r e c t ly to t he t o i l et w h e re accused number 1 i n d i c a t ed that t he p i s t ol w as h i d d en inside a m o t or v e h i c le t y r e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is found a t y r e, brought it o u t s i de the room, but c o u ld not find anything i n s i d e, w h e r e u p on a c c u s ed number 1 p e r s i s t ed that it must be inside a t y r e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is a g a in searched the room, found a n o t h er t y re and felt s o m e t h i ng i n s i de the t y r e. This w as a .38 S p e c i al r e v o l v er w r a p p ed in a red and p u r p le plastic b a g. T h e re w e re a l so 15 .38 s p e c i al c a r t r i d g es inside t he p l a s t ic b a g. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is i d e n t i f i ed this w e a p on as E x h i b it 3 by its e n g r a v ed number w h i ch c o r r e s p o n d ed w i th t he number on E x h i b it 3 and w h i ch w as handed in e a r l i er and i d e n t i f i ed by Mr K r i el in r e s p e ct of c h a r ge 6. It w as heavily disputed by a c c u s ed number 1 t h r o u gh h is c o u n s e l, Mr G r o b l e r, that he ever p o i n t ed out such a w e a p on or e v en went to O t j i w a r o n go from O u t jo to p o i nt a w e a p on out on that p a r t i c u l ar day. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s, h o w e v e r, t e s t i f i ed that t h is w e a p o n, E x h i b it 3, w as in fact immediately e n t e r ed on a r r i v al at t he p o l i ce station at O t j i w a r o n go in t he P o l .7 r e g i s t er and Mr S m a l l, on behalf of the S t a t e, p r o v i d ed c o u n s el w i th c o p i es of t he specific page of that r e g i s t e r, w h i ch w as h a n d ed in as E x h i b it CC u n d er i n s c r i p t i on N o . 78 on t he 2 6 th A p r il 1991 and w h e re r e f e r e n ce to the c a se b o ok e n t ry N o . 2 0 4 4 / 91 a l so a p p e a r s. In c o l u mn 2 the O u t jo M R - n u m b er w h i ch W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is said he o b t a i n ed from S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge w as e n t e r ed and in c o l u mn 3 the p a r t i c u l a rs of t he .38 S p e c i al r e v o l v er w i th its c o r r e s p o n d i ng n u m b e r. It w as a l so i n d i c a t ed in c o l u mn 5 that the w e a p on w as in fact found in a r o om at a house in O r w e t o v e ni t o w n s h i p. In E x h i b it B B, w h i ch is a c o py of the o c c u r r e n ce b o ok u n d er t he same number 2 0 4 4 / 9 1, a p p e a rs an i n s c r i p t i on m a de by t he c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant that W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is h a n d ed t h is w e a p on in on the 26th A p r il 1991 to t he c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant and the t i me i n d i c a t ed w as 6.15. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is a l so t e s t i f i ed that he e s t a b l i s h ed from t he F i r e - a rm o f f i ce in W i n d h o ek that t h is w e a p on b e l o n g ed to Mr K r i e l, w h i ch i n f o r m a t i on w as a l so e n t e r ed into t he P o l . 7. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is a l so t e s t i f i ed about four i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es w h e re he acted as a p h o t o g r a p h e r. T h e se p a r a d es involved r e s p e c t i v e ly Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg and Mr and M rs K r i e l. In r e s p e ct t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de a t t e n d ed by Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g, W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is d e s c r i b ed the p r o c e e d i n g s. T he w i t n e ss e n t e r ed t he room and t he p r o c e d u re w as e x p l a i n ed to h im by I n s p e c t or K o t z e, w ho w as in c h a r ge of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de and w ho sat at a t a b le o p p o s i te t he line of p e r s o n s. Only t he p r o c e d u re had b e en e x p l a i n ed to t he w i t n e s s, w h e r e a f t er Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg p o i n t ed out a c c u s ed number 1 and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is t h en t o ok a p h o t o g r a p h. E x h i b it Y, t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form, in r e s p e ct of b o th Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg i n d i c a t ed w ho w as in c h a r ge of t he p a r a d e, t he p h o t o g r a p h e r 's n a me and t he r e s p e c t i ve p o l i ce o f f i c e rs w ho w e re also involved in k e e p i ng t he w i t n e s s es apart and taking them separately into t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade room. The names of the p e r s o ns i n c l u d ed in the p a r a d e, as w e ll as t h e ir p o s i t i o ns a re i n d i c a t e d. It is also a p p a r e nt from Exhibit Y that t he p o s i t i o ns of the persons and in p a r t i c u l ar t he a c c u s ed w e re c h a n g ed b e t w e en the two i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es i n v o l v i ng t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g s. T h is i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as held on the 2nd A p r il 1991 and t he t i m es that the d i f f e r e nt w i t n e s s es e n t e r ed a re a l so i n d i c a t ed on t he document Exhibit Y. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg also pointed out a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 and a p h o t o g r a ph w as taken t h e r e o f. She used a r u l er as she did not w a nt to touch the accused w i th her hand. In r e s p e ct of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade i n v o l v i ng Mr and M rs K r i e l, W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is also acted as p h o t o g r a p h er and E x h i b it Z w as handed in as the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form w i th all t he relevant i n f o r m a t i on in r e s p e ct of t h at i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e, i n d i c a t i ng Mr Kriel as first w i t n e ss and M rs K r i el as second w i t n e s s. The order of t he p e r s o ns in t he line up w e re also c h a n g ed b e t w e en t h e se t wo p a r a d es i n v o l v i ng t he K r i e l s. Mr K r i el indicated a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 and M rs Kriel could not identify a n y o n e. Mr S m a ll h a n d ed in a p h o to as Exhibit AA w h i ch w as t a k en by W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is in t he c o u r se of an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de i n v o l v i ng a c e r t a in Mr Schickerling as c o m p l a i n a nt and w h i ch had nothing to do w i th this c a s e. The r e a s on for h a n d i ng it in w as to indicate that part of t h is p h o t o g r a ph w as e x p o s ed to light. T h i s, according to W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s, d e s t r o y ed the photos after Exhibit AA on t he film, w h i ch w e re taken in respect of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es i n v o l v i ng t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r gs and the K r i e ls and for t h at r e a s on no p h o t os in respect of those i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es are a v a i l a b l e. T wo f e m a le p o l i ce o f f i c e r s, namely Sergeant J . J . H . O b e r h o l z er and W a r r a nt O f f i c er A . D a v i ds testified b r i e f ly in r e s p e ct of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es involving Mrs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and M rs K r i el r e s p e c t i v e l y. Sergeant O b e r h o l z e r, w ho is a f i n a n c i al c l e rk at the police station in O t j i w a r o n g o, w as o r d e r ed by I n s p e c t or K o t ze to keep M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w i th h er in her office and w h en she r e c e i v ed the m e s s a ge she t o ok M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg to the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de r o om w h e re she knocked on the door, M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg e n t e r ed and she w a i t ed o u t s i de for her u n t il she r e - a p p e a r ed w h e r e a f t er then t o ok her b a ck to her o f f i c e. S he d id n ot see a n y b o dy e l s e, including Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg d u r i ng t h at t i m e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er Davids fulfilled the same d u ty in r e s p e ct of M rs K r i el and also c o n f i r m ed that M rs K r i el did not t a lk to or see a n y b o dy during the time that she w as in t he c a re of W a r r a nt O f f i c er D a v i d s. No c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on w as d i r e c t ed at a ny of t h e se t wo p o l i ce o f f i c e r s. C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo of the N a m i b i an P o l i ce and s t a t i o n ed at O t j i w a r o n go t e s t i f i ed that on t he 24th March 1991, w h i le he w as o f f - d u t y, he r e c e i v ed c e r t a in information from an i n f o r m e r, w h e r e u p on he and a n o t h er p o l i ce o f f i c e r. C o n s t a b le S h i t e l e p o, a p p r o a c h ed accused number 7 and i n t r o d u c ed t h e m s e l v es as p o l i ce o f f i c e r s. They w e re then taken by a c c u s ed number 7 to his own house in O r w e t o v e ni w h e re t h ey at first c o u ld not gain e n t r a n ce as accused number 7's w i f e, w ho had t he keys to t he house in her p o s s e s s i o n, w as not p r e s e n t. W h en t h ey c o u ld not obtain the k e y s, accused number 7 b r o ke t he d o or of his own house and during i n v e s t i g a t i on a r i f le w as found, w h i ch w as c o n f i s c a t ed and taken to t he p o l i ce s t a t i o n. A c c u s ed number 7 w as also t a k en to t he p o l i ce s t a t i on but w h en he got into the p o l i ce v a n, C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo noticed something behind his b a ck u n d er h is o v e r a ll and u p on i n v e s t i g a t i on found it to be a p i s t o l. T h is w as a l so c o n f i s c a t e d. T h e se t wo w e a p o ns w e re then t a k en to t he p o l i ce station and handed over to the c h a r ge o f f i c er s e r g e a nt w ho entered it into t he Pol.7 r e g i s t er w h i ch a re r e f l e c t ed in E x h i b it W. W h en f u r t h er i n f o r m a t i on w as received by C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo he a p p r o a c h ed his senior o f f i c e rs w i th that i n f o r m a t i on w h e r e u p on a number of p o l i c e m en u n d er the command of C h i ef I n s p e c t or E k a n d jo went on the e v e n i ng of the 27th M a r ch 1991 to t he h o u se 0/94 in t he O r w e t o v e ni t o w n s h i p. C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo a l so c o n f i r m ed that at t h is house a rifle w r a p p ed in long t r o u s e rs w as d i s c o v e r ed in an outside toilet and t h at a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 t o g e t h er w i th a c e r t a in H e i k i, w ho w as a l so an i n h a b i t a nt of that h o u s e, w e re t a k en to t he p o l i ce s t a t i on w h e re t h ey w e re first taken to I n s p e c t or V i s s e r 's o f f i ce and t h e r e a f t er w e re booked in and t a k en to t he c e l l s. He also confirmed that W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s, w ho w as a part of this group of i n v e s t i g a t i ng p o l i c e m e n, a c c o m p a n i ed them to t h is specific h o u s e. A c c o r d i ng to him, he and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is t o ok accused numbers 1 and 6 to I n s p e c t or V i s s e r 's office and then left t o g e t h e r. T he t wo a c c u s ed remained there for quite some t i me w h i le he h i m s e lf w e nt out to the police v e h i c l e s. He w as l a t er c a l l ed and he and W a r r a nt Officer M a r a is again w e nt up to I n s p e c t or V i s s e r 's office and c o l l e c t ed accused n u m b e rs 1 and 6 and t o ok them to the charge office w h e re t h ey w e re b o o k e d. He also c o n f i r m ed that accused number 6 had a b r i e f c a se w i th him w h i ch w as entered into the r e l e v a nt r e g i s t e r, but d o es not know what happened to t h at a f t e r w a r d s. H e i ki M a t h i as t e s t i f i ed that he w as an inhabitant of h o u se 0/94 in t he O r w e t o v e ni township in O t j i w a r o n go d u r i ng M a r ch 1 9 9 1. A c c u s ed numbers 1 and 6 also stayed in t h at p a r t i c u l ar house w h i ch belonged to J o h a n n es P a u l u s. On t he 2 7 th M a r ch 1991 he w as at home after he finished his w o rk for t he day w h en the police arrived. The house w as s e a r c h ed and a c c o r d i ng to him a rifle w as found. He w as t h en t a k en t o g e t h er w i th accused numbers 1 and 6 to the p o l i ce s t a t i on and t r a v e l l ed w i th the two accused in the same p o l i ce v a n. He r e c o g n i s ed t he t r o u s e rs in w h i ch the rifle w as w r a p p ed and a c c o r d i ng to him he thought it b e l o n g ed to a c c u s ed n u m b er 6 b e c a u se he saw accused number 6 w e a r i ng it. He a l so t e s t i f i ed that a p p r o x i m a t e ly a w e ek b e f o re t he p o l i ce a r r i v ed he saw another rifle w h i ch w as brought to t he h o u se by a c c u s ed number 1. A c c u s ed number 1 e x p l a i n ed that t h ey w e nt to t he house of a "boer" w h e re they "made l i ke y o u ng m e n" and tied the "boer" and t o ok the r i f l e. T h is w as e x p l a i n ed to mean that they went there to steal and t h en t i ed up t he owner of the rifle and t o ok his r i f l e. He o n ly saw t he rifle w r a p p ed in a blue cloth w h i ch l o o k ed l i ke a b e d s p r e a d. A p p r o x i m a t e ly a w e ek before a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 b r o u g ht the rifle to t h e ir home he saw a b l a ck b r i e f c a se of t he t y pe w i th combination locks as w e ll as a r a d io c a s s e t te p l a y er w h i ch w e re brought there by accused n u m b er 1. No e x p l a n a t i on w as given in respect of t h e se t wo i t e m s. A c c o r d i ng to this w i t n e ss he w as not at h o me all t he t i me and a c c u s ed numbers 1 and 6 also c a me and w e n t. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on it w as e l i c i t ed from t he w i t n e ss t h at a c c u s ed number 1 said w h i le they w e re in t he b a ck of t he p o l i ce v e h i c le on t h e ir w ay to the p o l i ce s t a t i on on t he 2 7 th M a r ch 1991 that the reason w hy they w e re a r r e s t ed w as p e r h a ps t he things that they had stolen. A c c u s ed n u m b er 6 said n o t h i n g. At the p o l i ce station they w e re s e p a r a t ed and he w as locked u p. He w as a p p a r e n t ly held in c u s t o dy for a p p r o x i m a t e ly a w e ek as a suspect and t h en r e l e a s e d. Mr M a t h i as also formed part of an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O t j i w a r o n go but w as not identified by a n y o n e. I n s p e c t or F. J. K o t z e, the station c o m m a n d er of t he p o l i ce at O u t j o, t e s t i f i ed that all the r e g i s t e rs at t he p o l i ce s t a t i on in Outjo w as u n d er his c o n t r o l. He t e s t i f i ed a c c o r d i ng to Exhibit FF, being p a ge 85 in the o c c u r r e n ce b o o k, that Sergeant H e r r i d ge w e nt w i th a p o l i ce v e h i c le P O L . 3 0 5 1, an Isuzu bakkie w i th a c a n o p y, to O t j i w a r o n go on t he 26th A p r il 1991. He also i d e n t i f i ed the i n s c r i p t i o ns in t he r e g i s t er w i th t he relevant O . B . n u m b e rs in r e s p e ct of t he r e t u rn of Sergeant H e r r i d ge at O 6 h 5 0. T h is a p p e a rs from E x h i b it H H. He further i d e n t i f i ed i n s c r i p t i o ns in t he v e h i c le r e g i s t er for the p a r t i c u l ar v e h i c le w h i ch left at 5 o ' c l o ck on the m o r n i ng of the 26th A p r il 1991 and r e t u r n ed at 06h50 that same day and d r i v en by S e r g e a nt H e r r i d g e. I n s p e c t or K o t ze also c o n f i r m ed that the w as in c o m m a nd of a number of i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es in respect w h e r e of E x h i b i ts B B, Y and Z w e re c o m p l e t e d. He e x p l a i n ed at t he h a nd of t h e se e x h i b i ts how each i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as p ut t o g e t h er and set u p. A ll t h e se d o c u m e n ts w e re c o m p l e t ed by h i m s e l f. They involved a c e r t a in Mr S c h i c k e r l i n g, Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and Mr and M rs K r i el r e s p e c t i v e l y. He as commanding officer d e t e r m i n ed how m a ny p e o p le s h o u ld form t he line u p. They w e re selected so that t h ey h a ve c e r t a in similar physical features as t he s u s p e c t s. T h e se p e r s o ns w e re then set up in a line in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room. T h e ir names w e re e n t e r ed c h r o n o l o g i c a l ly f r om 1 to 10 in p a r a g r a ph 23 of t he p a r t i c u l ar form. T h ey w e re t h en informed that they have t he right to c h a n ge t h e ir p o s i t i o ns if they so w i sh and if they d o, t h is is t h en e n t e r ed in p a r a g r a ph 17 w h i le t h e ir o r i g i n al n u m b e rs a re a l so i n d i c a t e d. In r e s p e ct of t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g s, for i n s t a n c e, t h is line up had been changed a f t er t he first w i t n e s s. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g, finished his i d e n t i f i c a t i on and it is a l so apparent from E x h i b it Y that the w i t n e s s es i d e n t i f i ed by h im in fact c h a n g ed t h e ir p o s i t i o ns b e f o re his w i fe e n t e r ed t he room. The same h a p p e n ed in respect of t he K r i e l s. I n s p e c t or K o t ze also t e s t i f i ed that w h en t he w i t n e s s es w ho are kept s e p a r a te are b r o u g ht s e p a r a t e ly to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room, t he w i t n e s s es are let in and t h en it is e x p l a i n ed to him or her that t h ey should l o ok at t he p e o p le in the line up and if they i d e n t i fy a n y o ne t h at t h ey should put t h e ir hand on t he p e r s o n 's s h o u l d er and g i ve t he p h o t o g r a p h er an o p p o r t u n i ty to t a ke a p h o t o. A c c o r d i ng to I n s p e c t or K o t ze it w o u ld be d i s h o n e st and u n f a ir to let t he w i t n e ss out and give h im a n o t h er o p p o r t u n i ty to i d e n t i fy and he a d a m a n t ly d e n i ed that t h is ever h a p p e n ed in r e s p e ct of any of the w i t n e s s es r e l e v a nt h e r e t o. T he only i n f o r m a t i on c o n v e y ed from the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de r o om to t he o u t s i de is w h en the line up is ready and I n s p e c t or K o t ze then by r a d io i n f o rm t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er that they are ready and that t he w i t n e ss c an be sent in, in the w o r ds "parade is ready, send in first w i t n e s s ". A c c o r d i ng to I n s p e c t or K o t z e, E x h i b i ts BB, Y and Z a re r e s p e c t i v e ly t r ue r e f l e c t i o ns of what did in fact o c c ur d u r i ng t h e se i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e s. He c o n f i r m ed that S e r g e a nt V i l ho S i m e on acted as i n t e r p r e t er and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is as p h o t o g r a p h er r e s p e c t i v e l y, d u r i ng all t h e se i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e s. I n s p e c t or K o t ze also t e s t i f i ed that he p e r s o n a l ly w e nt to t he De L a n g e' s farm w h en he r e c e i v ed a r e p o rt of p o s s i b le a t t e m p t ed m u r d e r. He found Mr De Lange in a b a d ly i n j u r ed c o n d i t i on at the n e i g h b o u r 's farm. He and a p p r o x i m a t e ly e i g ht p o l i c e m en then w e nt to the farm K h a i r ob w h e re he m a de c e r t a in o b s e r v a t i o ns and found c e r t a in f o o t p r i n t s. He i n s t r u c t ed his m en u n d er the command of Sergeant H e r r i d ge to f o l l ow t he footprints w h i ch lead into the h i l l s. T h ey a l so f o l l o w ed t he footprints w h i ch lead to d i f f e r e nt d i r e c t i o n s, i n t er a l ia to a s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a ce in t he v e ld n e ar a fence and to t he h o u s e. Three d i f f e r e nt sets of f o o t p r i n ts w e re c l e a r ly d i s t i n g u i s h a b le and I n s p e c t or K o t ze d r ew a sketch of e a ch of t h e se f o o t p r i n ts w h i ch w e re handed in as E x h i b i ts J J 1, JJ2 and J J 3. JJ1 d e p i c ts a footprint d e s c r i b ed as a " t e k k i e" f o o t p r i nt w h i le JJ2 d e p i c ts a smooth footprint and J J3 a l so a smooth footprint w i th a w o rn h e e l. T h e se f o o t p r i n ts w e re found in t he k r a a l, o u t s i de the k r a al and a l so in t he v i c i n i ty of the h o u s e. The f o o t p r i n ts w h i ch led to t he h o u se w e re only those reflected in E x h i b i ts JJ2 and J J 3, w h i le the footprints r e f l e c t ed in JJ1 w e re in t he v i c i n i ty of the place w h e re Mr De Lange w as a s s a u l t ed and n e ar t he w a t er t r o u g h. A ll t h r ee set of f o o t p r i n ts a l so lead to and from from the s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a c e. At t he s l a u g h t e r i ng place part of a c a r c a ss of a sheep w as found h a n g i ng from a t r e e, tied w i th a nylon r o p e, h a n d ed in as E x h i b it 19, w h i ch rope had been shown to Mr De L a n ge and he w as p o s i t i ve that he did not have such a r o pe of t h is t y pe on his farm. The rope w as identified by I n s p e c t or K o t ze as t he same type of rope as E x h i b it 4, w h i ch w as u s ed to t ie up Mr and M rs K r i e l. I n s p e c t or Kotze also found at t he s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a ce other p i e c es of meat and b e c a u se t h e re w e re t h r ee legs of sheep t h i g h s, as w e ll as t wo b a c k - p i e c es he c o n c l u d ed that m o re than one sheep had been s l a u g h t e r ed t h e r e. A c c o r d i ng to the blood found and the c o n d i t i on of t he m e a t, it w as not older than 24 h o u r s. He a l so found a p l a ce i n d i c a t ed on p h o to FF2 w h e re the ground w as c l e a r ed and an o b v i o us o b s e r v a t i on place w as m a de w i th a c l e ar v i ew of t he h o m e s t e ad and the k r a a l. On this spot b r a n c h es w e re c l e a r ly b r o k en and chopped off from the b u s h es and a n u m b er of f r e sh b r o k en b r a n c h es w e re also found in t he v i c i n i ty of t he k r a al and t he place of assault on Mr De L a n g e. On t h at spot k e ys on a holder b e l o n g i ng to Mr De L a n ge w as f o u n d. He a l so found t he r e c e i v er or the e a r - p i e ce of t he t e l e p h o ne b e h i nd t he fridge in the kitchen w h i ch w as c l e a r ly p u l l ed off by f o r ce from the t e l e p h o ne itself w h i ch is s i t u a t ed in t he c o r r i d o r. He also found Exhibit 17, the s h a r p e n ed o r yx h o r n, and c o n f i s c a t ed it as it appeared like a w e a p o n. P i e c es of b a rk and sticks w e re found in the v i c i n i ty of t he p l a ce of a s s a u lt on Mr De L a n g e, w h e re the hat of Mr De L a n ge w as a l so found. I n s p e c t or K o t ze also t e s t i f i ed that since he b e c a me s t a t i on c o m m a n d er on t he 21st A u g u st 1990, he e s t a b l i s h ed c e r t a in p r o c e d u r es to be followed w h e n e v er e m p l o y e es c o m p l a i n ed a b o ut w a g es not being paid by their e m p l o y e r s. T h is e n t a i l ed t h at an e n t ry is m a de in t he register c o n t a i n i ng t he n a me of t he c o m p l a i n a nt and the c i r c u m s t a n c es of t he c o m p l a i n t, w h e r e u p on he then contact the employer p e r s o n a l ly and put t he c o m p l a i nt to him. In most c a s es t he e m p l o y er a c k n o w l e d g es that he owes t he employee m o n ey but c o u ld not pay h im b e c a u se he left his employ and a r r a n g e m e n ts a re t h en m a de for p a y m e n t. He also informs the L a b o ur D e p a r t m e nt at O t j i w a r o n go in respect of the c o m p l a i n t. If it s h o u ld h a p p en that there is a disagreement b e t w e en t he c o m p l a i n a nt and t he employer then he himself as p o l i ce o f f i c er c a n n ot t a ke t he m a t t er any further and he then a s s i s ts t he c o m p l a i n a nt to obtain legal r e p r e s e n t a t i on and r e g a rd t he m a t t er as being sorted out between him and t he c o m p l a i n a n t. No such complaint w as lodged between t he 7th M a r ch and t he 23rd M a r ch 1991 by accused number 7 in r e s p e ct of w a g es not p a id to him. S e r g e a nt G o r d on N a n da of the N a m i b i an P o l i ce and s t a t i o n ed at O t j i w a r o n go testified that he w as an i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er at the time and w as not i n v o l v ed in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of this p a r t i c u l ar m a t t e r. On t he 2nd A p r il he w as a s k ed by Inspector V i s s er to t a ke Mr K r i el to h is o f f i c e. He stayed w i th Mr Kriel in t he o f f i ce u n t il a p p r o x i m a t e ly 3 o'clock until half past t h r e e. He w as t h en i n f o r m ed by radio to t a ke Mr K r i el to the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room. T h is he did and after d e l i v e r i ng Mr K r i el at t h at r o om he returned to his office w h e re he stayed u n t il he w as c a l l ed again a few m i n u t es later t h r o u gh the r a d io to go and fetch Mr K r i e l. He w e nt to the i n v e s t i g a t i on p a r a de r o om to collect Mr K r i e l, t o ok him b a ck to h is o f f i ce a nd k e pt h im t h e re u n t il he w as informed that the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as completed. T h is office d o es not l o ok out i n to t he s q u a re inside of the police s t a t i o n. He saw Mr K r i el l e a v i ng t he p o l i ce station, standing at his c ar and g e t t i ng i n to it. S e r g e a nt Jakobus J o h a n n es Erasmus t e s t i f i ed that he w as e m p l o y ed as a stores c l e rk in the N a m i b i an P o l i ce and s t a t i o n ed at O t j i w a r o n g o. He w as not i n v o l v ed in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of t h is c a s e. He did not k n ow any of t he s u s p e c ts or how they l o o k e d. On the 2nd A p r il 1991 he w as asked to keep Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg in his o f f i ce u n t il he w as i n f o r m ed that he should take Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room, w h i ch he d i d. W h i le Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as in his office n o b o dy t a l k ed to h i m. At t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room he h a n d ed Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg over to a guard w ho opened t he d o or of t he p a r a de r o om and Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg e n t e r ed w h i le t h is w i t n e ss r e m a i n ed o u t s i d e. A f t er the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as a g a in handed over to h im and he t o ok h im b a ck to his o f f i c e. He remained in t he o f f i ce u n t il he w as i n f o r m ed that the p a r a de w as o v e r. D u r i ng t he t i me t h at Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w as in his p r e s e n ce he did not t a lk to a n y b o dy including his w i f e. His o f f i ce a l so d o es not look out into the square inside the p o l i ce s t a t i o n. W a r r a nt O f f i c er B . A . M a l an t e s t i f i ed that he w as s e c t i on c o m m a n d er during April 1991 at O m a r u ru but w as not i n v o l v ed in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of the G r a m o w s ky c a s e. S e r g e a nt Z e e l ie w as t he i n v e s t i g a t i on o f f i c er in that c a s e. On t he 12th A p r il 1991, after he w as r e q u e s t ed to c o n d u ct an i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade at O k a h a n d j a, he t o ok M rs G r a m o w s ky as w e ll as Sergeant Zeelie w i th him to O k a h a n d j a. On a r r i v al at O k a h a n d ja he requested t he station c o m m a n d er to put an o f f i ce at his disposal as w e ll as staff to a s s i st h im w i th t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. Mrs G r a m o w s ky w as p l a c ed in an o f f i ce w i th a w i t n e ss to s u p e r v i se h e r. At his r e q u e st I n s p e c t or Du R a n d, t he station c o m m a n d er of O k a h a n d j a, f u r n i s h ed him w i th the names of three s u s p e c ts w ho he had p r e v i o u s ly i d e n t i f i ed and w h om he did not k n ow at a l l. He and t he p h o t o g r a p h er as w e ll as I n s p e c t or Du Rand w e nt to t he c e l ls w h e re t he s u s p e c ts w e re i d e n t i f i e d. I n s p e c t or Du R a nd t h en left the cell and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an i n s p e c t ed t he p e r s o ns p r e v i o u s ly selected and p a r t i c i p a t i ng in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w h i ch w e re a n o t h er 13 in number and a f t er s a t i s f y i ng himself that they m a t c h ed a p p r o x i m a t e ly t he l o o ks and a p p e a r a n ce of t he suspects and a f t er letting o ne of t he p e r s o ns leave t he p a r a d e, he c o m p i l ed the line u p, c o n s i s t i ng of 15 p e o p l e, i n c l u d i ng the t h r ee s u s p e c t s. T he g u a rd o u t s i de t he d o or n e v er entered t he room w h e re t he p a r a de w as held and only himself and the p h o t o g r a p h er r e m a i n ed i n s i d e. M rs G r a m o w s ky e n t e r ed t he p a r a de room a f t er a k n o ck at t he d o o r. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an e x p l a i n ed to her that t h e re m ay p o s s i b ly be one of the p e r s o ns w ho a s s a u l t ed her in t he r o om as p a rt of the p a r a de and if she should r e c o g n i se a n y b o dy she should t o u ch his right shoulder and a f f o rd t he p h o t o g r a p h er an o p p o r t u n i ty to t a ke a p h o t o g r a p h. A c c o r d i ng to h im M rs G r a m o w s ky i d e n t i f i ed M a t h e us T j a p a, a c c u s ed n u m b er 3, a f t er 43 seconds w h i ch t i me he also i n d i c a t ed on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form. She r e q u e s t ed one p e r s on to s t r a i g h t en but did not i d e n t i fy any o t h er p e r s o n. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an w as i n t e n s i v e ly c r o s s - e x a m i n ed a b o ut t he t i me that M rs G r a m o w s ky i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3 and in p a r t i c u l ar in the light of her evidence that she c a r e f u l ly w a l k ed d o wn the line, looked at every face and e v e n t u a l ly i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an r e m a i n ed a d a m a nt that he noted the time and that he c h e c k ed his w a t ch so to a s c e r t a in that he e n t e r ed t he c o r r e ct t i me on the form. A c c o r d i ng to him M rs G r a m o w s ky w as t he only p e r s on on that d a te w ho p a r t i c i p a t ed in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de as a w i t n e ss and that he himself d id not a t t e nd any o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O k a h a n d j a. He d e n i ed s t a t e m e n ts m a de to him on b e h a lf of the a c c u s ed t h at he had some t i me b e f o re t he p a r a de stood in the c o r r i d or w i th some of t he w i t n e s s es and that i n d i c a t i o ns w e re m a de by p o l i ce o f f i c e rs i n d i c a t i ng a c c u s ed number 3 and m a k i ng r e m a r ks w h i ch c o u ld lead to his i d e n t i f i c a t i o n. He w as a l so c r o s s - e x a m i n ed in respect of E x h i b it L L, t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form and c e r t a in p a r a g r a p hs that w e re not c o m p l e t ed as w e ll as s i g n a t u r es that w e re not m a de w h e re it w as r e q u i r ed on the second last page but w h i ch w as not n e c e s s a ry a c c o r d i ng to W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an b e c a u se t he p e o p le i n v o l v ed did sign next to t h e ir names on p a ge 1 of t he form. He e x p l a i n ed that he did not enter t he n a m es of t he s u s p e c ts b e c a u se he did not k n ow w h e t h er t h ey in fact w e re i n v o l v ed b e f o re the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as c o m p l e t e d. He e x p l a i n ed that t h is p e o p le w e re b r o u g ht d o wn f r om O u t jo a f t er i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es held t h e re and t h at t h is p a r a de w as held in an effort to e s t a b l i sh w h e t h er a ny of t h em w e re p o s s i b ly involved in the G r a m o w s ky i n c i d e n t. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an also denied that Mrs G r a m o w s ky c o u ld not i d e n t i fy a n y b o dy on the p a r a de and w as taken by a p o l i ce o f f i c er or himself into a b a t h r o om and that w h en she r e t u r n ed she immediately identified accused number 3. A c c o r d i ng to h im there w as no b a t h r o om in the c e l ls save for an o p en part w i t h o ut a door c o n t a i n i ng a t o i l et and a s h o w e r. He d e n i ed that Mrs Gramowsky w as ever t a k en i n to t h at space by himself or anybody e l s e. He r e p e a t ed that she i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3 w i t h in 43 seconds and n e v er left t he v i c i n i ty of the parade before doing t h a t. She left t he r o om a f t er t he p h o to w as t a k e n. S e r g e a nt M i c h a el B o o y s en testified that he a s s i s t ed in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de held on the 12th A p r il 1991 at O k a h a n d ja w h e re he w as stationed at the t i m e. He led M rs G r a m o w s ky from the station commander's o f f i ce to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room. He w as not involved in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of t h is case in any w a y. He t o ok her to c e ll n u m b er 1, w h e re t he parade w as held, knocked on t he d o o r, d e l i v e r ed her and then returned to his o f f i c e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er J e a n e t te Mostert testified that she w as s t a t i o n ed as a c o n s t a b le in the N a m i b i an P o l i ce at O k a h a n d ja on t he 4th A p r il 1991. She t e s t i f i ed that she s u p e r v i s ed w i t n e s s e s, namely Mr and Mrs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg in t he o f f i ce of t he station commander before they w e re t a k en to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade room. From t h is o f f i ce y ou c a n n ot see t he p o l i ce c e l ls and in p a r t i c u l ar c e ll number 1 w h e re t he p a r a de w as c o n d u c t e d. W h i le the two w i t n e s s es w e re u n d er her s u p e r v i s i on nobody entered and spoke to them. S he w as not i n v o l v ed in the i n v e s t i g a t i on of t h is c a se in a ny w a y, w h a t s o e v e r. She did not see them looking at p e r s o n al i t e ms at any stage on that day. S e r g e a nt W i l l em Janse van R e n s b u rg t e s t i f i ed that he w as a s t a t i on c o m m a n d e r 's clerk at O k a h a n d ja and on t he 12th A p r il he s u p e r v i s ed M rs G r a m o w s ky in an office so that no o t h er w i t n e ss c o u ld communicate or get in touch w i th h e r. She w as c o l l e c t ed by Sergeant B o o y s en and t a k en to t he p a r a d e. W h i le she w as under his supervision nobody e n t e r ed t he o f f i c e. A c c o r d i ng to him the office w h e re he s u p e r v i s ed h er d o es not have a v i ew onto the c e l l s. T h is sergeant w as a l so i n v o l v ed in the identification parade in r e s p e ct of Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and he c o l l e c t ed t h em o ne a f t er o ne a n o t h er from the parade room to an office w h e re t h ey w e re s u p e r v i s ed separately. That w as the o f f i ce of t he b r a n ch c o m m a n d e r. On the w ay from the parade room to t h at o f f i ce w h i le c o n d u c t i ng Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg he did not m e et M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g. He w as also i n v o l v ed in o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on parades inter alia in respect of Mr and M rs V o i g t s. He t o ok Mr and M rs V o i g ts as w e ll as t wo o t h er p e o p le separately from the parade room to an o f f i c e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er Rudolf H e y d e n r y ch t e s t i f i ed t h at he w as e m p l o y ed in W i n d h o ek at the F i n g e r p r i n ts O f f i ce as a p h o t o g r a p h er and attended an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O k a h a n d ja on the 4th A p r il 1991 after he had b e en r e q u e s t ed to do so in his capacity as p h o t o g r a p h e r. He i d e n t i f i ed t he p h o t os in Exhibit Q as being taken by him at that p a r t i c u l ar i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de involving Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g. He also t o ok photos on the same d ay of Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg identifying c e r t a in items w h i ch t h is w i t n e ss a l so identified in Court, namely a m e a s u r e - t a p e, t wo p i s t ol m a g a z i n es and a firearm h o l s t e r. T h e se e x h i b i ts w e re p h o t o g r a p h ed and the p h o t os are c o n t a i n ed in t he b u n d le m a r k ed Exhibit S. In c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on it w as put to S e r g e a nt H e y d e n r y ch on behalf of accused number 3 that he and o t h er w i t n e s s es w e re standing in a c o r r i d or during t he t i me w h en p o l i ce o f f i c e rs b r o u g ht p r i s o n e r s, including a c c u s ed number 3, from t he c e l ls and on w h i ch o c c a s i on p o l i ce o f f i c e rs m a de s t a t e m e n ts and g a ve i n d i c a t i o ns w h i ch w o u ld e n a b le the w i t n e s s es to i d e n t i fy accused number 3. S e r g e a nt H e y d e n r y ch r e j e c t ed t h e se s t a t e m e n ts and said that he w as c a l l ed from t he o f f i ce and w e nt d i r e c t ly to t he c e ll w h e re the p a r a de w as h e ld and did not see any other w i t n e ss in the c o r r i d or or a n y w h e re e l s e. He also said that p e o p le in c u s t o dy in the c e l ls had b e en b r o u g ht to cell number 1 w h e re the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as held. They did not p a ss t h r o u gh t he p o l i ce station or the c o r r i d o rs of t he p o l i ce station at a l l. C o n s t a b le D. C l a a s s en t e s t i f i ed that he w as s t a t i o n ed at O u t jo d u r i ng A p r il 1991 and w as on duty on t he 2 6 th A p r il 1991 as c h a r ge o f f i ce s e r g e a n t. He i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b it HH as a p h o t o c o py of a p a ge in the o c c u r r e n ce b o ok and said t h at he m a de t he entry number 1722 himself on that p a ge on t he 26th A p r il 1991 and that he a l so signed u n d e r n e a th t he e n t r y. T h is entry refers to w h at o c c u r r ed at 6h50 on t h at m o r n i ng and in p a r t i c u l ar to a p r e v i o us e n t ry in t he o c c u r r e n ce b o o k, namely number 1712 w h i ch a p p e a rs on E x h i b it FF w h i ch is a copy of a n o t h er p a ge in the o c c u r r e n ce b o ok u n d er the same d a t e. A c c o r d i ng to C o n s t a b le C l a a s s e ns t he p u r p o se of his entry w as to i n d i c a te that t he p a r t i c u l ar p e r s o ns w i th Sergeant H e r r i d g e, w ho are r e f e r r ed to in t he p r e v i o us entry, r e t u r n ed at 6h50 that m o r n i ng in a safe and h e a l t hy c o n d i t i on and that Sergeant H e r r i d ge signed for t h e se p e r s o ns u n d e r n e a th e n t ry number 1712 as the s e r g e a nt w ho a c c o m p a n i ed the p r i s o n e r s. C o n s t a b le C l a a s s e ns w as not on d u ty w h en t he entry in E x h i b it FF w as m a d e. He a l so c o n f i r m ed u n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on that he himself w as in t he c h a r ge o f f i ce w h en Sergeant H e r r i d ge r e t u r n ed w i th t he t wo p r i s o n e rs r e f e r r ed to in t he e a r l i er e n t ry number 1712 and that he himself t o ok t he t wo p r i s o n e rs to the c e l l s. He said he k n o ws b o th John T j i za and a c c u s ed number 1. C o n s t a b le G . G o m eb t e s t i f i ed that he w as t he c h a r ge o f f i ce sergeant on the early m o r n i ng of t he 26th A p r il 1991 w ho m a de t he e n t ry number 1712 in t he o c c u r r e n ce b o ok as a p p e a rs in E x h i b it FF, a copy of t he p a r t i c u l ar p a ge in t he o c c u r r e n ce b o o k. He w as r e q u e s t ed by S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge to b r i ng t he t wo p r i s o n e rs from t he c e l ls and m a de t he e n t ry w h i ch S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge signed as the p e r s on a c c o m p a n y i ng t he p r i s o n e r s. T he reason g i v en to him by Sergeant H e r r i d ge w as that he w as i n v e s t i g a t i ng a c a se on MR 3 9 / 3 / 9 1. S e r g e a nt R . C. H e r r i d ge t e s t i f i ed that he w as in fact t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er in respect of t he De L a n ge c a se and that he w as present on the 24th M a r ch 1 9 9 1, a f t er r e c e i v i ng a r e p o r t, w i th I n s p e c t or K o t ze w h en f o o t p r i n ts w e re found on the farm in the v i c i n i ty of t he h o m e s t e ad of Mr De L a n g e. T h ey first went in separate c a rs to t he n e i g h b o ur at t he farm A b y s s i n ia w h e re Inspector K o t ze a t t e m p t ed to t a lk to Mr De L a n g e. F r om there they w e nt to t he De L a n g e 's farm. He said t h at three separate sets of footprints w e re found on t he farm and he i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b i ts J J 1, 2 and 3 as b e i ng an i d e n t i c al r e p r o d u c t i o ns of t he footprints found. He w as not i n v o l v ed in looking for the footprints around t he scene but had i n s t r u c t i o ns to f o l l ow the footprints leading from t he farm. A c c o r d i ng to him they found these footprints e n t e r i ng a c a mp and leaving it a l s o. They followed the footprints up to a p l a ce w h e re it w as c l e ar that animals w e re s l a u g h t e r ed and from t h e re in a s o u t h e r n ly d i r e c t i on and later in an e a s t e rn d i r e c t i o n. T he e a s t e rn d i r e c t i on e v e n t u a l ly lead to t he m a in r o a d. At t he t i me w h en p e r s o ns w e re arrested in r e s p e ct of t h is p a r t i c u l ar incident on the De L a n g e 's f a rm S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge w as on leave and found the suspects in t he O u t jo p o l i ce station c e l ls w h en he returned from l e a v e. On t he 2 6 th A p r il 1991, a f t er receiving i n f o r m a t i on from a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 d u r i ng i n t e r r o g a t i on that a p i s t ol w h i ch he u s ed to shoot Mr De L a n ge w i t h, w as in t he house w h e re t h ey w e re a r r e s t ed in O t j i w a r o n g o, he w e nt w i th a n o t h er p r i s o n e r, w ho a c t ed as an i n t e r p r e t e r, John T j i za and a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 to O t j i w a r o n go to search for t h is firearm. He i n f o r m ed W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is in a d v a n ce that he w i ll a r r i ve e a r ly in t he m o r n i ng of the 26th A p r il and on a r r i v al at O t j i w a r o n go t h ey w e nt to the p a r t i c u l ar house w h i ch w as i n d i c a t ed by a c c u s ed number 1. S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge also t e s t i f i ed t h at w h en he left O u t jo w i th t he t wo p e r s o ns an e n t ry w as m a de a f t er t he p r i s o n e rs w e re fetched by t he c h a r ge o f f i ce s e r g e a nt f r om t he c e l l s, in t he o c c u r r e n ce b o ok and he i d e n t i fied b o th t he entry and t he s i g n a t u re on E x h i b it F F. It w as s t i ll d a rk w h en they left and w h en they went to the h o u se in O t j i w a r o n g o. On arrival at a house accused n u m b er 1 i n d i c a t ed t he toilet in the backyard as the p l a ce w h e re t he p i s t ol w a s. Sergeant H e r r i d ge related how W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is first w e nt into the toilet and that could he not find t he p i s t ol w h e r e u p on accused number 1 said it must be t h e r e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a is returned and c o n d u c t ed a f u r t h er s e a r ch w h e r e a f t er he found the revolver w h i ch w as a .38 S p e c i al as w e ll as 50 rounds of ammunition in a r e d - p u r p le p l a s t ic b a g. T he r e v o l v er w as taken to the O t j i w a r o n go p o l i ce s t a t i on and entered into a Pol.7 r e g i s t er as an e x h i b i t, t o g e t h er w i th the c a r t r i d g e s. T h e r e a f t er S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge r e t u r n ed to O u t jo w i th John Tjiza and a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 and handed them over to C o n s t a b le C l a a s s e n, w ho w as on d u ty as c h a r ge office sergeant. The latter e n t e r ed t h is into t he o c c u r r e n ce b o o k. Sergeant H e r r i d ge a l so c o n f i r m ed t he i n s c r i p t i on in Exhibit GG, the v e h i c le r e g i s t er of t he p a r t i c u l ar v e h i c le used that m o r n i ng and read out t he e n t ry in t he r e c o r d, w h i ch i n d i c a t es that he left w i th t h is v e h i c le that m o r n i ng and returned later w i th it. C e r t a in s t a t e m e n ts w e re m a de on behalf of accused n u m b er 1 by Mr G r o b l er in respect of statements that S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge w o u ld have m a de t o w a r ds accused number 1 and w h i ch w e re d e n i ed by Sergeant H e r r i d g e. It w as a l so put to S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge that accused number 1 w i ll d e ny t h at he w as e v er t a k en on that p a r t i c u l ar m o r n i ng to O t j i w a r o n go or that he p o i n t ed out the firearm. T h is w as d e n i ed by S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge and he then c o n f i r m ed his e v i d e n ce in t h is r e g a r d. He a l so said that he did not t a ke accused n u m b er 1 to any o t h er p l a ce on that m o r n i n g. It w as put to S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge that accused number 1 w as later in O u t jo c o n f r o n t ed w i th t he r e v o l v er as being the one found in O t j i w a r o n go b ut S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge denied this and t e s t i f i ed t h at t h is p a r t i c u l ar r e v o l v e r, as appears c l e a r ly from E x h i b it C C, had b e en h a n d ed over to the owner t h e r e o f, Mr K r i e l, a l r e a dy on t he d a te it w as found and that any t r a n s f er of a f i r e a rm to O u t jo w o u ld in any event have to be entered into t he P o l .7 r e g i s t e r. D e t e c t i ve W a r r a nt O f f i c er N . B e c k er t e s t i f i ed t h at he is s t a t i o n ed in W i n d h o ek and w as involved in t h is m a t t er o n ly in r e s p e ct of an identification p a r a de w h i ch he w as a s k ed to c o n d u ct in O k a h a n d j a. He identified Exhibit 00 as a t y p ed v e r s i on of the h a n d w r i t t en and c o m p l e t ed form in r e s p e ct of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade that he held w h e re Mr and M rs V o i g ts acted as w i t n e s s e s. A f t er c o m p l e t i on of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade he handed his h a n d w r i t t en form to W a r r a nt O f f i c er K u r z. Four suspects as w e ll as seven o t h er p e r s o ns w e re lined up in a cell in O k a h a n d j a. A p o l i ce p h o t o g r a p h e r, C o n s t a b le V an L i l l, a c t ed as p h o t o g r a p h er a nd t h e re w as also an interpreter p r e s e n t. He o b t a i n ed t he n a m es of the suspects from the i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er and e n t e r ed them onto the form. A f t er t he c h a r ge w as put to t he s u s p e c t s, they w e re informed of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de and t h e ir rights as w e ll as their right to c h a n ge p o s i t i o n s. A c c u s ed number 3 asked to change his p o s i t i on and in fact c h a n g ed w i th Primus A n g u l a. T h e r e a f t er e v e r y b o dy w as s a t i s f i ed and the first w i t n e s s, Mr V o i g ts w as c a l l e d. He e n t e r ed the cell and W a r r a nt O f f i c er B e c k er e x p l a i n ed t he p r o c e d u re to him, w h e r e u p on he i d e n t i f i ed s u s p e c ts 5,11 and 1 and photos w e re t a k en separately of e a ch s u s p e c t 's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n. Mr V o i g ts left the c e ll and t he s u s p e c ts w e re given another o p p o r t u n i ty to c h a n ge t h e ir p o s i t i o ns b ut t h ey remained in the same p o s i t i o ns e x c e pt for a c c u s ed number 3 w ho changed w i th M i c h a el A n g u l a. T h is w as a l so e n t e r ed onto the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form, p a r a g r a ph 1 7. M rs V o i g ts then attended t he p a r a de but c o u ld not i d e n t i fy a n y b o d y. The suspects w e re again g i v en an o p p o r t u n i ty to c h a n ge t h e ir p o s i t i o ns but r e m a i n ed in t he same p o s i t i on and t he t h i rd w i t n e s s, J o h a n n es E i s eb e n t e r ed t he r o o m. He w as e x p l a i n ed the p r o c e d u re and he i d e n t i f i ed p e r s on n u m b er 5, w h e r e u p on a p h o to w as t a k e n. T he s u s p e c ts w e re a g a in g i v en an o p p o r t u n i ty to c h a n ge but r e m a i n ed in t he same p o s i t i on and t he fourth w i t n e s s, P r i c i l la K e i n k os e n t e r ed and a l so i d e n t i f i ed a suspect, w h e r e u p on a p h o to w as t a k e n. A f t er t he p a r a de w as completed t he form w as h a n d ed to W a r r a nt O f f i c er K u r z. A c c o r d i ng to W a r r a nt O f f i c er B e c k er he a r r i v ed at the p a r a de w h en it w as a l r e a dy set up but w as s a t i s f i ed that the p e r s o ns on t he p a r a de w e re s i m i l ar in a p p e a r a n ce and b u i l d. He said that he w o u ld not h a ve c o n d u c t ed a p a r a de if he w as not s a t i s f i e d. W a r r a nt O f f i c er B e c k er a l so c o n f i r m ed that t he p a rt of t he b u i l d i ng w h e re t he p o l i ce c e l ls are is a c o m p l e te s e p a r a te b u i l d i ng from the p o l i ce station and t h at t he c e l ls c a n n ot be seen from the c o r r i d or or v i ce v e r s a. He a l so d id not see t he suspects b e f o re t he p a r a d e. I n s p e c t or J. L. K n o u w ds t e s t i f i ed in r e s p e ct of c h a r g es 10 to 1 3. He w as an i n s p e c t or in the N a m i b i an P o l i c e, s t a t i o n ed at G r o o t f o n t e in at the t i m e. He c o n d u c t ed an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O u t jo w h e re t he t wo De L a n g es w e re p r e s e nt as w i t n e s s e s. A c c u s ed number 7 w a s, a c c o r d i ng to him, in t he line u p, but w as not i d e n t i f i ed by Mr or M rs De L a n g e. M rs De L a n g e, h o w e v e r, i d e n t i f i ed t wo o t h er p e r s o ns but m e n t i o n ed that she r e c o g n i s ed a c c u s ed number 7 as M a r t in b e c a u se he w o r k ed on t he farm. T he i n s p e c t or c o u ld not r e m e m b er t he r e a c t i on of a c c u s ed number 7. He w as not i n v o l v ed in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of t he c a se at a l l. S e r g e a nt H. M. Zeelie t e s t i f i ed w i th r e l a t i on to c h a r g es 1 and 2, that is the G r a m o w s ky i n c i d e n t. He w as t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er in that c a se and t o ok M rs G r a m o w s ky to an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O u t j o. He w as not p r e s e nt in the p a r a de room and did not k n ow w h e t h er any of t he a c c u s ed w e re on the p a r a d e. In r e s p e ct of the second p a r a de at O k a h a n d j a, w h e re M rs G r a m o w s ky w as i n v o l v e d, he and W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l a n, w ho p r e s i d ed over that p a r a de d r o ve w i th M rs G r a m o w s ky from O m a r u r u. He u n d e r s t o od that c e r t a in s u s p e c ts c o n n e c t ed w i th similar i n c i d e n ts w o u ld be on that p a r a d e, but h as not seen any of t h em b e f o re and did not e x p e ct any of t h em t h e r e. He did not c o n s i d er it out of o r d er to d r i ve w i th M rs G r a m o w s ky to O k a h a n d ja b e c a u se he did not k n ow any of t he s u s p e c ts and c o u ld c o n s e q u e n t ly not i n f l u e n ce her in any w a y. He a l so stayed w i th h er in O k a h a n d ja in her r o om b e f o re M rs G r a m o w s ky w as t a k en to t he p a r a de room. Mr F i l l e m on K a n a e le t e s t i f i ed w i th r e l a t i on to c h a r g es 3, 4 and 5. He said he w as "a C ID in K a t u t u r a ", but did not w a nt to c o n f i rm that he w as an i n f o r m a n t. L a t er in h is e v i d e n ce he said he w as a w a r r a nt o f f i c e r. It l a t er t r a n s p i r ed that he w as m e r e ly a student p o l i c e m an but w e re p r e v i o u s ly d u r i ng the l i b e r a t i on struggle i n v o l v ed as a p o l i c e m an in A n g o la w i th the r a nk equal to that of a w a r r a nt o f f i c e r. He w as involved w i th accused number 4 in t he i n v e s t i g a t i on of the c a s e. A c c o r d i ng to him, he o b t a i n ed i n f o r m a t i on a f t er a p e r s on w as killed, a p p a r e n t ly t he p e r s on shot by Mr V o i g t s. He informed Sergeant Piatt that a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 w o r k ed at the B r e w e r i es and they w e nt t o g e t h er to t he s i n g l e - q u a r t e rs of the B r e w e r i es in K a t u t u r a. A c c o r d i ng to h im a number of t h i n gs w e re found i n c l u d i ng a r e v o l v er and a t o y - g u n. In his e v i d e n c e - i n - c h i ef he d e s c r i b ed h ow t h ey found these i t e m s, but later said t h at he and a c c u s ed number 4 stayed in t he car but c o u ld see f r om t he c ar into t he room w h e re Sergeant Piatt w as s e a r c h i n g. He a l so d e s c r i b ed that d o c u m e n ts w e re found b e l o n g i ng to P r i m us A n g u la and identifying him. He also t e s t i f i ed t h at he w e nt to O w a m b o l a nd w i th W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s h i, a f t er i n f o r m a t i on w as obtained from accused number 4, w h e re t h ey s e a r c h ed for a c c u s ed number 3 and Primus A n g u l a. A c c o r d i ng to h im t h ey attempted to search the house w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 stayed w i th his m o t h e r. He c o n f e s s ed that he a s s a u l t ed a c c u s ed number 3's sister to o b t a in i n f o r m a t i o n, b ut l a t er c h a n g ed this and d e s c r i b ed how he and S e r g e a nt N g o s hi w e re in fact attacked by the m o t h er and s i s t er of a c c u s ed number 3 and that they assaulted t h em only in d e f e n ce of t h e m s e l v e s. H o w e v e r, a f t er the arrest of a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 he w as taken to his father's house w h e re a r i f le w as h a n d ed o v er by the father and t h is r i f le w as i d e n t i f i ed as t he shotgun, Exhibit 9, w h i ch w as p r e v i o u s ly s t o l en from t he farm of Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g. A c c u s ed n u m b er 3 also informed him that the p i s t ol i d e n t i f i ed as E x h i b it 8 w as w i th his b r o t h e r. The pistol w h i ch w as h a n d ed o v er t he next day by accused number 3's father a f t er he o b t a i n ed it from accused number 3's b r o t h e r. T h is p i s t ol a l so b e l o n gs to Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g, while E x h i b it 7 w as t he r e v o l v er found in the room of accused number 4 at t he s i n g l e - q u a r t e rs of the B r e w e r i es in K a t u t u r a, a c c o r d i ng to K a n a e l e. T he w i t n e ss w as severely c r o s s - e x a m i n ed in r e s p e ct of w h i ch room t he p i s t ol w as in fact found in K a t u t u ra and it w as put to him that it w as in fact found in P r i m us A n g u l a 's r o om and not in accused number 4's room. On b e h a lf of accused number 3 it w as d i s p u t ed t h at t he f i r e a r m s. E x h i b i ts numbers 8 and 9, w e re in fact t he p i s t ol and s h o t g un handed over by accused number 3's f a t h er and it w as put to the w i t n e ss that other firearms b e l o n g i ng to a c c u s ed number 3 w e re c o n f i s c a t ed by the p o l i c e. It w as a l so d i s p u t ed that accused number 3 w as p r e s e nt w h en t he f i r e a r ms w e re handed over to this w i t n e ss and W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s h i. The w i t n e s s, however, r e m a i n ed a d a m a nt t h at he w as i n f o r m ed by accused number 3's sister w h e re to find h im and that she accompanied them to the m a h a n g o - l a nd w h e re a c c u s ed number 3 w as found and arrested and t h at t h ey t h en w e nt to t he h o u se of accused number 3' s father w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 r e q u e s t ed his father to hand o v er t he r i f l e, E x h i b it 9, w h i ch w as d o n e. B e c a u se the b r o t h er w as not t h e re t he p i s t ol could not be obtained on that day and a c c u s ed number 3 was taken to the police s t a t i on w h e re he r e m a i n ed the next day b e c a u se they c o u ld not o b t a in p e r m i s s i on from the station commander to t a ke h im a l o ng as it w as feared that accused number 3 w o u ld e s c a p e. T h ey d id not find t he brother but the p i s t ol w as h a n d ed o v er by t he f a t h er to the witness and W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s h i. T h is w as E x h i b it 8. The w i t n e ss also t e s t i f i ed that a n u m b er of o t h er t h i n gs w e re collected from t he house w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 s t a y ed and that a list of t h o se items w as c o m p i l e d, w h i ch w as h a n d ed in as Exhibit Q Q. T he w i t n e ss a l so r e c o g n i s ed t he items that appeared in the photos c o n t a i n ed in E x h i b it S and in p a r t i c u l ar those in the suitcase as some of t he i t e ms w h i ch w e re found in the house w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 s t a y e d. He further t e s t i f i ed that he w as p r e s e nt w h en t he p h o t os c o n t a i n ed in Exhibit S w e re t a k en at t he p o l i ce s t a t i on in O k a h a n d ja w h en W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s hi and o t h er p o l i ce o f f i c e rs opened the s u i t c a s e. T he w i t n e ss a l so t e s t i f i ed that he w as present w h en the r e v o l v e r. E x h i b it 1, w as o b t a i n ed from the w i t n e ss M a t h i as M a u l t i u s, w h i ch a p p a r e n t ly belonged to Primus A n g u l a. He i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b it 1 as b e i ng that revolver. I n s p e c t or F. J. Du Rand t e s t i f i ed that he w as t he s t a t i on c o m m a n d er of the police station at O k a h a n d ja d u r i ng t he t i me of t he incident that occurred at Mr V o i g t s' farm and t h at he w e nt out to the scene but did not i n v e s t i g a te t he c a s e. He w as in his office w h e re he supervised the V o i g ts family w h en t h ey a t t e n d ed an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de at O k a h a n d ja and i d e n t i f i ed his signature on Exhibit 002 in t h is r e s p e c t. A ll four p e r s o n s, namely Mr and M rs V o i g t s, a b l a ck m an and a b l a ck w o m an w e re supervised by him in his o f f i c e. T h ey w e re t a k en by Sergeant H a c c ou from the o f f i ce and he c o n f i r m ed that nobody t a l k ed w h i l st u n d er his s u p e r v i s i on in t he o f f i c e. S e r g e a nt J. Piatt t e s t i f i ed in respect of c h a r g es 3,4 and 5 and said that after o b t a i n i ng i n f o r m a t i on from F i l l e m on K a n a e le w ho w as no m o re than an i n f o r m e r, he w e nt to t he s i n g l e - q u a r t e rs of the B r e w e r i es in K a t u t u r a. He t o ok a c c u s ed number 4 w i th him but t he w i t n e ss F i l l e m on K a n a e le r e m a i n ed in the car as he did not w a nt to be s e e n. W h e re t he c ar w as parked it w as in such a p o s i t i on that F i l l e m on c o u ld not see from the c ar into t he r o om of a c c u s ed n u m b er 4. S e r g e a nt Piatt said a c c u s ed number 4 w e nt w i th h im to his r o om and u n l o c k ed a locker w i th his own k e ys and in t h is locker i n t er alia a p i s t o l, E x h i b it 7, w as f o u n d. A c c u s ed number 4 i d e n t i f i ed the locker to be h i s. A c c u s ed n u m b er 4 said that he did not h a ve a licence for t he r e v o l v er a v a i l a b le as it w as in O v a m b o. B e c a u se S e r g e a nt P i a tt did not b e l i e ve him he w as t a k en to the p o l i ce s t a t i on and a number of o t h er items w e re t a k en along t o o. D u r i ng c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i on it b e c a me c l e ar that o t h er p o l i c e m en a l so a s s i s t ed in this o p e r a t i on and that some of t h em a l so a s s i s t ed in taking some of the p r o p e r ty from t he r o o m. A list w as m a de in the o f f i ce of C o l o n el Smit and a ll t he items t a k en from the r o om w e re e n t e r ed i n to t h at l i s t. S e r g e a nt Piatt denied that the w i t n e ss F i l l e m on w as e v er p r e s e nt or could see into t he room or that he e v er s e a r c h ed a n o t h er room. It a p p e a rs from t he E x h i b it S S, n a m e ly t he list c o m p i l ed of the items found, that t h e re w e re i n t er a l ia d o c u m e n ts b e l o n g i ng on the face of it to o t h er p e r s o ns t h an a c c u s ed number 4. Sergeant Piatt did not have a n y t h i ng f u r t h er to do w i th the i n v e s t i g a t i on of t h is c a s e. S e r g e a nt L e o n a rd B e u k es t e s t i f i ed that he is employed by t he N a m i b i an P o l i ce as an o f f i c i al d r a u g h t s m an and s t a t i o n ed at t he f i n g e r p r i n ts o f f i ce in W i n d h o e k. He i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b i ts F and G as a b u n d le of p h o t os taken by himself and a k ey t h e r e to c o m p i l ed by h i m s e l f. These p h o t os reflect i n t er a l ia t he l i v i n g r o om of t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r gs as w e ll as c e r t a in o b j e c ts and the study. C o n s t a b le B e u k es a l so t o ok p h o t os c o n t a i n ed in E x h i b it U in respect of t he scene w h e re Mr G u n n ar V o i g ts had b e en attacked on his farm. He i d e n t i f i ed c e r t a in p o i n ts on the d i f f e r e nt p h o t os r e f l e c t i ng i n t er a l ia spent c a r t r i d g e s, the t o o ls used by t he a s s a i l a n ts to r e p a ir a t y re and c e r t a in o t h er s p o t s. T he next w i t n e ss w as the b r a n ch c o m m a n d er of the O k a h a n d ja D e t e c t i ve B r a n c h, M r. J. A. M y b u r g h. He t e s t i f i ed in r e s p e ct of t he CZ p i s t ol w h i ch b e l o n g ed to Mr V o i g ts as w e ll as a s h o t g un and an a i r g u n. T h e se w e a p o ns w e re b r o u g ht to t he O k a h a n d ja P o l i ce S t a t i on and he also saw s u i t c a s e s, s p o r t b ag and c l o t h i ng that w e re b r o u g ht t o g e t h er w i th the w e a p o n s. He e s t a b l i s h ed from the w e a p o ns office that the CZ p i s t ol b e l o n g ed to Mr G u n n ar V o i g t s. He asked Mr V o i g ts to b r i ng h is l i c e n ce to t he p o l i ce station and he c o m p a r ed it w i th t he f i r e - a rm w h i ch he then b o o k ed it as an E x h i b it in t he c a s e. T h is w as E x h i b it 1 w h i ch w as a l so i d e n t i f i ed by Mr M y b u r g h. He o b t a i n ed it from I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c h e. Mr M y b u r gh a l so i d e n t i f i ed Exhibit 9 as t he shotgun that he r e c e i v ed and Exhibit 2 8 as the airgun, r e s p e c t i v e l y. He w as a c c o m p a n i ed by S e r g e a nt Haccou w h en he brought t h e se e x h i b i ts to O k a h a n d ja and Exhibit QQ1 w as identified by h im as a list w h i ch w as c o m p i l ed by his w i f e, Sergeant M y b u r g h. D e t e c t i ve C o n s t a b le C . J . R a l ph t e s t i f i ed that he is an o f f i c i al d r a w er of p l a n s, p h o t o g r a p h er and attached to t he f i n g e r p r i n ts b r a n ch in W i n d h o e k. He identified Exhibit N as a b u n d le of p h o t o g r a p hs t a k en by himself at the O u t jo P o l i ce S t a t i on in respect of an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de i n d i c a t i ng c e r t a in p e r s o ns on t he p a r a de and w i t n e s s es i d e n t i f y i ng p e r s on number 10 on t h o se p h o t o s. S e r g e a nt R . C . M a l e t s ky i d e n t i f i ed his signature on E x h i b it LL in r e s p e ct of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w h e re M rs G r a m o w s ky w as a w i t n e ss and w h i ch p a r a de w as held on the 12th A p r il at O k a h a n d j a. He t e s t i f i ed that he t o ok M rs G r a m o w s ky from t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e - r o om to another room w h e re she w as s u p e r v i s ed by somebody e l s e. He said he did not k n ow a n y t h i ng about t he G r a m o w s ky incident. He further t e s t i f i ed t h at on t he 4th A p r il and on the request of Sergeant H a c c o u, he a c c o m p a n i ed Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg s e p a r a t e ly f r om t he p l a ce w h e re they w e re supervised to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e - r o o m. The two w i t n e s s es did not h a ve any c o n t a ct w i th e a ch o t h er b e t w e en t he p a r a d es that t h ey a t t e n d e d. He i d e n t i f i ed his name and signature on E x h i b it MM, t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form of the 4th A p r il 1 9 9 1. J o h a n n es E i s eb t e s t i f i ed that he w as a w o r k er employed by Mr G u n n ar V o i g ts on h is farm on the 16th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. He w as off d u ty on t h at p a r t i c u l ar day and at h o m e. At a p p r o x i m a t e ly 1 o ' c l o ck c e r t a in m en arrived at his house and a s k ed t he w ay to t he h o m e s t e ad of Mr V o i g t s. They parked t h e ir v e h i c le in t he road and w a l k ed up to his h o u s e. He i d e n t i f i ed t he v e h i c le as the same Izusi bakkie w i th a c a n o py w h i ch w as l a t er found a f t er the incident on Mr V o i g t s' farm. T h ey t a l k ed a b o ut t he old Mr V o i g ts and he informed t h em that he m o v ed to O k a h a n d j a. The people then left his h o u se and h is o b s e r v a t i on w as that they knew Mr Gunnar V o i g t s. T he p e o p le set off in t he d i r e c t i on of Mr V o i g t s' h o m e s t e ad and l a t er r e t u r n e d, t o ok t h e ir b a k k ie and drove away in t he d i r e c t i on of W i n d h o e k. He also testified that he i d e n t i f i ed a p e r s on as o ne w ho w as at his house that p a r t i c u l ar d ay at t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de held in O k a h a n d j a. T h is p e r s on w as a c c u s ed number 4. He didn't notice anything s t r a n ge d u r i ng t he e v e n i ng of that day, except that he later heard s h o ts and on t he Sunday m o r n i ng he went to the home of Mr V o i g t s, w h e re he saw t he same v e h i c le that w as there the m o r n i ng of t he 16th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. He identified the v e h i c le a l so as t he o ne t h at a p p e a rs on the photos Ul to U 7. He e x p l i c i t ly d e n i ed u n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on that he i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 as one of the persons w ho w as on his farm on t h at m o r n i ng to Mr V o i g t s, neither did he d i s c u ss that w i th Mr V o i g t s. He a l so denied that he told Mr V o i g ts h ow t h is p e r s on l o o k ed a f t er he identified him at the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. He said that he only told Mr V o i g ts a f t er he saw t he w h i te b a k k ie on the farm that three m en v i s i t ed his h o u s e, w ho w e re t wo short m en and one tall m a n, but d i d n 't t a lk to h im a b o ut t h e ir l o o k s. S e r g e a nt Petrus Johannes Haccou t e s t i f i ed that he w as a t t a c h ed to the C r i m i n al Investigating D e p a r t m e nt of t he N a m i b i an Police as a detective sergeant and s t a t i o n ed at O k a h a n d ja at the time of the V o i g t s' i n c i d e n t. He w as i n f o r m ed about the incident and went out to Mr V o i g t s' farm. S i m u l t a n e o u s ly the Station Commander, I n s p e c t or Du R a n dt and W a r r a nt Officer Myburgh also went out to the farm. S e r g e a nt H a c c ou t o ok c e r t a in photographs w h i ch he i d e n t i f i ed as E x h i b it C and D, c o n t a i n i ng the p h o t o g r a p hs on t he V o i g t s' farm as w e ll as a key to the p h o t o s. He e x p l a i n ed e v e ry p h o to in Exhibit C and indicated w h i ch p h o t os w e re t a k en t he p r e v i o us evening and w h i ch the next m o r n i n g. T h is i n c l u d ed p h o t os of the scene, the incident, t he d e c e a s ed as he w as found as w e ll as the v e h i c l e. The d e c e a s ed died on h is w ay to t he h o s p i t a l. Sergeant Haccou a l so t e s t i f i ed in r e s p e ct of an i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade w h i ch he c o n d u c t ed on t he 2 0 th M a r ch 1991, Exhibit NN. The parade w as a l r e a dy set up by W a r r a nt O f f i c er K u r z, the investigating o f f i c e r. T h e re w e re n i ne p e o p le on the p a r a d e. Sergeant Haccou e x p l a i n ed to t he s u s p e c ts that they w e re e n t i t l ed to h a ve l e g al r e p r e s e n t a t i o n. N o ne of them w a n t ed legal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n. He a l so f i l l ed in t he form in respect of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. E x h i b it N N. W i t n e s s es w e re brought separately i n to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room. The first w i t n e ss w as J o h a n n es E i s e b. He identified suspect number 4 and S e r g e a nt H a c c ou t o ok a p h o to of the parade h i m s e l f, w h i ch p h o t os a re c o n t a i n ed in Exhibit T. Two other w i t n e s s es w e re b r o u g ht i n to t he identification parade room, n a m e ly Mr and M rs V o i g t s. N e i t h er of them i d e n t i f i ed anybody on that p a r a d e. S e r g e a nt Haccou i d e n t i f i ed Exhibit 0 01 as t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form of a n o t h er similar p a r a de held at O k a h a n d ja on t he 4th A p r il 1991. Four w i t n e s s es a t t e n d ed t h is p a r a de and S e r g e a nt Haccou w as t he p e r s on w ho t o ok t he w i t n e s s es i n d i v i d u a l l y, one after t he o t h er to the p a r a de r o o m. A c c o r d i ng to him, he n e v er entered the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de r o om and none of t h e se w i t n e s s es had c o n t a ct w i th e a ch o t h er a f t er he had t a k en any one of t h em to t he room. S e r g e a nt Haccou a l so c o n d u c t ed a n o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de on t he 4th A p r il 1991. T he p a r a de w as set up by t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er and c o n t a i n ed e l e v en p e o p l e. W a r r a nt O f f i c er H e y d e n r y ch w as t he p h o t o g r a p h e r. S e r g e a nt H a c c ou a g a in e x p l a i n ed to the suspects that t h ey are e n t i t l ed to l e g al r e p r e s e n t a t i on and t h ey all d e c l i n ed to m a ke u se of t h i s. He t e s t i f i ed that the w i t n e s s es t o ok t h e ir p o s i t i o ns a f t er t h e ir r i g h ts of c h a n g i ng p o s i t i o n s, if they w i sh t o, w e re explained to them. T he first w i t n e ss w as Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g. A f t er Sergeant Haccou e x p l a i n ed to h im t he p r o c e d u r e, he i d e n t i f i ed p e r s o ns n u m b e rs 10,8 and 1 in t he l i n e - u p. Person number 10 w as N a k a li M a t h e u s, w ho had n o t h i ng to do w i th the incident as it w as e s t a b l i s h ed l a t er t h at he w as at the t i me of t he i n c i d e nt in c u s t o dy on a n o t h er c h a r g e. M a t h e us T j a pa w as p e r s on n u m b er 8 and p e r s on number 1 in t he l i n e - up w as Primus A n g u l a, a c c u s ed number 2, w ho is not present in t h is t r i a l. S e r g e a nt H a c c ou a l so i d e n t i f i ed the p h o t os t a k en of t h is p a r a de as t h ey a p p e ar in E x h i b it Q. A c c o r d i ng to S e r g e a nt Haccou t he s u s p e c ts r e m a i n ed of t h e ir own c h o i ce in the same p o s i t i o ns w h e r e a f t er M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg entered t he p a r a de r o om and a f t er her r i g h ts w e re e x p l a i n ed to her as w e ll as t he p r o c e d u r es to be followed, she i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed number 3, as a p p e a rs on p h o to number 5 in E x h i b it Q, by p o i n t i ng h im out w i th a s t i c k. Sergeant H a c c ou d e n i ed h a v i ng a s s i s t ed a n y o ne w i th i d e n t i f i c a t i on in t h is p a r a d e. S e r g e a nt H a c c ou a l so t e s t i f i ed that he as w e ll as W a r r a nt O f f i c er M y b u r gh t o ok c e r t a in e x h i b i ts w h i ch t h ey r e c e i v ed from I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he in W i n d h o ek to O k a h a n d j a. T h e se items w e re e n t e r ed i n to the P o l .7 r e g i s t e r, except E x h i b i ts 8 and 9, as t h e se w e re h a n d ed to Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg on t he same d a y. T he e x h i b i ts h a n d ed to Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w e re s p e c i f i ed on E x h i b it TT and signed by S e r g e a nt H a c c o u, Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg as w e ll as accused number 3, w ho g a ve p e r m i s s i on that t he f i r e - a r ms c o u ld be h a n d ed to Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g, the owner of it, a f t er he e s t a b l i s h ed h is o w n e r s h ip by w ay of his f i r e - a rm l i c e n c e s. A f u r t h er e x h i b it w as h a n d ed in, n a m e ly E x h i b it 2 8, an a i r - g u n, w h i ch w as a l so o b t a i n ed from I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c h e. S e r g e a nt H a c c ou i d e n t i f i ed E x h i b it Q Q1 as p a g es from t he P o l. 7 r e g i s t er in w h i ch o t h er i t e m s, except t he w e a p o n s, w h i ch he r e c e i v ed from I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c h e, w e re e n t e r ed i n. T he P o l .7 r e g i s t e r, E x h i b it Q Q 1, w as c o m p l e t ed by female S e r g e a nt M y b u r g h. In c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on S e r g e a nt Haccou c o n c e d ed that t he d a m a ge to a part of the c o o l er and i n d i c a t ed on p h o to 1 in E x h i b it C c o u ld have been c a u s ed by something else t h an a b u l l e t. He a l so found only rifle b u l l e ts and no r i f le c a r t r i d g es and no spent c a r t r i d g es of a h a n d g un in t he v i c i n i t y. He t e s t i f i ed that he w as only involved in a p r e l i m i n a ry i n v e s t i g a t i on and w as not the i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c e r, w h i ch did not d i s q u a l i fy him to conduct t he i n v e s t i g a t i on p a r a d e s. He also said that Mr V o i g t s, on t he first p a r a d e, seemed n e r v o us and he did not identify a n y o n e. He a l so d e n i ed statements by the d e f e n ce that he c a l l ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 to his office w h e re o t h er p e o p le w e re s i t t i ng and d e n i ed any suggestion that he in any w ay a t t e m p t ed to i n f l u e n ce any of the w i t n e s s es to i d e n t i fy a c c u s ed n u m b er 3. Sergeant Haccou also denied s t a t e m e n ts in r e s p e ct of a c c u s ed number 3's a l l e g a t i o ns that h e, S e r g e a nt H a c c o u, w as t he p o l i ce o f f i c er w ho w as standing o u t s i de t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de room in t he c o r r i d or of t he p o l i ce s t a t i on at O k a h a n d ja in the company of o t h er p o l i c e m en and w i t n e s s es and that he m a de r e m a r ks w h i ch could i n d i c a te a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 to w i t n e s s es as being the p e r s on w ho w as i n v o l v ed in t he V o i g t s' i n c i d e n t. On b e h a lf of accused number 3, it w as put by Mr K a s u to to S e r g e a nt H a c c ou that Exhibit TT w as signed by a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 a f t er he w as brought u n d er t he impression that he w as s i g n i ng a statement i n d i c a t i ng that he did not w a nt to m a ke any s t a t e m e nt at a l l. T h is w as d e n i ed by Sergeant H a c c o u. Mr S m a ll t h en handed in w i t h o ut o b j e c t i on from the d e f e n c e, t he r e c o rd of the section p r o c e e d i n gs in t he M a g i s t r a t e 's Court in respect of accused numbers 1,4,6 and 7, as w e ll as another person w ho w as not c h a r g ed e v e n t u a l l y. T h is d o c u m e nt w as handed in as Exhibit U U. I shall r e f er to t h is d o c u m e nt w h en I c o n s i d er the e v i d e n ce in this m a t t e r. D e t e c t i ve W a r r a nt O f f i c er W a l t er Kurz t e s t i f i ed that he w as s t a t i o n ed at O k a h a n d ja Police Station at the r e l e v a nt t i m e. He w as t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng officer in the V o i g t s' i n c i d e n t. He t e s t i f i ed in respect of the exhibits found on Mr V o i g t s' farm and r e f e r r ed to Exhibit W, w h i ch is an extract of t he P o l. 7 r e g i s t e r, into w h i ch exhibits w e re e n t e r e d. T h e se e x h i b i ts w e re found at the scene or in t he v e h i c le left on Mr V o i g t s' farm. A c c o r d i ng to t h is list t h e re w e re m o re t h an e n o u gh t o o ls to fix a t y re on t he v e h i c l e. T h e se s p e c i f ic e x h i b i ts w e re also handed in and numbered d u r i ng t he t r i a l. He a l so testified in respect of E x h i b it Q Q 1, a c o py of t he r e g i s t er Pol.7 of O k a h a n d ja P o l i ce S t a t i o n. He i d e n t i f i ed c e r t a in objects on that list as E x h i b i ts 23 to 27 in r e s p e ct of t he items identified later by Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg as his p r o p e r t y, as w e re also r e f l e c t ed in E x h i b it S and w h i ch w e re found by W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s hi a nd P h i l l e m on K a n a e le at the house of accused number 3*s m o t h er in O v a m b o. He also t e s t i f i ed that he w as not i n v o l v ed in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade in any w ay in O k a h a n d j a, e x c e pt t h at he a s s i s t ed in lining the people up in one of t he p a r a d e s. He d e n i ed that the accused w e re not a f f o r d ed t he o p p o r t u n i ty to get legal r e p r e s e n t a t i on and said that he in fact a s s i s t ed accused number 4 to get hold of his a t t o r n e y. I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he t e s t i f i ed in respect of a s t a t e m e nt by a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 w h i ch document w as a d m i t t ed after a t r i al w i t h in a trial w as completed in this r e g a r d. I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he read out p a r a g r a ph 7 w h i ch c o n t a i ns the s t a t e m e nt in A f r i k a a ns and w h i ch w as t r a n s l a t ed in E n g l i sh in C o u r t. T h is statement as t r a n s l a t ed is t he f o l l o w i n g: "I w i sh to give the following s t a t e m e nt and e x p l a n a t i o n. T h is robbery story on the farm near O k a h a n d ja w as not my p l a n. It is the short m a n, S h i m b u lu and t he d e c e a s e d 's b u s i n e s s. I landed in it c o i n c i d e n t a l l y. T wo d a ys before the Saturday a friend of m i n e, K a t e m a, told me that the a b o v e m e n t i o n ed t wo p e o p le w e re p l a n n i ng to rob a W h i te m an c a l l ed L i s t e r, w ho o w ns c l o t h es in a shop, to go and rob him. The p l an w as also to take his Land C r u i s er and load the g o o ds o n to it. That Saturday at about 12, four of us w e nt to t he farm, it w as myself, K a t e m a, Shimbulu and t he d e c e a s e d. We t o ok the d e c e a s e d 's car to t he farm. I k n ow t he d r i v er had a w e a p on but not one of t he o t h er t h r ee c a r r i ed a w e a p o n. W h en we a p p r o a c h ed the farm I t o ld the others that I k n ow the farm as w e ll as t he W h i te m a n. I stayed behind in the car and sat and s l e p t. T he o t h er t h r e e, K a t e m a, Shimbulu and t he d e c e a s ed w e nt to t he farm. They w e re going to c h e ck t he p l a ce w i th K a t e m a. I told t h em to leave the p l a n, I k n ow t he " l a n i" and it w o n 't " t o l ". That w as w h en t h ey r e t u r n e d. The d r i v er slapped me a g a i n st t he leg, l a u g h ed and said that I w as just t oo m u ch of a c o w a rd and that they w o u ld " t o l ". We t h en r e t u r n ed from t he farm to W i n d h o e k. The same day at about 6 o ' c l o ck in t he evening we r e t u r n ed to t he farm. A n o t h er m an accompanied u s, namely K a t e m a 's b r o t h e r - i n - l a w. A ll five of us had w e a p o n s. I had a p i s t ol w h i ch I h a n d ed over to the p o l i ce in O v a m b o. T h is p i s t ol I b o u g ht a long time p r e v i o u s ly from a B a s t er in t he s i n g le q u a r t e rs for R 2 5 0. I don't h a ve a l i c e n ce for i t. It has 10 b u l l e ts and it looks like a p o l i ce p i s t o l. B e f o re we left, we t o ok a b o t t le of R i c h e l i eu b r a n dy from the d e c e a s e d 's home as w e ll as t wo b o t t l es of C o ke and 4 g l a s s e s. We left 2 g l a s s es b e c a u se 4 g l a s s es w e re t oo m a n y. I saw that t h e re w e re b u l l e ts l o a d e d. T h e r e a f t er we put in R 5 0 's w o r th of p e t r ol at H a k a h a na S e r v i ce S t a t i o n. Shimbulu, K a t e ma and his b r o t h e r - i n- law each gave RIO's p e t r ol and the d e c e a s ed p ut in R 2 0 's w o r t h. We then went to t he farm and got t h e r e. We stopped a p p r o x i m a t e ly 600 m e t r es from t he f a r m s t e a d. H e re we all had a d r i n k. K a t e ma t h en t o ok off t he spare tyre w h i ch w as b r o k en (sic) and we w e nt to t he farmstead u n d er the p r e t e n ce that we w e re l o o k i ng for help to have it fixed. T he farmer g a ve us a t y re l e v er and a hammer; I saw that the " l a n i" c a r r i ed a r e v o l v er in h is b e l t. I told the o t h e rs in O v a m bo l a n g u a ge t h at the m an w as c a r r y i ng a r e v o l v er and that we s h o u ld leave the p l a n. We must just fix t he t y re and t h en l e a v e. The "lani" then said that he just had to go and stop the m a c h i ne that pumps w a t er and put in p i l ls for the h o r s e s. A f t er a w h i le he r e t u r n ed and a s k ed if we had not finished. We told him that we n e e d ed a n o t h er p i e ce of iron. He then g a ve us a t o m m y - b a r. T he p e r s on w ho is now d e c e a s ed then t a c k l ed t he W h i te m an from b e h i nd by g r a b b i ng his a r m s. K a t e ma t o ok t he m a n 's p i s t ol from its h o l s t er and grabbed t he m a n 's l e g s. They t h r ew him on t he g r o u nd and I c a u g ht h is a r m s. W h en t he m an w as d o w n, S h i m b u lu hit h im in h is face w i th his p i s t o l. T he " l a n i" t h en asked us not to shoot him, he w o u ld t a lk n i c e l y. I asked e v e r y o ne not to shoot t he m a n. S u d d e n ly I h e a rd shots from t he h o m e s t e ad and saw t he m a n 's w i fe standing next to t he d o or at the l a w n. Shimbulu i m m e d i a t e ly fired at t he w o m an w ho w as standing by t he d o o r. We let go of t he W h i te m a n. K a t e ma t h en shot at t he W h i te m a n. T he W h i te m an t h en shouted for h is w i fe to b r i ng t he g u n. I t h en b e g an r u n n i n g; b e h i nd me w e re S h i m b u lu and K a t e m a 's b r o t h e r - i n - l a w. I did not see w h e re K a t e ma and t he d e c e a s ed had r u n. I s u d d e n ly heard a u t o m a t ic fire and kept on r u n n i n g. M y s e l f, S h i m b u lu and K a t e m a 's b r o t h e r - i n - l aw t h en ran t h r o u gh the v e ld to K a p p 's Farm. We w a i t ed only a few m i n u t es w h en K a t e ma a l so c a me b a c k. K a t e ma then t o ld us that t he d r i v er of t he c ar m ay have been shot, b e c a u se he w as s t i ll b e h i n d. I t h en told the p e o p le that if the d r i v er had just b e en shot t h r o u gh t he leg, t he "lani" w o u ld k i ll him. I then also saw that K a t e ma had t wo f i r e - a r ms w i th him. We then w e nt to W i n d h o e k, we did not see S h i m b u lu a g a i n. We heard that t he p o l i ce w e re at K a t e m a 's h o u se and we w e nt up to t he N o r t h. K a t e ma and his b r o t h e r - i n - l aw stayed b e h i nd in T s u m eb and I w e nt to my p l a ce in O v a m bo w h e re t he p o l i ce a r r e s t ed me at my m o t h e r 's p l a c e ." I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he also t e s t i f i ed that he t o ok a s i m i l ar s t a t e m e nt from accused number 4 on the 19th M a r ch 1991 w h i ch s t a t e m e nt w as h a n d ed in as E X H I B IT XX and of w h i ch p a r a g r a ph 7 w as a l so t r a n s l a t ed from A f r i k a a ns to E n g l i sh in C o u r t. T he c o n t e nt of t h is statement is the following: "I w i sh to m a ke t he following statement and e x p l a n a t i o n. I w o r k ed t o g e t h er w i th a p e r s on c a l l ed E r a s t us M u u n da at t he b r e w e r i e s. We h a ve b e en w o r k i ng t h e re t o g e t h er for a p p r o x i m a t e ly 5 y e a rs at t he b r e w e r y. On S a t u r d a y, 16 M a r ch 1 9 9 1, I w as at my room at t he q u a r t e rs at t he b r e w e r y. W h i le I w as b u sy t h e r e, t h is friend of m i n e, E r a s t u s, arrived t h e re and told me there is a m an w ho a s k ed h im to fetch his t h i n g s, namely 2 a r c - w e l d e rs and g as b o t t l es and a c u t t i ng t o r c h, on a farm. T h is w as a p p r o x i m a t e ly 1 5 : 0 0. As I had nothing in p a r t i c u l ar to d o, I d e c i d ed to go a l o n g. The p e r s on w ho had m a de t he r e q u e st to E r a s t us w as at the room of J o h n n y. We p i c k ed up t wo m en t h e r e, the one's name w as K a t e ma and t he o t h er w as u n k n o w n. A short d i s t a n ce from t h e re at t he road we p i c k ed up a n o t h er two m e n. O n e 's p i c t u re w as in a w h i te f r a m e. T he v e h i c le w as d r i v en by E r a s t us and a n o t h er p e r s on u n k n o wn to me sat in front w i th m e. T h is is t he p e r s on w ho said h is t h i n gs w e re on the farm. We d r o ve from W a n a h e da to K a p p 's F a r m. B e f o re we left we t o ok a b o t t le of R i c h e l i eu and t wo b o t t l es of c o ol d r i nk from E r a s t u s' h o me in S h a n d u m b a l a. At K a p p 's Farm we turned off o n to a d i rt r o ad and t o ok i n s t r u c t i o ns from the p e r s on w ho said his t h i n gs had to be fetched. We c a me to a c e r t a in farm and stopped next to the road. I c o u ld see t he f a r m s t e ad from w h e re we w e re standing, it w as a p p r o x i m a t e ly 1 8 : 3 0. We t h en d r a nk some of the b r a n dy and c o ol d r i n k, we had about half a b o t t l e. I c l o s ed it and put it b a ck in the c a r. I t h en saw that K a t e ma had a p i s t ol w h i ch he had put in his jacket p o c k e t. T he o t h er t wo m en as w e ll as K a t e ma each had a p i s t ol as w e l l. One did not h a ve a p i s t o l. They also g a ve E r a s t us a p i s t ol (a small o n e ). T he four t h en said that E r a s t us must accompany t h em to the farm. I still said to E r a s t us don't go a l o n g. L e a ve the m en to fetch t h e ir own t h i n g s. He d i d n 't w a nt to listen and he w e nt a l o n g. T h ey left me at the car a l o n e. A short w h i le a f t er t h e y 'd left, t wo r e t u r n ed and t o ok the spare t y re and left w i th it. I don't k n ow if t he spare t y re w as flat, b e c a u se I d i d n 't feel it. I don't know the farm. I h a ve n e v er b e en t h e re b e f o r e. Not long a f t er t h ey had left, I heard a shooting at the farm. A f t er a few m i n u t es a Land R o v er c a me along the dirt road. I m o v ed a w ay from t he car and w e nt and hid behind a t r e e. T he L a nd R o v er c a me and stood at t he car and I c o u ld see t wo m en in t he c a r. T h ey did not get out at t he c ar and p r o c e e d ed to t he farmstead. I t h en saw that t h ey w e re r e t u r n i n g. I ran away from the c a r. I w as a p p r o x i m a t e ly 200 to 300 m e t er away from the c a r, w h en I h e a rd shots at the c a r. F r om t h e re I just kept on w a l k i ng all night long. The next m o r n i ng I r e a c h ed t he t a r r ed road at the airport, of the a i r p o r t. At t he road I also found Katema and t wo of his f r i e n d s. E r a s t us w as not t h e r e. And the one o t h er p e r s on u n k n o wn to me w as also not t h e r e. I then e n q u i r ed w h at had h a p p e n ed at the farm. Katema said no, t he f a r m er had shot u s. I asked the w h e r e a b o u ts of E r a s t us and t he o t h er m a n. Upon w h i ch K a t e ma informed me that t he t wo had run in a different d i r e c t i o n. A ll t h r ee s t i ll had t h e ir p i s t o l s. I then suggested that we w a lk to W i n d h o e k. K a t e ma and his t wo friends didn't w a nt to w a l k, b e c a u se it w as approximately five o'clock, 5 h 0 0. I t h en w a l k ed alone to a service station in K l e in W i n d h o e k. I t o ok a taxi from t h e re to my h o u s e, w h e re I w e nt to s l e e p. Monday I went to w o rk at 5 h 3 0. I t h en sent a n o t h er m an to E r a s t u s' h o m e. E r a s t us d i d n 't go to w o rk on M o n d a y. Tuesday I went to E r a s t u s' h o u se m y s e l f. T h e re I learned from a n o t h er m an that E r a s t us had b e en k i l l e d. Yesterday I saw K a t e ma as w e l l, b ut I d i d n 't speak to him. Katema and his friends o f t en go to J o h n n y 's house w h e re the d e t e c t i v es found c e r t a in g o o ds in J o h n n y 's h o u s e, w h i ch b e l o n g ed to K a t e m a. S a t u r d ay w as t he first time that I w e nt along, t h at I d r o ve w i th E r a s t u s, I went along w i th E r a s t u s ." I n s p e c t or V i s s er t e s t i f i ed that he t o ok t wo s t a t e m e n ts f r om a c c u s ed number 7 w h i ch had also been t he subject m a t t er of a "trial w i t h in a t r i a l" and w h i ch statements w e re a d m i t t ed as e v i d e n ce by the C o u r t. A statement m a de in A f r i k a a ns w h i ch w as t r a n s l a t ed in E n g l i sh in t h is Court w as h a n d ed in as E X H I B IT Y Y: "In answer to the above w h i ch has b e en read to m e, and w h i ch I've signed, I w i sh to state t he f o l l o w i n g: I h a ve no k n o w l e d ge of the r o b b e r y. I simply r e c e i v ed t he 7.9 mm rifle from V e n a s i us A m e ho w h i ch a l l e g e d ly w as stolen from the P l a i n t i f f ." T he next statement handed in w as E X H I B IT ZZ and w as t r a n s l a t ed in t h is Court from A f r i k a a ns to E n g l i s h. It r e a ds as f o l l o w s: "In answer to the above w h i ch has b e en read to me and w h i ch I h a ve signed, I w i sh to m a ke t he f o l l o w i ng s t a t e m e n t: The c e r t a in fire-arm, the r e l e v a nt f i r e arm, w h i ch I went to fetch in a c e r t a in h o me in B l i k k i e s d o rp in O t j i w a r o n g o, is not my g u n. T h is g un w as given to me late one night by V e n a s i us A m e h o, a l i as S h a v a t a n g u, alias K a m a u h a, to k e ep it for him. It w as g i v en to me approximately a m o n th a g o. I c a n 't r e m e m b er the specific d a t e. I m e r e ly kept t he said g un for V e n a s i us w i th m e. V e n a s i us a l so d i d n 't t e ll me w h e re he had got the g u n. V e n a s i us a l so d i d n 't t e ll me for h ow long I should keep the g un for him. V e n a s i us a l so did not give me a letter of c o n s e nt to k e ep t he gun w i th m e. I am not in p o s s e s s i on of a f i r e - a rm l i c e n ce for the said fire-arm. W h en t he p o l i ce a s k ed me for the gun, I told them w h e re it i s. T he p o l i ce found the gun under the m a t t r e ss of t he b ed w h e re I s l e e p. I can m a ke no further s t a t e m e nt about t he said fire-arm." The State then closed its c a s e, w h e r e a f t er b o th Mr G r o b l er and Mr K a s u to applied on behalf of t h e ir c l i e n ts for d i s c h a r ge on several c h a r g e s. A f t er h e a r i ng a r g u m e nt t he C o u rt u n a n i m o u s ly d i s m i s s ed the a p p l i c a t i o n s. Mr G r o b l er c a l l ed accused number 1 to t e s t i f y. A f t er t e s t i f y i ng in respect of his p e r s o n al c i r c u m s t a n c es a c c u s ed number 1 said that a l t h o u gh he stayed in the N o r th he u s ed to stay o v er o c c a s i o n a l ly in the house of J o h a n n es P a u l us N o. 0/94 in O r w e t o v e ni in O t j i w a r o n g o. He a l so v i s i t ed W i n d h o ek o c c a s i o n a l l y. A c c o r d i ng to h im he d i d n 't k n ow a ny of t he accused p r e v i o u s ly except for accused n o. 6 w i th w h om he stayed o c c a s i o n a l ly in t he h o u se at O t j i w a r o n g o. He o n ly m et a c c u s ed number 7 on t he 24th M a r ch 1991, t he d ay of t he De L a n ge incident. A c c u s ed number 1 also d i d n 't k n ow t he d e c e a s e d, E r a s t u s. He d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge of t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg incident or that he w as i n v o l v ed in t h at i n c i d e nt at a l l. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed number 1, he a l so w e nt on the 2nd February 1991, t he d ay b e f o re t he S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg incident, from t he N o r th to W i n d h o ek v ia O t j i w a r o n go and w as a c c o m p a n i ed by a c e r t a in J a p h et N g h i f i k e p u n y e, a f t er they have heard over the r a d io t h at former PLAN soldiers could apply for w o rk at t he D e f e n ce F o r ce in W i n d h o e k. A f t er a r r i v i ng at W i n d h o e k, he s t a y ed at t he house of one Kondja w i th a c e r t a in Jason w ho w as w i th h im nearly all the t i m e. Japhet also stayed t h e r e. He n e v er left W i n d h o ek until the 13th M a r c h. He a l so t e s t i f i ed that he doesn't k n ow anything about t he G r a m o w s ky i n c i d e n t, n e i t h er w as he there on the 29th December 1 9 9 0. He t e s t i f i ed about the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es at O t j i w a r o n go and that he w a s n 't a f f o r d ed the o p p o r t u n i ty to h a ve l e g al r e p r e s e n t a t i o n. A c c o r d i ng to h im Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o n e, left t he room and a f t er he r e t u r n ed he immediately i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed number 1. T he same h a p p e n ed to M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg w ho c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o ne but w as e n c o u r a g ed to t ry again and t h en she p o i n t ed h im out w i th a s t i c k. S i m i l a r ly Mr K r i el c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy him, left t he room w h e r e a f t er they c h a n g ed t h e ir p o s i t i o ns and Mr K r i el entered a g a in and t h en i d e n t i f i ed h im and a c c u s ed number 6. A c c u s ed number 1 d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge or i n v o l v e m e nt in t he K r i el i n c i d e n t. A c c o r d i ng to h im he w as on that day w i th (Simeon) K a m a ti in K a t u t u r a. In r e s p e ct of t he e v i d e n ce of H e i ki M a t h i a s, he said that t h ey w e re not on good speaking t e r ms and t h at H e i ki M a t h i as left t he h o u se w h e n e v er he w as t h e r e. He a l so d e n i ed t h at he had any r i f l es in his p o s s e s s i on w h i ch a n y o ne c o u ld see or t h at he t o ld H e i ki M a t h i as a n y t h i ng about r o b b i ng c e r t a in b o e rs e i t h er in t he h o u s e, or in the p o l i ce v a n. He a l so d e n i ed h a v i ng had a r a d io t a pe of Mr K r i e l, in fact he said t h at he o n ly had his o wn r a d io t a p e. In r e s p e ct of t he six s h o t g un c a r t r i d g e s, he t e s t i f i ed that he b o u g ht t h em on t he 13th M a r ch in W i n d h o ek from a c e r t a in D a m a r a - s p e a k i ng p e r s o n. He d i d n 't h a ve a l i c e n ce for it or for a w e a p on to u se i t. He d e n i ed that he i d e n t i f i ed t he b r o wn t r o u s e rs in w h i ch t he r i f le t h at w as found in t he o u t s i de r o om on the p r e m i s es of h o u se 0/94, in t he o f f i ce of I n s p e c t or V i s s er to W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a r a i s. He said he w as t a k en i m m e d i a t e ly to t he c e l ls and not to I n s p e c t or V i s s e r 's o f f i c e. A c c o r d i ng to h im he stayed for almost a m o n th w i th his one hand c h a i n ed to h is n e ck and w as t r e a t ed b a d ly w h i ch c a u s ed h im to e s c a p e. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he had d i f f i c u l ty to e x p l a in w hy he escaped from O t j i w a r o n go w h e re he w as not t r e a t ed as b a d ly as in O u t jo and w a s n 't c h a i n ed a n y m o r e. A c c u s ed number 1 denied that he w as taken to O t j i w a r o n go to p o i nt out a r e v o l v er in t he o u t s i de room. He said t h is p a r t i c u l ar p i s t ol w as only later showed to him by a short m a n, but w ho w as not Sergeant H e r r i d g e. T h is h a p p e n ed w h i le he w as in c u s t o dy in O u t j o. H e, however, admitted that t he p a r t i c u l ar p i s t ol w i th w h i ch he said he shot Mr De L a n ge w as in fact i n s i de a tyre in t he o u t s i de room in O t j i w a r o n g o. He a l so a d m i t t ed that the rifle w as found t h e re in t he o u t s i de room. H o w e v e r, he said he bought b o th t he p i s t ol and t he r i f le from a W h i te m an near the single q u a r t e rs in O t j i w a r o n go for R 7 0 0. In r e s p e ct of t he De Lange incident he t e s t i f i ed that he m et a c c u s ed number 7 in the e a r ly m o r n i ng hours of t he 2 4 th M a r c h. T h ey w e nt to a p l a ce in the v i c i n i ty of Mr De L a n g e 's farm to c a t ch c a t e r p i l l a rs w h i ch they w a n t ed to sell for m o n e y. W h en they w e re in the v i c i n i ty of t he farm a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 said that the o w n er of that p a r t i c u l ar farm o w ed h im m o n ey and they then w e nt to the farm. T h ey a p p r o a c h ed Mr and M rs De L a n ge w ho had t wo dogs w i th them. Mr De L a n ge a s k ed w h at are y ou K a f f i rs d o i ng on my farm and e n c o u r a g ed t he d o gs to a t t a ck them. A c c u s ed number 1 said he h i m s e lf w a l k ed straight to Mr De L a n ge and told him that t h ey w e re t h e re in p e a ce and only w a n t ed to t a l k. Mr De L a n ge still e n c o u r a g ed t he d o gs to b i te them and told h im to lie d o wn and t he d o gs w o u ld then not b i te him. A c c u s ed number 1 t h en p i c k ed up stones and t h r ew it at the dogs w ho ran a w a y. He w as s u d d e n ly hit on the m o u th and nose by Mr De L a n ge w i th a w a l k i ng stick w h i ch b r o k e. A c c u s ed number 1 t h en t o ok out h is p i s t ol and shot t wo b u l l e ts in the ground at t he d o g s, and t h en fired a n o t h er shot w h i ch according to him, s o m e h ow hit Mr De L a n ge in the c h e e k. A f t er Mr De L a n ge fell d o wn he a g a in said to his w i fe to t a ke the rifle and c o me and shoot t he K a f f i r s. A c c o r d i ng to accused number 1, a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 w e nt to t he w i fe and told her not to t a ke t he r i f le b e c a u se t h ey w e re there in p e a c e. The w i fe of Mr De L a n ge t h en said, t h ey shouldn't harm her b e c a u se it is t he old m an w ho u s ed to k i ll B l a ck p e o p le and bury t h em on t he farm. A c c u s ed number 6 asked the w i fe for the rifle or p i s t ol w i th w h i ch Mr De L a n ge shot the B l a ck people and she i n v i t ed h im to c o me i n to t he house and t a ke t he rifle and p i s t o l. T h is a c c u s ed n u m b er 6 did w h i le accused number 1 and a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 r e m a i n ed o u t s i d e. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed n o. 1 he d i d n 't a t t e m pt to assist Mr De Lange w ho w as l y i ng on t he g r o u n d. A c c u s ed number 7 asked for his m o n ey and M rs De L a n ge said t h ey can't pay h im and he should t a ke t he r i f le and t he p i s t o l. A c c u s ed number 1 denied that he w as e v er in t he h o u se or that M rs De L a n ge w as ever a s s a u l t ed by h im or t he o t h e rs w i th a stick. He also d e n i ed t h at t h ey s l a u g h t e r ed any sheep or w as ever at the s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a c e. A c c u s ed n o. 1 also d e n i ed that any of t he t r a c ks as i n d i c a t ed by I n s p e c t or K o t ze on E X H I B IT JJ1 - 3 w as h i s, but said that he w e a rs n o. 7 shoes and indicated that it w as a t y pe of l e a t h er shoe, w h i ch sole had a s m o o th s u r f a c e. A c c u s ed n u m b er 1 denied any k n o w l e d ge o f / or i n v o l v e m e nt in t he V o i g t s' i n c i d e n t. U n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he a d m i t t ed h a v i ng b e en t r a i n ed in the u se of fire-arms and b e i ng a g o od shot as such. He also said if the w a n t ed to a t t a ck t he f a r m e rs he w o u ld erect an o b s e r v a t i on post to o b s e r ve t h e ir m o v e m e n t s. A c c u s ed n o. 1 called Japhet N g h i f i k e p u n ye to t e s t i fy on h is b e h a l f. Japhet testified that they t r a v e l l ed t o g e t h er f r om t he N o r th a f t er a call on the radio in respect of e m p l o y m e nt at t he N a m i b i an Defence F o r c e. B e c a u se they c o u l d n 't get a lift t o g e t h e r, Japhet arrived first in W i n d h o e k. He a r r i v ed on t he 3rd of February in W i n d h o ek and saw a c c u s ed n o. 1 t h at d a y. They didn't stay t o g e t h er in W i n d h o e k. He l a t er l e a r n ed that accused number 1 w as in p r i s o n. He said he a nd a c c u s ed number 1 went to the D e f e n ce Force on t he m o r n i ng of t he 3rd of F e b r u a ry and that they w e re told that t h ey w i ll be c a l l ed l a t e r. J a s on H a n d y e n go w as also called to testify and a c c o r d i ng to h im he saw accused no. 1 on the m o r n i ng of t he 3rd of F e b r u a ry and they stayed together at his b r o t h e r 's h o u se a nd w e re in each o t h e r' s company for m o st of t he t i me u n t il a c c u s ed n o. 1 left on the 13th M a r ch 1991. W h en a s k ed u n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on in respect of specific d a t es he c o u ld d e s c r i be w h at they did on each and every d a y. He a l so s a id t h at t h ey w e nt to Defence Head Q u a r t e rs on t he 3rd F e b r u a ry and on t he 7th F e b r u a r y. L a t er he said t h ey w e nt t h e re on t he 3rd F e b r u a r y, again on the 6th, the 7th and t he 8th F e b r u a r y. E a ch time accused number 1 w as t o ld to w a i t. L a t er u n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he said that a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 and h i m s e lf only went on t wo o c c a s i o ns to t he D e f e n ce F o r ce and that t h o se dates w e re the 6th and the 7th F e b r u a ry a nd on no o t h er d a t e s. He also d o e s n 't k n ow a n y t h i ng a b o ut s h o t g un b u l l e ts bought by accused n o. 1 at t he s i n g le q u a r t e r s. A c c u s ed n o. 3 t e s t i f i ed in his o wn d e f e n c e. A f t er he g a ve e v i d e n ce in respect of his p e r s o n al c i r c u m s t a n c es he d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge of the G r a m o w s ky incident and said he w as not p r e s e nt on that farm on the 29th D e c e m b er 1 9 9 0. In r e s p e ct of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de i n v o l v i ng M rs G r a m o w s k y, he d e n i ed that he w as offered legal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n. He f u r t h er said that M rs G r a m o w s ky w as one of t he w i t n e s s es s t a n d i ng o u t s i de in the c o r r i d or w h en p o l i ce o f f i c e rs c l e a r ly i n d i c a t ed accused number 3 by d e s c r i b i ng h is c l o t h es and a p p e a r a n ce and that he w as i n v o l v ed in t he V o i g ts i n c i d e n t. T h e se w i t n e s s es included M rs G r a m o w s ky as w e ll as Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and Mr V o i g t s. U n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he w as adamant that t h is all h a p p e n ed on t he same d a y. He al so t e s t i f i ed that even a f t er he had b e en so p o i n t ed o u t, all of t h e se w i t n e s s es had p r o b l e ms to i d e n t i fy h im in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade room. A c c u s ed n u m b er 3 d e n i ed t h at t he t wo f i r e - a r m s, E X H I B I TS 8 and 9 w e re t he o n es c o n f i s c a t ed by F i l l e m on K a n a e le and t he late W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s hi at his father's h o u se and said that t h ey in fact c o n f i s c a t ed his own w e a p o ns for w h i ch he had v a l id p e r m i t s. He said that his rifle w as a s h o t g un w i th o ne b a r r el and h is p i s t ol had a w h i te grip and w as not at all s i m i l ar to E X H I B IT 9. He denied that he w as a r r e s t ed at t he p l a ce a nd in t he m a n n e r, as K a n a e le t e s t i f i e d, or t h at he w as t a k en a l o ng to his father's h o u se w h e re t he r i f le w as h a n d ed o v er by his f a t h e r. A c c u s ed n o. 3 said he w as t a k en d i r e c t ly to t he p o l i ce cells a f t er b e i ng a r r e s t e d. He t e s t i f i ed that c e r t a in p e r s o n al b e l o n g i n gs of his as w e ll as his m o t h e r 's p e n s i on m o n ey w e re t a k en by t he p o l i ce o f f i c e r s. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on in respect of E X H I B IT TT n a m e ly h is c o n s e nt t h at M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g 's w e a p o ns found in h is p o s s e s s i on could be h a n d ed over to him, he d e n i ed that he w as shown t he w e a p o ns or that he signed a d o c u m e nt for t h at p u r p o s e. A c c o r d i ng to h im he signed the d o c u m e nt so t h at f i n g e r p r i n ts could be t a k en from him. He a l so d e n i ed h a v i ng b e en i n v o l v ed in t he K r i el i n c i d e n t. In r e s p e ct of t he V o i g ts i n c i d e nt he a d m i t t ed that he w as on t he farm a f t er b e i ng a p p r o a c h ed by t he d e c e a s ed and a c c u s ed n u m b er 2 to a c c o m p a ny t h em to t he farm for innocent r e a s o n s. A c c u s ed n u m b e rs 4 and 5 w e re also part of the g r o u p. A c c u s ed n u m b er 5 s t a y ed b e h i nd at t he m o t or v e h i c le and a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 a c c o m p a n i ed them to the h o m e s t e ad w h e re t h ey a s k ed for e q u i p m e nt to fix a t y r e. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed number 3 t h ey a s k ed for further e q u i p m e nt w h en Mr V o i g ts r e t u r n ed from t he w a t er p u m p. Then the d e c e a s ed grabbed Mr V o i g t s' a rm from b e h i nd and w as assisted by accused number 2, a l so k n o wn as K a t e m a, but h e, a c c u s ed number 3, attempted to stop t h em from a t t a c k i ng Mr V o i g t s. M rs V o i g ts then fired a few shots a f t er w h i ch they ran a w a y. He also saw that the d e c e a s ed t o ok Mr V o i g t s' fire-arm. T h ey ran away from the farm a nd m et on t h e ir w ay to W i n d h o e k. During c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on Mr S m a ll q u e s t i o n ed accused n o. 3 about his statement to C h i ef I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he and d e a lt w i th it t h o r o u g h l y, s e n t e n ce by s e n t e n c e. A c c u s ed n o. 3 c o n c e d ed t he c o r r e c t n e ss of c e r t a in s e n t e n c es in t he s t a t e m e nt but d e n i ed o t h e r s, m a i n ly t h o se i n c r i m i n a t i ng him and t h en said it w a s n 't i n t e r p r e t ed p r o p e r ly by K a n a e l e. T he next w i t n e ss that w as c a l l ed on behalf accused n o. 3 w as h is s i s t er C a r o l i ne T j a pa w ho significantly k n ew t h at a c c u s ed n o. 3 had the g u ns for 1 1/2 y e ar and could d e s c r i be t he g u ns that w e re a l l e g e d ly t a k en by K a n a e l e, e x a c t ly as a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 d i d. She denied h a v i ng been p r e s e nt w h en a c c u s ed n o. 3 w as a r r e s t e d. She t e s t i f i ed that she w as b e a t en by K a n a e le to tell t h em about t he w e a p o ns but not a b o ut t he w h e r e a b o u ts of a c c u s ed n o. 3. A c c o r d i ng to h e r, b o th w e a p o ns w e re h a n d ed over on the same day, a l t h o u gh she l a t er a d m i t t ed that it w a s n 't on t he same o c c a s i o n. She a l so c o n f i r m ed t h at t he c l o t h es and items that appears on p h o t os 1 and 2 in E x h i b it S w e re t a k en by the p o l i ce from h er m o t h e r 's h o u s e. T he next w i t n e ss w as a c c u s ed number 4 w ho t e s t i f i ed that he w o r k ed t o g e t h er w i th K a t e ma or a c c u s ed number 2. He w as a s k ed on t he p a r t i c u l ar day of the V o i g ts incident, n a m e ly t he 16th M a r ch 1991 by K a t e m a, to accompany t h em to t he f a rm of Mr V o i g t s. T h ey a r r i v ed t h e re at about 12 o ' c l o ck and saw J o h a n n es E i s eb and t he female w o r k er of Mr V o i g ts w ho t e s t i f i ed for the S t a t e. T h ey r e t u r n ed to W i n d h o ek and he w as d r o p p ed off at his room. He w as later picked up a g a in by E r a s t u s, t he d e c e a s e d, and K a t e ma w ho w i th a c c u s ed n o. 3 and 5 as w e ll as t wo o t h er p e r s o ns r e t u r n ed to t he farm. T h ey a g a in p a r k ed a d i s t a n ce from the h o u s e. A c c u s ed n u m b er 2, t o g e t h er w i th t he d e c e a s ed and a c c u s ed number 3 w e nt to t he f a rm w h i le he and a c c u s ed number 5 stayed b e h i n d. T he t h r ee p e r s o ns t o ok the spare w h e el w i th them. He w as i n i t i a l ly informed by K a t e ma that they w a n t ed to p i ck up t he p r o p e r ty of one of the persons being two w e l d i ng m a c h i n es and g as c y l i n d e r s. He saw that several of the p e r s o ns w e re a r m ed w i th p i s t o l s. It became apparent u n d er c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i on that he k n ew that something w as not r i g ht and t h e r e f o re stayed b e h i n d. W h en he heard the shots he hid a w ay and in p a r t i c u l ar w h en a m o t or v e h i c le a p p r o a c h e d. T he v e h i c le a p p r o a c h ed again and he remained h i d d en and h e a rd s h o ts in t he v i c i n i ty of t h e ir m o t or v e h i c l e. He and a c c u s ed n o. 5 t h en ran away in d i f f e r e nt d i r e c t i o n s. A ll t he p e o p le m et on t he road to W i n d h o ek or in W i n d h o ek and he w e nt b a ck to his room. He w as picked up later by t he p o l i ce and t a k en to his room in W a n a h e da in the B r e w e r y 's S i n g le Q u a r t e r s. A c c o r d i ng to him, he and K a n a e le stayed b e h i nd in t he m o t or v e h i c le w h i le the police o f f i c e rs s e a r c h ed h is r o om and if I u n d e r s t a nd his evidence c o r r e c t l y, a f t er c e r t a in t h i n gs w e re taken by the p o l i c e, they r e t u r n ed and f o u nd o t h er items in accused number 2' s room w h e r e u p on a c c u s ed number 4 w as taken to his room and again t he r o om w as s e a r c h ed but only c e r t a in d o c u m e n ts c o n c e r n i ng n a t u re c o n s e r v a t i on w e re t a k en from his b r i e f c a s e. He w as a r r e s t ed and w as in c u s t o dy w h en the De Lange incident o c c u r r e d. He t e s t i f i ed about t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es w h en he w as i d e n t i f i ed by Mr V o i g ts and also about t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es d u r i ng w h i ch Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg as w e ll as M rs G r a m o w s ky i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed number 3. He said neither had any d i f f i c u l ty to i d e n t i fy a c c u s ed number 3. No w i t n e s s es w as c a l l ed by a c c u s ed n o . 4. M i c h a el A n g u l a, accused number 5 t e s t i f i ed that he is 18 y e a rs old and also informed the Court of h is p e r s o n al c i r c u m s t a n c e s. Primus A n g u l a, alias K a t e m a, a c c u s ed n u m b er 2, w ho w as not present during this t r i a l, is his b r o t h e r - i n- l a w. At the time of the incident, accused n u m b er 5, w as w o r k i ng in his b r o t h e r 's Cuca shop in W a n a h e d a, K a t u t u r a. He m et accused number 3 for the first t i me w h en t h ey w e nt to t he farm of Mr V o i g ts on the 16th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. He a l so m et a c c u s ed number 4 on that day and also t he d e c e a s e d, E r a s t us M u u n d a. He met accused numbers 6 and 7 in p r i s o n. He d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge of or involvement in t he G r a m o w s ky i n c i d e n t. In r e s p e ct of the V o i g t s' incident he t e s t i f i ed t h at t he d e c e a s e d, E r a s t us M u u n d a, Primus A n g u l a, a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 and a c c u s ed number 4, c a me to his p l a ce on t he 16th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. F r om there they went to S h a n d u m b a la w h e re t h ey s t a y ed for a short w h i le and the deceased o b t a i n ed a b o t t le of R i c h e l i e u. From there they went to H a k a h a na S e r v i ce S t a t i on and t h en to K l e in W i n d h o ek w h e re they p i c k ed up t wo o t h er p e r s o ns and then d r o ve to Mr V o i g t s' farm w h e re t h ey p a r k ed in t he road. A c c o r d i ng to him he w as a s l e ep w h en t h ey s t o p p ed at Mr V o i g t s' farm. He w as t o ld by M u u n d a, t he d e c e a s e d, to stay behind and three m en w e nt to t he farm, t a k i ng t he spare w h e el of the v e h i c le a l o n g. T he t wo p e r s o ns p i c k ed up at K l e in W i n d h o ek followed t he t h r ee m e n. He d i d n 't notice any w e a p o ns on a n y o n e. He h e a rd s h o ts and he and accused number 4 w ho also stayed b e h i nd at t he c a r, m o v ed away from the c a r. Primus A n g u la and M a t h e us T j a pa c a me and they kept on w a l k i ng w a i t i ng for M u u n da to c o m e. T h ey w a l k ed t h r o u gh the night and t he d e c e a s ed n e v er t u r n ed u p. A c c o r d i ng to him, he d i d n 't run away, he o n ly w a l k ed away b e c a u se of the s h o o t i n g. He t e s t i f i ed a b o ut t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de of the 3rd A p r il w h en n e i t h er Mr and M rs V o i g ts i d e n t i f i ed him but Mr V o i g ts i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 3 and 4. He denied any k n o w l e d ge of or i n v o l v e m e nt in t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg i n c i d e n t. S i m i l a r ly he d e n i ed any i n v o l v e m e nt or k n o w l e d ge of t he K r i el and t he De L a n ge i n c i d e n t s. He w as arrested on the 27th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on by Mr Small a c c u s ed number 5 first said that he fell a s l e ep in the b a ck of the v e h i c le b e f o re t h ey t u r n ed off the t a r r ed road o n to the dirt road n e ar K a p p 's farm, but later c h a n g ed that and said that he fell a s l e ep a f t er they t u r n ed onto t he dirt r o a d. He d e n i ed t h at he e v er t r a v e l l ed on that road to t he v i c i n i ty of Mr V o i g t s' farm, b e f o re or after t he incident and had p r o b l e ms in e x p l a i n i ng how he knew w h i ch w ay to run a f t er t he s h o o t i ng as he w as a s l e ep w h en they a r r i v ed on t he farm. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he also c h a n g ed his e v i d e n ce to t he e f f e ct that a c c u s ed number 3 and t he o t h e rs joined him and a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 in the v i c i n i ty of the c ar just a f t er t he s h o ts w e re fired and that they t h en m o v ed away t o g e t h er f r om t h at farm e v en b e f o re the n e i g h b o ur a r r i v ed by c a r. He c o u l d n 't e x p l a in w hy a c c u s ed number 4 stated to C h i ef I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he that he r e m a i n ed b e h i nd a l o ne at t he c a r. A c c u s ed number 5 said that he w as just asked to go a l o ng on t h at p a r t i c u l ar day and that he t h o u g ht t h e re m ay be a p a r ty or s o m e t h i ng like t h a t. He w as told that Mr V o i g ts w as a f r i e nd of K a t e m a. He said if a c c u s ed number 4 t o ld t he C o u rt that he remained at t he c ar u n t il the t i me t h at t he shots w e re fired at the c a r, he's not t e l l i ng t he t r u th b e c a u se a c c o r d i ng to him, a f t er accused n o. 3 and P r i m us A n g u la c a me r u n n i ng they m o v ed away and only saw t he n e i g h b o u r 's v e h i c l e 's lights in the d i s t a n c e. He said he saw Mr V o i g t s' p i s t o l, E X H I B IT 1 on t he w ay to W i n d h o ek w h en K a t e ma showed it to him. He did not see the o t h er t wo u n k n o wn p e o p le again on t h e ir w ay to W i n d h o e k. It w as put to a c c u s ed number 5 by Mr Small that t h e re w e re no such p e r s o ns and that it w as in fact only t he 5 of t h em w ho w e nt to Mr V o i g t s' farmhouse and that it w as in fact, he and a c c u s ed number 4 w ho w e nt t h e re as w e ll as a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 2, 3 and the d e c e a s e d. He d e n i ed t h i s. He f u r t h er t e s t i f i ed that he w as a r r e s t ed in t he N o r t h, b e c a u se he left for t he N o r th d u r i ng t he E a s t er w e e k e n d. A c c u s ed number 5 c a l l ed one d e f e n ce w i t n e s s, namely h is b r o t h er Immanuel A n g u l a, w ho t e s t i f i ed that a c c u s ed n u m b er 5 used to stay w i th him in W i n d h o ek b e f o re he w as a r r e s t ed and that he w o r k ed for him in his C u ca shop w h i le he h i m s e lf w o r k ed as a p e t r ol a t t e n d a nt in O k a h a n d j a. He t e s t i f i ed that d u r i ng a p p r o x i m a t e ly the last t wo w e e ks of D e c e m b er 199 0, accused n o. 5 left for the N o r th and r e t u r n ed at t he end of J a n u a ry 1 9 9 1. A f t er that he stayed in his room in W i n d h o ek and w o r k ed for him in the C u ca s h o p. P r i m us A n g u la w as his b r o t h e r - i n - l aw and used to c o me to his C u ca shop in W i n d h o ek as w e ll as accused n o. 3. During t he t i me of t he V o i g ts incident accused n o. 5 w as t he o n ly one w o r k i ng for h im at t he C u ca shop and he c o u l d n 't support t he e v i d e n ce of a c c u s ed number 5 that he himself and a c c u s ed number 5 w o r k ed s h i f ts on that p a r t i c u l ar S a t u r d a y. A c c u s ed n o. 6 t e s t i f i ed that he is 40 y e a rs old and informed t he C o u rt about his p e r s o n al c i r c u m s t a n c e s. A c c o r d i ng to h im he stayed at his e m p l o y e r, R o s s i n g 's camp at a m i ne n e ar O t j i w a r o n go but he used to go over w e e k e n ds to O t j i w a r o n go w h e re he t h en stayed at the house of Johannes P a u l u s, namely h o u se N o. 0/94 in O r w e t o v e n i. T h is is the house w h e re he and a c c u s ed n o. 1 w e re a r r e s t ed on the 27th M a r ch 1991. Of t he o t h er a c c u s ed he only k n ew accused no's 1 and 7 and m et t he o t h e rs in c u s t o d y. He t e s t i f i ed that he k n ew nothing of t he G r a m o w s k y / S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g / K r i el and V o i g ts i n c i d e n t s. In respect of t he Kriel incident w h i ch o c c u r r ed on t he 9th M a r ch 1991 he t e s t i f i ed in his e v i d e n c e - i n - c h i ef t h at he w as on duty on that day at the m i ne busy sifting m e a l ie m e a l. L a t er during c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he said he c a me to t he h o u se of J o h a n n es P a u l us on Friday, but w h en he w as f u r t h er q u e s t i o n ed in respect of his e a r l i er e v i d e n c e, he said he left at 7 o'clock that m o r n i ng again for the m i ne and that he w as on duty u n t il 6 o'clock the a f t e r n o o n. He w as c l e a r ly v e ry u n c o m f o r t a b le b e c a u se it w as put to h im t h at a c c u s ed number l's a b s e n ce w h om he i n i t i a l ly said w as not at J o h a n n es P a u l u s' house on that day c o u ld then not be v o u c h ed for the rest of t he S a t u r d a y, the 9th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. He d e n i ed that they ever had any rifles at house 0/94 as H e i ki M a t h i as t e s t i f i e d. He testified that E X H I B IT 12 w as not found in his p o s s e s s i on and that he never had t h is r i f le in h is p o s s e s s i o n. W h en it w as later shown to him d u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n, he a d m i t t ed that this w as t he rifle t h at he o b t a i n ed at Mr De L a n g e 's farm and handed over to a c c u s ed n u m b er 7. He also t e s t i f i ed about t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de on t he 2nd A p r il 1991 and initially said that Mr K r i el e n t e r ed t he parade-room, but couldn't identify a n y o ne and w as a s k ed to look again but w h en he still c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o ne and shook his head, he left the p a r a de room. T h en a D a m a ra p e r s on entered and pointed a p e r s on o u t. On t h at day Mr K r i el did not point him out. A f t er r e s u m p t i on of t he p r o c e e d i n gs the next m o r n i ng w h i le accused number 1 w as still t e s t i f y i ng in c h i e f, he suddenly r e m e m b e r ed t h at he m a de a m i s t a ke the p r e v i o us day and said that Mr K r i el r e t u r n ed t he same day and then identified him and a c c u s ed number 1 a f t er the p o l i ce moved him and accused number 1 to t he first t wo p l a c es in the line and a B l a ck p o l i c e m an c a me and stood b e h i nd them. A f t er the statements by h is C o u n s el w e re put to h im in respect of this i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de n a m e ly that Mr K r i el couldn't identify accused n o ' s. 1 and 6 and t h en left the room, w h e r e a f t er Mrs K r i el e n t e r ed a nd c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o n e, t h e r e a f t er r e - e n t e r ed and t h en i d e n t i f i ed him and accused number 1, it w as c l e ar t h at a c c u s ed number 6 had difficulty in d e s c r i b i ng w h at h a p p e n ed d u r i ng that i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e. In respect of t he De L a n ge i n c i d e nt accused number 6 t e s t i f i ed that h e, a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 and accused number 7 went to look for c a t e r p i l l a r s, w h i ch t h ey w a n t ed to s e l l, early that m o r n i ng and w h en t h ey w e re in that v i c i n i t y, accused number 7 suddenly r e a l i s ed that t h ey w e re near Mr De L a n g e 's farm w h e re he u s ed to w o rk and that Mr De Lange still owed him his salary. A c c o r d i ng to h im t h ey c o l l e c t ed a number of c a t e r p i l l a rs and left it in b a gs b e h i n d. They saw Mr and M rs De L a n ge c o m i ng out of t he h o u s e. T h ey approached them and Mr De L a n ge a s k e d: "You K a f f i r s, what are y ou looking for at my f a r m ? ". A c c u s ed n o. 1 then passed t h r o u gh the fence and Mr De L a n ge c a l l ed t he dogs to attack accused n o. 1 and told t h em t h at t h ey m u st lie down so that the d o gs w o u l d n 't b i te t h e m. A c c u s ed n o. 1 then said that they w e re c o m i ng in p e a c e. W h en t he d o gs ran at accused number 1, he p i c k ed up s t o n es and t h r ew it at the d o g s. Mr De L a n ge further i n c i t ed t he d o gs to b i te accused number 1. He t h en just s aw t h at a c c u s ed number 1 had taken the p i s t ol out of his jacket and he fired t wo shots into the ground at the d o gs w h e r e u p on t he o w n er of t he farm approached him and hit at h im w i th h is w a l k i ng s t i c k. A c c u s ed n o. 1 t h en fell b a ck o n to t he f e n ce and t h en shot at Mr De L a n g e. He saw that Mr De L a n ge f e ll d o wn w h i le he and accused n o. 7 w e re still s t a n d i ng on t he o t h er side of the fence, some 3 to 4 m e t r es from Mr De L a n g e. W h en he fell Mr De Lange screamed to h is w i fe to f e t ch t he rifle and come and shoot t he K a f f i r s. W h en M rs De L a n ge started running to the h o u s e, a c c u s ed number 6 c a l l ed h er b a ck and said: "Miesies, we are just h e re in p e a c e ". He a l so told her that they had c o me in p e a ce that a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 c o u ld collect his m o n e y. They t h en a p p r o a c h ed h er and a c c u s ed n o. 7 asked w h e t h er she still r e m e m b e r ed h im and said that they w e re just looking for his m o n e y. M rs De L a n ge a p p e a r ed very scared and asked t h em not to k i ll or h a rm her and said that she had no d i f f i c u l t i es w i th B l a c k s, it w as just her husband w ho used to shoot B l a c k s. A c c u s ed n o. 6 t h en asked w i th what did he shoot t he B l a c ks and M rs De L a n ge r e p l i ed w i th r i f l e s, w h e r e u p on he asked w h e re t h o se w e a p o ns w e r e. M rs De Lange said it w as in the h o u se and i n v i t ed h im to come into the house and said she w i ll h a nd it o v er to him. He, Mrs De L a n ge and t he o t h er t wo a c c u s ed t h en w e nt to the house and w h i le a c c u s ed n o. 1 w ho w as c l e a n i ng his face w i th his shirt and a c c u s ed n o. 7 w a i t ed o u t s i d e, he went into t he house w h e re she showed h im t he w e a p o ns w h i ch he t o o k. He w e nt out of t he h o u s e. O u t s i de he found the other t wo accused. A c c u s ed n o. 7 t h en said that they came in peace and n ow t h ey had e n c o u n t e r ed d i f f i c u l t i es w h i le he only w a n t ed his m o n e y. U p on t h is M rs De L a n ge said she didn't have any m o n ey but it w as b e t t er t h at he t a ke the guns and go and sell it, w h e r e u p on a c c u s ed n o. 6 h a n d ed the t wo fire-arms to a c c u s ed n o. 7 and t h ey t h en left the farm. He denied that Mr De L a n ge w as a s s a u l t ed except for the shot by a c c u s ed n o. 1. He d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge of a s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a ce and said he h as n o t h i ng to say about the stolen s h e e p. He d e n i ed t h at h is shoes m a de tracks similar to that of E X H I B IT J J 1 - 3. He i n d i c a t ed the shoe that he w as w e a r i ng at t he t i m e, w h i ch had a sort of zig-zag p a t t e rn and w as a number 8, c o u ld h a ve m a de any of t he t r a c ks found by I n s p e c t or K o t z e. W h en his p l ea and answers to q u e s t i o ns of t he m a g i s t r a te in r e s p e ct of the S e c t i on 119 p r o c e e d i n gs of t he M a g i s t r a t e 's C o u rt w as put to him, he d e n i ed m o st of his a n s w e r s, b ut a d m i t t ed some of it w h i ch didn't i n c r i m i n a te him. A c c u s ed number 7 t e s t i f i ed about his p e r s o n al c i r c u m s t a n c e s. He d e n i ed that, except for accused n u m b er 6, he had k n o wn any of t he other accused p r e v i o u s l y. He t e s t i f i ed as w as put to Mr and Mrs De Lange by c o u n s e l, that he in fact w o r k ed for Mr De Lange during the first four m o n t hs of 1990 and said that d e s p i te p r o m i s es of p a y m e n t, he w as n e v er p a i d. He said that that w as the r e a s on w hy he a c c e p t ed Mr De L a n g e 's invitation on the 7th M a r ch 1991 to go to t he f a rm Ill to r e c e i ve his p a y m e n t. As he w as again not paid and only p r o m i s ed p a y m e n t, he left on the a f t e r n o on of the 9th M a r ch 1991 and r e p o r t ed Mr De L a n g e' s a t t i t u de to the p o l i ce on M o n d a y. A f t er I n s p e c t or K o t ze p h o n ed Mr De L a n ge and w as t o ld that he r e f u s ed to pay him b e c a u se he just left t he farm w i t h o ut w o r k i n g, t h e re w as n o t h i ng e l se that he c o u ld d o. On t he m o r n i ng of t he i n c i d e n t, in the early h o u r s, he a c c u s ed n o. 6 and accused n o. 1 left to s e a r ch for c a t e r p i l l a r s. W h en t h ey a r r i v ed at a p a r t i c u l ar p l a c e, a c c u s ed n o. 7 told the o t h er a c c u s ed that he u s ed to w o rk on that farm but his salary w as not p a i d. T h ey then w e nt to Mr De L a n g e 's house to a sk for his p a y m e n t. He said he m et a c c u s ed n o. 1 only that m o r n i ng w h en he c a me to fetch a c c u s ed n o. 6 to go and look for c a t e r p i l l a r s. T h r o u g h o ut h is e v i d e n ce in c h i e f, he t e s t i f i ed that the t h r ee of t h em w e nt to look for c a t e r p i l l a r s, but later in c r o s s- e x a m i n a t i on w h en he w as a s k ed w hy he now suddenly r e a l i s ed he w as n e ar Mr De L a n g e' s farm and as he w as the o ne w ho t o ok t he lead to go and l o ok for c a t e r p i l l a r s, he said t h at t h r ee o t h er ladies a c c o m p a n i ed t h em and that they w e re t he p e o p le w ho k n ew w h e re the c a t e r p i l l a rs w e r e. W h en t h ey a r r i v ed at t he f a r m s t e a d, t h ey stayed for a short p e r i od at t he r o om w h e re he used to live in, d r a nk some w a t er and t h en saw Mr and M rs De L a n ge c o m i ng out of t he h o u s e. T h ey w e nt to m e et Mr and M rs De L a n g e. A c c u s ed n o. 1 w a l k ed in front and Mr De L a n ge just c a l l ed t he d o gs to c o me and b i te t h e m. Mr De L a n ge said something a b o u t: "What are y ou K a f f i rs d o i ng on my farm." He said a c c u s ed n o. 1 t h en c l i m b ed o v er t he fence w h i le they r e m a i n ed b e h i n d. The d o gs w e re r u n n i ng t o w a r ds a c c u s ed n o. 1. A c c u s ed n o. 1 p i c k ed up s t o n es and t h r ew it at the d o g s. A c c u s ed n o. 1 then said: "We a re just h e re in p e a c e ." Mr De L a n ge w a l k ed towards a c c u s ed n o. 1 and he s u d d e n ly saw that Mr De L a n ge hit a c c u s ed n o. 1 w i th a " k i e r i e ". A c c u s ed n o. 1 fell on the fence and he s aw t h at he t h en t o ok a p i s t ol from his jacket and fired t wo s h o ts i n to t he g r o u n d. He just saw Mr De L a n ge g o i ng d o w n. He said Mr De L a n ge w o ke up a bit and then c a l l ed h is w i fe to get t he p i s t ol and "shoot the K a f f i r s ". A c c u s ed n o. 6 w a l k ed t o w a r ds M rs De L a n ge and said she must not r un a w ay b ut w a it to be told s o m e t h i n g. M rs De Lange w a i t ed for h im and he and a c c u s ed n o. 6 a p p r o a c h ed M rs De L a n g e. A c c u s ed n o. 6 t o ld M rs De L a n ge that they had no p r o b l e ms or d i f f i c u l t i es w i th h e r. A c c u s ed number 7 asked h er w h e t h er she r e m e m b e r ed him. He said he just c a me to c o l l e ct h is m o n e y. S he w as standing t h e re and m o v i ng n e r v o u s ly a r o u n d. M rs De L a n ge said she has no p r o b l e ms w i th Black p e o p l e, it is just h er h u s b a n d, w ho used to kill them. A c c u s ed n o. 6 a s k e d, w i th w h a t? A nd she said w i th fire-arms w h e r e u p on a c c u s ed n o. 6 asked w h e re t h o se w e a p o ns w e r e. S he t h en i n v i t ed t h em into the house to c o me and fetch t he w e a p o n s. He w a i t ed o u t s i de for accused n o. 1 w h i le accused n u m b er 6 and M rs De L a n ge entered the h o u se and accused n u m b er 6 r e t u r n ed w i th t he f i r e - a r m s, w h i ch included a p i s t ol and a r i f l e. He asked M rs De L a n ge a g a in for his m o n ey and she said he m u st just t a ke the t wo w e a p o n s. They t h en l e f t. U n d er c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he said he didn't w a nt to sell t he w e a p o ns b ut w o u ld have kept it and w h en M rs De L a n ge c a me and a s k ed it, he w o u ld e x c h a n ge it for the m o n ey t h at t h ey o w ed h i m. He also said he w o u ld have had no p r o b l e ms if t he p o l i ce w o u ld a sk him w h at h a p p e n ed to the w e a p o n s, to e x p l a in it and t he reason for taking it. He i d e n t i f i ed E X H I B IT 12 as t he rifle that he t o ok from Mr De L a n g e 's f a rm as w e ll as E X H I B IT 14 the p i s t o l. He d e n i ed any k n o w l e d ge of a s l a u g h t e r i ng place or the theft of the s h e e p. He a l so d e n i ed that his shoes m a de t r a c ks similar to that i n d i c a t ed by I n s p e c t or K o t ze on J J 1 - 3. He said he w e a rs a n o. 7 s h oe and i n d i c a t ed that it w as the same shoe that he had on in C o u rt w h i ch shoe has a sole w i th a smooth s u r f a c e. He a d m i t t ed that E X H I B IT 14 w as found on his p e r s on w h en he w as a r r e s t ed and that the rifle w as found in his r o o m. He d e n i ed t h at it w as E X H I B IT 2, t he rifle of Mr K r i el and s a id t h at it w as E X H I B IT 12, the rifle that he o b t a i n ed from Mr De L a n g e 's farm. A c c o r d i ng to him he w as t a k en to t he P o l i ce S t a t i on and the two fire-arms w e re put on t he d e sk in t he C h a r ge O f f i ce before he w as locked up and t h at t h e re w e re no o t h er fire-arms on that d e sk at that s t a g e. He d e n i ed t he c o n t e n ts of the statements that he m a de and w h i ch w as a l l o w ed e a r l i er by the C o u r t. He d e n i ed that t he p l e a d ed g u i l ty of robbing Mr and M rs De L a n ge or that he d i d n 't m a ke any statement during the s e c t i on p r o c e e d i n g s. He said that he only e x p l a i n ed that he t o ok t he r i f l es w h i ch w e re given to him by M rs De L a n g e. T h is c o n c l u d ed t he evidence for the D e f e n ce and all t he c a s es for t he a c c u s ed w e re closed by the r e s p e c t i ve C o u n s e l. Mr G r o b l er i n d i c a t ed that he w as still l o o k i ng for a p a r t i c u l ar w i t n e ss and w i th the consent of Mr S m a ll and Mr K a s u to t he C o u rt indicated that Mr G r o b l er w i ll be a f f o r d ed t he o p p o r t u n i ty to re-open accused n o. l's c a se for t h at p a r t i c u l ar w i t n e s s e s' evidence if he w as a v a i l a b le on t he 10th A u g u st at 0 9 : 3 0. The case w as then p o s t p o n ed for a r g u m e nt on the 10th August 1 9 9 2. At t he resumption of the t r i al on t he 10th A u g u st 1 9 9 2, Mr G r o b l er applied for re-opening of accused number 1's c a se to c a ll Mr S i m e on K a n t o n d o k w a, the w i t n e ss w ho c o u ld not be found e a r l i e r. This w as allowed and Mr K a n t o n d o k wa t e s t i f i ed that he knew accused number 1 since 1989 w h en t he l a t t er a s s i s t ed during the e l e c t i on p r o c e s s. He saw a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 again last year on the 8th M a r ch in W i n d h o ek a nd m et h im at Jason * s house w h e re there w as a p a r t y. He saw a c c u s ed number 1 again the next m o r n i ng and he g a ve a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 R 2 00 just out of g r a t i t u de for t he latter" s a s s i s t a n ce during the e l e c t i o n. He saw a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 a l so on the 13th March 1992 at t he single q u a r t e rs in K a t u t u ra w h e re the latter w as looking for a lift and he t o ok a c c u s ed number 1 along to O t j i w a r o n g o. D u r i ng c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on he c o u l d n 't remember t he d ay of t he w e ek w h en he met accused number 1 for t he first t i me s i n ce 1 9 8 9. Mr K a n t o n d o k w a, w ho w o re a p r i s o n e r 's g a r m e n t, a d m i t t ed that he w as in p r i s on but refused to a n s w er Mr S m a l l 's q u e s t i on why he w as in p r i s o n. A r g u m e n ts on behalf of the v a r i o us accused t h en e n s u ed b a s ed on w r i t t en heads of argument w h i ch all t h r ee c o u n s el h ad s u b m i t t ed to the Court in advance and the C o u rt w i sh to e x p r e ss its g r a t i t u de to c o u n s el in t h is r e g a r d. I a l so w i sh to e x p r e ss my g r a t i t u de to my a s s e s s o rs for t h e ir t r e m e n d o us a s s i s t a n c e. I h a ve d e a lt w i th the e v i d e n ce of t he v a r i o us w i t n e s s es for the S t a te and D e f e n ce e x t e n s i v e ly and shall c o n s e q u e n t ly not r e f er to t h o se w i t n e s s e s' e v i d e n ce in d e t a il e x c e pt w h en it is n e c e s s a r y. It is n e c e s s a ry to m a ke t he f o l l o w i ng o b s e r v a t i o ns b e f o re c o n s i d e r i ng the evidence in r e s p e ct of t he d i f f e r e nt c h a r g e s. 1. T he t r i al in this m a t t er lasted for 40 d a ys and 48 w i t n e s s es w e re c a l l ed to t e s t i fy on b e h a lf of t he S t a t e. S e v e r al days w e re also spent in r e s p e ct of t he t r i a ls w i t h in a trial w i th r e g a rd to t h r ee s t a t e m e n ts m a de by accused numbers 3 and 7 r e s p e c t i v e ly and at t he c o n c l u s i on of that part of t he t r i a l, d u r i ng w h i ch I sat w i t h o ut a s s e s s o rs and I h a n d ed d o wn a d e t a i l ed judgment and a c c e p t ed the three s t a t e m e n ts as a d m i s s i b le e v i d e n c e. A f t er t he State c l o s ed i ts c a s e, a p p l i c a t i o ns on behalf of t he accused for a c q u i t t al w e re m a d e, but t h e se w e re r e f u s e d. A ll t he a c c u s ed t h en d e c i d ed to t e s t i fy in t h e ir own d e f e n ce and t h ey c a l l ed 5 d e f e n ce w i t n e s s e s. 2. T he i n c i d e n ts w h i ch g a ve rise to t he d i f f e r e nt c h a r g es in t h is c a se occurred o v er a p e r i od of 3 m o n t h s. 3. T h e re w e re five i n c i d e n ts w h e re p e o p le w e re h e ld at g un p o i nt at t h e ir r e s p e c t i ve h o m es and r o b b e d: G r a m o w s ky incident - 29 D e c e m b er 1990 - O m a r u ru d i s t r i c t; S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg incident - 3 F e b r u a ry 1991 O t j i w a r o n go d i s t r i c t; K r i el incident - 9 M a r ch 1991 - O t j i w a r o n g o; V o i g ts incident - 16 M a r ch 1991 - O k a h a n d ja d i s t r i c t; De L a n ge incident - 24 M a r ch 1991 - O u t jo d i s t r i c t. A p p r o x i m a t e ly the same m o d us o p e r a n di w as f o l l o w ed in e a ch c a s e: (a) m o re t h an one p e r s on a p p r o a c h ed the v i c t i m s; (b) u s u a l ly one or m o re p e r s o ns r e m a i n ed in t he b a c k g r o u nd or not v i s i b le to t he v i c t i m s; (c) t he v i c t i ms w e re suddenly c o n f r o n t ed and o v e r p o w e r e d; (d) t he v i c t i ms w e re either a s s a u l t ed or t i ed up or l a t er locked up; (e) in m o re than o ne i n s t a n ce sticks and p a n g as w e re in t he hands of the a s s a i l a n ts and in s o me i n s t a n c es the sticks w e re used to a s s a u lt t he v i c t i m s; (f) In all the i n c i d e n t s, except the V o i g ts i n c i d e nt w h e re t he a t t a ck w as i n t e r r u p t e d, t he r e c e i v er of t he t e l e p h o ne w as cut off or r i p p ed off; (g) in all the i n c i d e n ts the a s s a i l a n ts w a n t ed m o n ey and r i f l e s; (h) in all the i n c i d e n ts the a s s a i l a n ts t o ok f i r e - a r ms a f t er t h r e a ts or a s s a u l ts and in some a l so m o n ey and o t h er c o m m o d i t i e s. (i) in t he a s s a u l ts t he age or sex of t he v i c t i ms d id not m a t t er to t he a s s a i l a n t s; (j) in m o re than one instance the i m p r e s s i on w as c r e a t ed to t he v i c t i ms that the a s s a i l a n ts w e re p o l i ce o f f i c e rs or as b e i ng from t he p o l i ce (Kriel, G r a m o w s ky and De L a n g e .) 5. E x c e pt in t he De L a n ge and V o i g ts i n c i d e n ts t he a c c u s ed d e n i ed b e i ng p r e s e nt at the scene of t he i n c i d e n t. C o n s e q u e n t ly c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on in the other i n c i d e n ts w e re m a i n ly d i r e c t ed at the i d e n t i f i c a t i on of t he a s s a i l a n ts and in p a r t i c u l ar at the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es that w e re h e l d. 6. As t he S t a t e 's c a se against the accused d e p e n d ed to a l a r ge extent on i d e n t i f i c a t i on of t he r e s p e c t i ve a c c u s ed to link t h em w i th a p a r t i c u l ar i n c i d e n t, m a ny i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es w e re held and m a ny w i t n e s s es w e re c a l l ed to t e s t i fy in t h is r e s p e c t. 7. O t h er e v i d e n ce w as p r e s e n t ed to link c e r t a in a c c u s ed to c e r t a in i n c i d e n t s, e.g. that f i r e - a r m s, e t c ., w e re found in p o s s e s s i on of a p a r t i c u l ar accused. 8. C e r t a in of the a c c u s ed m a de sworn s t a t e m e n ts and a t r i al w i t h in a t r i al ensued to d e t e r m i ne t he a d m i s s i b i l i ty of t h e se s t a t e m e n t s. 9. T he S t a te relied on common p u r p o se in respect of e v e ry a c c u s e d 's i n v o l v e m e nt in a p a r t i c u l ar i n c i d e n t, but not that every accused w as also involved in all t he i n c i d e n ts on the b a s is of common p u r p o s e. 1 0. As i d e n t i f i c a t i on played an important and to some e x t e nt a d e c i s i ve role in the State's c a se a g a i n st t he a c c u s e d, the Court again acquainted itself w i th t he l aw in r e s p e ct of identification and in p a r t i c u l ar i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es as well as the a p p l i c a b le p r i n c i p l es that w e re kept in mind t h r o u g h o ut t he t r i al and in p a r t i c u l ar during the e v a l u a t i on of t he e v i d e n c e. B e f o re d e a l i ng then w i th the evidence in r e s p e ct of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n, it is n e c e s s a ry to reflect b r i e f ly u p on t he p r i n c i p l es laid down in v a r i o us authorities in t h is r e g a r d: "It is w e ll r e c o g n i z ed that the i d e n t i f i c a t i on of an accused p e r s on as the c r i m i n al is a m a t t er n o t o r i o u s ly fraught w i th error, and in r e c e nt y e a rs the A p p e l l a te Division has f r e q u e n t ly d i r e c t ed trial courts to exercise c a u t i on in t e s t i ng identity e v i d e n c e. To t h is end, m a t t e rs such as the identifying w i t n e s s e s' p r e v i o us a c q u a i n t a n ce w i th the accused, the d i s t i n c t i v e n e ss of t he alleged c r i m i n a l 's a p p e a r a n ce or c l o t h i n g, t he o p p o r t u n i t i es for o b s e r v a t i on or r e c o g n i t i o n, and t he time lapse between the o c c u r r e n ce and t he t r i a l, should be investigated in d e t a i l, s i n ce w i t h o ut such c a r e f ul i n v e s t i g a t i on a r e a s o n a b le d o u bt as to t he identity of the a c c u s ed m u st p e r s i s t ." L a n d s d o wn & C a m p b e l l, South A f r i c an C r i m i n al L aw and P r o c e d u r e, V o l. V at 9 3 5. E v i d e n ce of i d e n t i ty is treated by our c o u r ts w i th c a u t i o n. S V M t e t w a. 1972(3) SA 766 (A) AT 768; S v M o l a p i, 1963(2) SA 29(A) at 3 2. V a r i o us factors like the w i t n e s s e s' p r e v i o us a c q u a i n t a n ce w i th t he accused, accused's c l o t h i n g, specific f e a t u r e s, o p p o r t u n i ty for o b s e r v a t i o n, time lapse b e t w e en t he i n c i d e nt and t he t r i al should be properly i n v e s t i g a t ed to r e j e ct any r e a s o n a b le doubt as to the identity of an a c c u s ed p e r s o n. In t h is regard the Court is m o re c o n c e r n ed a b o ut t he w i t n e s s' accuracy than his sincerity. P r e v i o us identification at a p r o p e r ly o r g a n i s ed i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e, taking every p r e c a u t i on i n to a c c o u nt to p r e v e nt any indication to the w i t n e ss in r e s p e ct of t he s u s p e c t 's identity, w i ll of c o u r se c a r ry m o re w e i g ht in e v a l u a t i ng the w i t n e s s' e v i d e n c e. C e r t a in g u i d e l i n es in r e s p e ct of i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es h a ve been r e c o g n i s ed by t he a u t h o r i t i es and they should be i m p l e m e n t ed to e n s u re t h at an i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade is fair and that t he w i t n e ss is not influenced at a l l. C e r t a in rules are a l so u s u a l ly f o l l o w ed by police o f f i c e rs c o n d u c t i ng such p a r a d e s. S e e: H i e m s t r a: S u i d - A f r i k a a n se S t r a f p r o s e s, 4th ed. , 73 - 7 4. Du Toit. e t _ a l, Commentary on t he C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A c t, 3/6 to 3 / 1 2. "An identification p a r a de is not o n ly an e f f e c t i ve i n v e s t i g a t i ve p r o c e d u r e, but a l so s e r v es an important evidential p u r p o se in that it c an provide the p r o s e c u t i on w i th e v i d e n ce w h i ch is of far m o re p e r s u a s i ve v a l ue than an i d e n t i f i c a t i on in court, i.e. the s o - c a l l ed 'dock i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ' ". Du Toit, et al (supra) at 3/5. I h a ve dealt w i th the e v i d e n ce of all the p o l i ce o f f i c e rs i n v o l v ed in the v a r i o us i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e s. C o u n s el for the d e f e n ce have levelled serious c r i t i c i sm in r e s p e ct of s e v e r al of these i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es and h a ve r e q u e s t ed me not to accept them. I shall deal w i th the w e i g ht that I a t t a ch to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on of t he w i t n e s s es in r e s p e ct of t he v a r i o us i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es w h en I e v a l u a te t he i n v o l v e m e nt of e a ch and every accused separately and i n d i v i d u a l ly in r e s p e ct of each and e v e ry c h a r ge r e g a r d i ng t he r e s p e c t i ve i n c i d e n ts w h i ch o c c u r r e d. A l t h o u gh i d e n t i f i c a t i o n, as m e n t i o n ed b e f o r e, p l a ys an important part in t he e v a l u a t i on of the i n v o l v e m e nt of e a ch and every accused in the v a r i o us i n c i d e n t s, t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es o n ly f o r ms a p a rt of the e v i d e n t i al m a t e r i al against t he r e s p e c t i ve a c c u s ed involved in c e r t a in i n c i d e n ts as t h e re w e re a l so o t h er factual e v i d e n ce c o n n e c t i ng t he a c c u s ed to t h o se i n c i d e n ts and c o n s e q u e n t ly the r e l e v a nt c h a r g e s. H o w e v e r, in c e r t a in o t h er i n c i d e n ts the i d e n t i f i c a t i on of c e r t a in a c c u s ed w e re c r u c i al to connect t h em to t he r e l e v a nt c h a r g e s. It is t h e r e f o re n e c e s s a ry to d i s t i n g u i sh b e t w e en t he De L a n ge and V o i g ts i n c i d e n ts on the one hand w h e re some of t he a c c u s ed admitted to h a ve been p r e s e nt and t he G r a m o w s k y, S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and K r i el i n c i d e n ts w h e re t h ey d e ny to h a ve b e en involved and w h e re i d e n t i f i c a t i on or o t h er f a c t u al e v i d e n ce is n e c e s s a ry to link any of t h em to that p a r t i c u l ar i n c i d e nt or the r e l e v a nt c h a r g e. T he C o u rt r e m a i n ed a w a re of t he c a u t i o n a ry r u le in respect of t he e v i d e n ce of a single w i t n e s s. I shall first d e al w i th the De L a n ge and V o i g ts i n c i d e n ts and t h en w i th the G r a m o w s k y, the S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and t he K r i el i n c i d e n t s. B e f o re d e a l i ng w i th t he v a r i o us i n c i d e n ts it is n e c e s s a ry to c o n s i d er t he a r g u m e n ts p r e s e n t ed by Mr G r o b l er in r e s p e ct of t he p o s s i b le d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s. Mr G r o b l er r e f e r r ed me to t he t wo t e s ts to be applied e i t h er s e p a r a t e ly or in c o m b i n a t i on to d e t e r m i ne w h e t h er t h e re is a s p l i t t i ng of c o n v i c t i o ns in our law as set out in R v V an d er M e r w e, 1921 {If (TPD) at p .5 and R v S a b u y i, 1905, TS 170 at 1 7 1, w h i ch w e re cited w i th a p p r o v al in S v G r o b l er & ' n A n d e r, 1966(1) SA 507 (A) at 518 F - 519 A: It is c l e ar from the w o r d i ng of section 83 of t he C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A c t, N o . 51 of 1977 that t he p r o s e c u t or m ay c h a r ge an a c c u s ed w i th all the o f f e n c es w h i ch m i g ht p o s s i b ly be p r o v ed by m e a ns of a v a i l a b le f a c t s. T he s e c t i on r e a ds as f o l l o w s: " 8 3. C h a r ge w h e re it is d o u b t f ul w h at o f f e n ce c o m m i t t e d. If by r e a s on of any u n c e r t a i n ty as to t he facts w h i ch can be p r o v ed or if for any o t h er r e a s on it is d o u b t f ul w h i ch of several o f f e n c es is c o n s t i t u t ed by the facts w h i ch c an be p r o v e d, t he accused may be c h a r g ed w i th the c o m m i s s i on of all or any of such o f f e n c e s, and any n u m b er of s u ch c h a r g es may be tried at o n c e, or t he a c c u s ed m ay be charged in the a l t e r n a t i ve w i th t he c o m m i s s i on of any number of such o f f e n c e s ". T h is m ay be d o ne even if the c h a r g es m ay o v e r l ap and m ay lead to a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s. S e e: S v G r o b l e r. (supra) p. 522 E - F. A l t h o u gh the accused m ay not object to t he c h a r ge sheet b e c a u se of the n u m e r o us c h a r g es w h i ch m ay lead to a d u p l i c a t i on of c h a r g es by v i r t ue of t he a u t h o r i z a t i on p r o v i d ed for in section 83, it r e m a i ns t he t a sk of t he C o u rt to see to it that an accused is not c o n v i c t ed of m o re t h an one o f f e n c e. S e e: S v G r o b l e r. (supra) p . 5 13 E - H. T he r u le against d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o ns is to p r e v e nt that an accused is c o n v i c t ed and sentenced t w i ce on t he s a me c u l p a b le fact. Du T o i t. et a l. (supra) 1 4 - 7. In respect of the "evidence t e s t" and "single i n t e n t i on t e s t" the a u t h o rs Du Toit, et al say on 1 4 - 7: "Two such indicators are the test of a s i n g le i n t e n t i on and t he evidence t e s t. H o w e v e r, it m u st be e m p h a s i z ed that n e i t h er of these g u i d i ng p r i n c i p l es is i n f a l l i b le and that they do not n e c e s s a r i ly d e l i v er t he s a me r e s u l ts in regard to e v e ry set of f a c t s. (R v K h an & O t h e r s. 1949 (4) SA 868 (N) ) nor a re t h ey e q u a l ly a p p l i c a b le in e v e ry c a se (R v J o h a n n e s, 1925 T PD 782 7 8 5 - 6 ) .- T he t wo t e s ts are the f o l l o w i n g: T he e v i d e n ce test " if the e v i d e n ce n e c e s s a ry to p r o ve one c r i m i n al act n e c e s s a r i ly i n v o l v es e v i d e n ce of a n o t h er c r i m i n al a c t, t h o se t wo are to be c o n s i d e r ed as one t r a n s a c t i o n. But if t he e v i d e n ce n e c e s s a ry to e s t a b l i sh o ne c r i m i n al act is c o m p l e te w i t h o ut t he other c r i m i n al act b e i ng b r o u g ht in at all t h en t he t wo are s e p a r a te c r i m e s ." R v V an d er M e r w e, (supra) at p. 5. T he single intent test is formulated as f o l l o w s: "Where a m an commits t wo a c ts of w h i ch e a c h, s t a n d i ng a l o n e, w o u ld be c r i m i n a l, but d o es so w i th a s i n g le i n t e n t, and b o th a c ts are n e c e s s a ry to c a r ry out t h at i n t e n t, then it seems to me that he ought o n ly to be i n d i c t ed for one o f f e n c e; b e c a u se the t wo a c ts c o n s t i t u te one c r i m i n al t r a n s a c t i o n ." R v S a b u y i, (supra) at 1 7 1. A l t h o u gh t h e se g u i d i ng p r i n c i p l es w e re e s t a b l i s h ed in our law, as r e f e r r ed to by Mr G r o b l e r, there exist no i n f a l l i b le formula to d e t e r m i ne a c c u r a t e ly w h e t h er or not t h e re m ay be a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s. C o n s e q u e n t l y, it has to be d e c i d ed on t he b a s is of sound r e a s o n i ng and f a i r n e s s. S e e: R v K u z w a v o. 1960(1) SA 340 (A) at 344 B; S v M a v u s o. 1989(4) SA 800 (T) at 804 G - H. At p a ge 523 F of t he G r o b l er c a s e, W e s s e l s, J. said t he f o l l o w i n g: "The test or c o m b i n a t i on of tests to be applied a re t h o se w h i ch are on a common sense v i ew best c a l c u l a t ed to a c h i e ve the object of the r u l e ". In e v e ry i n s t a n ce w h e re there m ay be a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o ns in this p a r t i c u l ar c a s e, one of the c h a r g es is r o b b e ry w i th a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es and t he o t h e rs a re e i t h er a t t e m p t ed m u r d e r, assault or i m p e r s o n a t i ng a p o l i ce o f f i c e r. T he d e f i n i t i on of the c h a r g es are always r e l e v a n t. R o b b e ry is d e f i n ed as f o l l o w s: "Robbery c o n s i s ts in the theft of p r o p e r ty by i n t e n t i o n a l ly using v i o l e n ce or t h r e a ts of v i o l e n ce to i n d u ce s u b m i s s i on to the taking of it from a n o t h e r ." Hunt - S. A. C r i m i n al L aw and Procedure - V o l. II - R e v i s ed 2nd ed. - p. 6 8 0. A g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es in r e l a t i on to robbery or a t t e m p t ed r o b b e ry are d e f i n ed as follows in section 1(1)(b) of t he C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A c t: (i) The w i e l d i ng of a fire-arm or any o t h er d a n g e r o us w e a p o n; (ii) the i n f l i c t i on of g r i e v o us bodily harm; or (iii) a threat to inflict grievous b o d i ly h a rm by the o f f e n d er or an accomplice on t he o c c a s i on w h en the o f f e n ce is committed, w h e t h er b e f o re or d u r i ng or after the c o m m i s s i on of t he o f f e n c e ." W h i le it m ay be competent for the State to f o r m u l a te s e p a r a te c h a r g es for r o b b e ry and attempted m u r d er w h i ch a r i se from the same c o n t i n u o us transaction t he C o u rt s h o u ld be c a r e f ul not to convict a person on b o th c h a r g e s, u n l e ss it is p r o v ed b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le doubt that the a c c u s ed had t he i n t e nt to kill and not only to use v i o l e n c e. In S v M o l o t o, 1982(1) 844 (A) at 854 E, R u m p f f, J. said t he f o l l o w i n g: "Na my m e n i ng is die Staat dus geregtig om, na g e l a ng v an o m s t a n d i g h e d e, 'n beskuldigde aan te kla v an r o of en v an p o g i ng tot m o o rd en is ' n hof b e v o eg om d ie b e s k u l d i g de skuldig te bevind aan d ie t w ee a f s o n d e r l i ke m i s d a de m i ts dit bo r e d e l i ke twyfel b e w ys is dat d ie b e s k u l d i g de ook d ie opset gehad het om te d o od en n ie s l e gs om g e w e ld te g e b r u ik n i e ." In t he same judgment, w h en dealing w i th S v B e n j a m in en 'n A n d e r, 1 9 8 0 ( 1) 9 5 0 ( A ), w h e re it w as found that t h e re w e re a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s, he said on p a ge 856 E: " O f s k o on d a ar v o l g e ns die feite in die B e n j a m i n- s a ak a a n w e n d i ng v an b u i t e n s p o r i ge geweld (vis m a j o r, e x c e s s i ve f o r c e) ten aansien v an d ie k l a er w a s, is d a ar a an d ie hand v an die besondere o m s t a n d i g h e de t e r eg b e s l is dat d a ar geen opset w as om d ie k l a er te d o od n i e. " S ee a l s o: Du T o i t. et a l, ( s u p r a ), 1 4 - 1 2: I shall r e t u rn to t h is aspect after e v a l u a t i ng the e v i d e n ce in r e s p e ct of w h at occurred in each of the i n c i d e n t s: THE DE LANGE I N C I D E N T: T h is i n v o l v es charges 10-13 and accused n u m b e rs 1,6 and 7. A c c u s ed numbers 1,6 and 7 admitted d u r i ng t h e ir e x p l a n a t i on of p l ea that they w e re on the farm of Mr De L a n ge on t he p a r t i c u l ar d a t e. They had provided a r e a s on for b e i ng on t h is farm and the reason advanced w as that a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 p r e v i o u s ly w o r k ed on the farm but w as n e v er p a id by Mr De L a n ge and that the p u r p o se for t h e ir v i s it w as to r e q u e st t he salary that w as still owed to him. B o th Mr and M rs De Lange d e n i ed that a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 w o r k ed on that p a r t i c u l ar farm for four m o n t hs in t he b e g i n n i ng of 1 9 9 0. I do not believe that he w o r k ed t h e re for o ne m o m e n t. A c c u s ed number 7 w o u ld n e v er have r e m a i n ed on t he f a rm for m o re t h an one m o n th if he w a s n 't paid and d e f i n i t e ly not for four m o n t h s. He said he w e nt to the p o l i ce to r e p o rt it b ut on t he e v i d e n ce of Inspector Kotze d e f i n i te p r o c e d u r es a re f o l l o w ed w h en they r e c e i ve such a c o m p l a i n t. F u r t h e r m o r e, a c c u s ed number 7 had other m e a ns a v a i l a b le to h im w h e re he c o u ld c o m p l a i n. It is even m o re r i d i c u l o us that he d e c i d ed to r e t u rn to the De L a n g e s' farm on t he 7th M a r ch 1991 w i t h o ut any d e f i n i te g u a r a n t ee that he w o u ld be p a i d. I n s p e c t or Kotze denied that he received any c o m p l a i nt as w as a l l e g ed by accused number 7 after a c c u s ed number 7 left on t h is o c c a s i o n. T he w h o le e x p l a n a t i on b e c o m es even m o re r i d i c u l o us w h en t he t h r ee accused attempted during t h e ir e v i d e n ce to p r o v i de a n o t h er reason for t h e ir p r e s e n ce in the v i c i n i ty of t he farm of Mr De L a n ge w h en they said that s u d d e n l y, w i t h o ut any p r i or a c q u a i n t a n ce of e a ch o t h e r, accused n u m b er 1 a c c o m p a n i ed accused number 6 and 7 in t he e a r ly m o r n i ng of t he 24th M a r ch 1991 to a p l a ce w h e re they w a n t ed to c a t ch c a t e r p i l l a rs to sell it. T h ey had to m a ke u se of v a r i o us m e a ns of t r a n s p o rt to get there and t h en s u d d e n ly a c c u s ed number 7 r e a l i s ed that he w as n ow n e ar or on t he farm of h is p r e v i o us e m p l o y e r, w ho n e v er p a id h im w h at w as d ue to h i m. A c c u s ed number 7 w as t he leader and t he m an w ho k n ew w h e re t he c a t e r p i l l a rs w e r e. T h is had to be so, o t h e r w i se a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 could not e x p l a in w hy they s u d d e n ly f o u nd t h e m s e l v es on or near the farm of Mr De L a n g e. H o w e v e r, w h en accused number 7 had to replay t h is b a ll w h i ch w as p ut in his c o u rt by t he o t h er t wo a c c u s ed and w as a s k ed w hy d i d n 't he r e a l i se that he w as in t he v i c i n i ty of Mr De L a n g e' s farm if he w as the p e r s on w ho k n ew w h e re t he c a t e r p i l l a rs w e re to be found, he s u d d e n ly and out of t he b l u e, e x p l a i n ed that he w as not t he one w ho k n ew w h e re t he c a t e r p i l l a rs w e re but that t h ey w e re a c c o m p a n i ed by t h r ee l a d i e s, one of w h om knew that c a t e r p i l l a rs w o u ld be f o u nd t h e re and that he only then r e a l i s ed Mr De L a n g e 's f a rm w as in that v i c i n i t y. T he e v i d e n ce of these t h r ee a c c u s ed in t h is r e s p e ct is so b l a t a n t ly u n t r ue that it .need no further e x a m i n a t i o n. W i t h o ut a p u r p o se of going to Mr De L a n g e *s farm, n a m e ly to a sk for t he m o n ey that w as owed to accused number 7, t he q u e s t i on a r i s es w h at w e re t h ey d o i ng on that farm? T he t h r ee accused a r r i v ed in the e a r ly h o u rs of a S u n d ay m o r n i ng and a c c u s ed number 1 w as armed, c e r t a i n ly not to shoot c a t e r p i l l a r s. I reject the e v i d e n ce that t h ey only m et in t he e a r ly m o r n i ng of that d a y. A p p a r e n t ly t he r e al s i t u a t i on w as that accused n u m b er 7 w ho w o r k ed for a p p r o x i m a t e ly t h r ee d a ys for Mr De L a n ge k n ew that t h e re w e re only t wo old p e o p le on t he farm and p r o b a b ly a l so k n ew t h at Mr De L a n ge w as in t he p o s s e s s i on of f i r e - a r ms and t h at t h e re w e re no o t h er farm w o r k e r s. T h is m a de t h em e a sy t a r g e ts to be r o b b e d. I h a ve no doubt that t he three a c c u s ed set out to Mr De L a n g e 's farm w i th t h is i n t e n t i on to rob t h em and w e re a r m ed for that p u r p o s e. That that w as t h e ir p u r p o se is a l so c o r r o b o r a t ed or s u p p o r t ed by t he e v i d e n ce found by I n s p e c t or K o t z e, S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge and o t h er p o l i c e m en of an o b s e r v a t i on post e s t a b l i s h ed for t he p u r p o se of o b s e r v i ng t he farmhouse to launch t h e ir a t t a ck at the m o st c o n v e n i e nt o p p o r t u n i t y. A c c u s ed number 1 t e s t i f i ed that if he w a n t ed to fight or steal he w o u ld e s t a b l i sh an o b s e r v a t i on p o s t. I am a l so satisfied that they arrived at least t he p r e v i o us d ay and stole a sheep from Mr De L a n g e 's k r a a l, w h e re t he t r a c ks w e re found and t o ok it to t he s l a u g h t e r i ng p l a ce w h e re t he same t r a c ks w e re a l so found. H e re t h ey s l a u g h t e r ed t he s h e ep and p r o b a b ly ate some of it. T h ey m ay even h a ve s t o l en s h e ep from o t h er farmers in the v i c i n i t y. In t he e a r ly m o r n i ng they w a i t ed at t he o b s e r v a t i on post for Mr a n d / or M rs De Lange to a p p e a r. I also h a ve no d o u bt that t he f o o t p r i n ts found by I n s p e c t or K o t ze w e re i n d e ed t he f o o t p r i n ts of accused numbers 1, 6 and 7, as t h e re w e re no o t h er f o o t p r i n ts on t he farm and on the relevant spots that e v en t he a c c u s ed alleged they w e r e, than t h o se and t he f o o t p r i n ts of Mr and M rs De L a n g e. It is also c l e ar from t he p h o t os that the o b s e r v a t i on post w as m a de at a p l a ce w h e re t h ey c o u ld easily o b s e r ve Mr and/or M rs De L a n g e, c o m i ng from the house t o w a r ds the k r a a l, w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 must h a ve k n o wn they w o u ld go on that m o r n i n g. T h ey a l so a p p r o a c h ed t he spot w h e re Mr De L a n ge w as e n c o u n t e r ed from t he d i r e c t i on of the o b s e r v a t i on post and not as it w as t e s t i f i ed by t he three a c c u s e d. I am a l so c o n v i n c ed that a c c u s ed number 7 in fact hid his face in o r d er not to be r e c o g n i s ed b e c a u se he knew Mr De L a n ge w o u ld r e c o g n i se him. Mr and M rs De L a n ge had no r e a s on not to i d e n t i fy h im if he w as in fact seen by any of t h e m. It is a l so s i g n i f i c a nt that accused number 1, w ho w as armed, t o ok t he leading role and h e, w ho had nothing to do w i th t he s a l a ry owed by Mr De L a n ge and only had met a c c u s ed n u m b er 7 e a r l i er that m o r n i n g, suddenly b e c a me the s p o k e s m an on b e h a lf of a c c u s ed number 7 and fearlessly p e r s u ed t h is r o le d e s p i te t he d a n g er of v i c i o us d o gs and the i n s u l ts of t he f a r m - o w n e r. I have no d o u bt that the story of t he o u t s t a n d i ng salary w as a b l a t a nt c o n c o c t ed l i e. It is f u r t h er c l e ar that t he best v e r s i on for a c c u s ed number 1's d e f e n ce of s e l f - d e f e n ce is to be found in the e v i d e n ce of Mr De L a n ge and not in t he e v i d e n ce of himself or any of t he o t h er t wo a c c u s e d. On t h e ir v e r s i on the a t t a ck by Mr De L a n ge w i th his w a l k i n g - s t i ck on accused number 1 w as f i n i s h ed and Mr De L a n g e *s only w e a p on w as a l r e a dy b r o k en at t he t i me w h en accused number 1 t o ok out his p i s t ol and first shot at t he d o gs and then "accidentally" shot Mr De L a n g e. At t he t i me w h en he did shoot Mr De L a n g e, w ho is an old m an w ho w a l k ed w i th the aid of a w a l k i n g - s t i c k, t h e re w as no t h r e at to a c c u s ed number 1 and his t wo friends a n y m o re and they c o u ld h a ve easily overpowered him w i t h o ut any n e c e s s i ty to shoot at him. A c c o r d i ng to him he t h r ew s t o n es at t he d o gs and t h ey ran away. I accept the v e r s i on of Mr De L a n ge that he w as only approached by accused number 1 w h i le t he o t h er a c c u s ed w e re placed in o t h er p o s i t i o ns to be a b le to a t t a ck t h em m o re efficiently, if n e c e s s a r y. I do not a c c e pt the evidence of the accused, w h i ch w as d e n i ed by b o th Mr and M rs De L a n g e, of the d e r o g a t o ry r e m a r ks a l l e g e d ly m a de by Mr De L a n g e. The a c c u s ed o v e r d id it by t e s t i f y i ng that even after Mr De L a n ge w as shot and he had f a l l en to the ground in a severely injured c o n d i t i on he c o n t i n u ed w i th such r e m a r k s. A c c u s ed number 6 a l so f o r g ot about t h is w h en he testified in c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i on that Mr De L a n ge w e nt to sleep after he w as shot. I h a ve no d o u bt that Mr De Lange w as attacked and a s s a u l t ed all o v er h is body as w as found by his w i fe and Dr B i r k e n s t o ck and that he w as robbed of his p e r s o n al b e l o n g i n g s, such as his w a t c h, p o c k e t - k n i f e, e t c. T he c u l p r it w as m o st probably accused number 1 and it is c l e ar that a c c u s ed numbers 6 and 7 w i t n e s s ed and a s s o c i a t ed t h e m s e l v es w i th t h i s. T he a c c u s ed a p p r o a c h ed M rs De Lange and t o ok her i n to t he h o u se w h e re Mr De Lange's r i f l e. Exhibit 1 2, as w e ll as h is p i s t o l. Exhibit 14, w e re t a k e n. I accept M rs De L a n g e 's e v i d e n ce that she w as assaulted by accused n u m b er 1. S he d id not r e c o g n i se accused number 7 and said it w as not a c c u s ed number 6 w ho assaulted h e r. I a l so a c c e pt t he e v i d e n ce that accused number 6 had a p a n g a. I t o t a l ly r e j e ct t he evidence of the accused that M rs De L a n ge v o l u n t a r i ly handed over the w e a p o ns or i n v i t ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 6 into the house to c o me and fetch t he f i r e - a r m s, as w e ll as t he o b v i o us concocted story that Mr De L a n ge u s ed it to shoot B l a c ks w h om he buried on t he farm. It is a l so c l e ar from the different v e r s i o ns of the a c c u s ed in r e s p e ct of t he r e a s on w hy the w e a p o ns w e re t a k en that it c a n n ot r e a s o n a b ly p o s s i b ly be t r u e. I accept M rs De L a n g e 's e v i d e n ce that accused number 1 w as in t he h o u se w h e re he w i p ed b l o od from his face w i th a k i t c h en t o w e l, t h at he p r e s e n t ed himself as a p o l i c e m an and that he d a m a g ed t he t e l e p h o n e. It is significant that t he m o u t h p i e ce of t he t e l e p h o ne w as found hidden b e h i nd t he f r e e z e r. A c c u s ed number 7's v e r s i on that he t o ok t he f i r e - a r ms to k e ep t h em so that it c o u ld be collected by M rs De L a n ge and t h at he w o u ld t h en d e m a nd his o u t s t a n d i ng salary, is so b l a t a n t ly u n t r ue that it needs no further a t t e n t i o n. I a l so accept Mrs De L a n g e 's e v i d e n ce of h ow she m a n a g ed to e s c a p e, w h i ch is also supported by t he c o n d i t i on t h at she w as found in by her husband. It is also s i g n i f i c a nt t h at t he t h r ee accused w ho allegedly c a me in p e a ce and w ho r e c e i v ed t he fire-arms without any r e s i s t a n ce fled i n to t he o p p o s i te d i r e c t i on into the h i l l s, as w as t e s t i f i ed by S e r g e a nt H e r r i d g e, w ho followed t h e ir t r a c k s. R e t u r n i ng to the c h a r g es w i th regard to t h is i n c i d e nt t he S t a te has proved b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le d o u bt t h at a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1, 6 and 7 stole one sheep w h i ch b e l o n g ed to Mr De L a n ge and should c o n s e q u e n t ly be c o n v i c t ed on c h a r ge 1 3. In r e s p e ct of c h a r g es 10 and 11, I a g r ee w i th Mr G r o b l er only to t he extent that the accused set out w i th t he p u r p o se to r ob t he De Langes and c a r e f u l ly e x e c u t ed that r o b b e r y. T h ey m a de an o b s e r v a t i on post and t h en c o n d u c t ed t he r o b b e ry by u s i ng force and w e a p o ns and as a r e s u lt of that r o b b ed Mr and M rs De Lange of the items alleged in b o th c h a r g e s. Mr G r o b l er submitted that t he a c c u s ed should o n ly be c o n v i c t ed on one c h a r ge of r o b b e ry in o r d er to a v o id a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s. I do not agree w i th t h is s u b m i s s i o n. A l t h o u gh they w e nt to t he farm to r ob t h ey c l e a r ly committed robbery in respect of b o th Mr and M rs De L a n g e. A f t er Mr De L a n ge w as shot, he r e g a i n ed c o n s c i o u s n e ss and attempted to get u p, he w as hit f r om b e h i nd and again lost c o n s c i o u s n e s s. W h en he c a me to o ne of t he p e r s o n s, p u l l ed off his R o l ex and t o ok h is p o c k e t - k n i fe and p e n. M rs De Lange w as b e a t en and t a k en into t he h o u se w h e re t he rifle and Colt p i s t ol w as t a k e n. C l e a r ly b o th a l l e g ed o f f e n c es w e re c o m m i t t ed and t he t h r ee a c c u s e d, a c t i ng w i th common p u r p o s e, should be c o n v i c t ed on b o th c h a r g e s. I am also satisfied that t he State p r o v ed that a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as d e f i n ed in section 1 of Act 51 of 1 9 7 7, w e re p r e s e n t. In r e s p e ct of c h a r ge 1 2, n a m e ly that of a t t e m p t ed m u r d e r, I d i s a g r ee w i th Mr G r o b l e r "s s u b m i s s i o ns that the S t a te d id not p r o ve that accused number 1 had the intent to kill Mr De L a n ge and n e i t h er do I a g r ee that Mr De L a n ge w as shot in s e l f - d e f e n c e. I have a c c e p t ed Mr De L a n g e 's e v i d e n ce and on his v e r s i on accused number 1 t o ok his gun out, shot at t he c h a r g i ng dog and then c h a n g ed the p o s i t i on of t he g un to b e t w e en h im and the d o g. Mr De L a n ge t h en hit t he a c c u s ed w i th his w a l k i n g - s t i ck w h i ch b r o ke and he w as shot in t he f a c e. T he accused admitted that he w as t r a i n e d, i n t er a l i a, in the u se of h a n d g u ns and w as a good shot. Mr De L a n ge is an old m an w ho w a l k ed w i th t he aid of a w a l k i n g - s t i ck w h i le t he a c c u s ed w as a y o u ng strong m an and armed w i th a revolver. T h e re c an be no o t h er i n f e r e n ce d r a wn on t he p r o v ed facts t h an that t he accused in shooting t h is old m an at a short d i s t a n ce in the face w i th a p i s t ol in t he face had t he intent to kill him and not m e r e ly to u se f o r c e. R e f e r r i ng to t he M o l o to c a se (supra) the a u t h o rs of Du_Toit, C o m m e n t a ry on the C r i m i n al P r o c e d u re A ct say t he f o l l o w i ng on 1 4 - 1 2: "For a c o n v i c t i on to follow, t he State w i ll h a ve to p r o ve b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le doubt that t he a c c u s ed i n t e n d ed to k i ll and not m e r e ly to u se force ( 8 5 4 E ). O n ce t he v i o l e n ce used w i th t he a im of t e m p o r a r i ly d i s a b l i ng t he v i c t im so as to rob him e x c e e ds t h o se l i m i ts and a m o u n ts to a p o t e n t i a l ly fatal act, yet w h i ch d o es not in fact c a u se d e a t h, b o th robbery and attempted m u r d er a re c o m m i t t ed and a p p r o p r i a te c o n v i c t i o ns m ay r e s u l t. ( 8 5 2 H - 8 5 3 B - E ). I am s a t i s f i ed that to convict t he accused number 1 on c h a r ge 1 2, namely attempted m u r d e r, w o u ld not c o n s t i t u te a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o n s. T he next aspect to be c o n s i d e r ed is w h e t h er accused n u m b e rs 6 and 7 c an also be c o n v i c t ed on c h a r ge 1 2. T he q u e s t i o ns to be a n s w e r ed are w h e t h er accused numbers 6 and 7 k n ew t h at a c c u s ed number 1 had a fire-arm in his p o s s e s s i on and t h at he w o u ld u se it during the e x e c u t i on of t h e ir c o m m on p u r p o se to r ob t he De L a n g e s. U n f o r t u n a t e l y, these q u e s t i o ns w e re not a s k ed and t h e re is no e v i d e n ce to that effect on r e c o r d. C o n s e q u e n t l y, I c a n n ot convict accused numbers 6 and 7 on c h a r ge 1 2. T HE V O I G T S' I N C I D E N T: T he next i n c i d e nt that should be c o n s i d e r ed is that of Mr G u n n ar V o i g ts on the 16th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. T h is i n c i d e nt i n v o l v es c h a r g es 8 and 9. Initially the accused d e n i ed a ny i n v o l v e m e nt in t h is i n c i d e n t. T h is incident w as p r e c e d ed by a v i s it to Mr V o i g t s' farm e a r l i er d u r i ng that s p e c i f ic d ay by a c c u s ed number 3, 4, t he d e c e a s ed and Primus A n g u l a. A c c o r d i ng to accused number 3 they w e nt to Mr V o i g t s' farm to collect t he b e l o n g i n gs of P r i m us A n g u la and the deceased and t h ey t h en left w i th t wo other accused, n a m e ly a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 4 and 5. In h is s t a t e m e nt to Inspector T e r b l a n c h e, a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 said t h at a c c u s ed number 4 and Primus A n g u la had a p l a n, t wo d a ys b e f o re t he p a r t i c u l ar day, to rob a m an c a l l ed L i s t er and t h at t h ey w e nt to the farm that p a r t i c u l ar m o r n i n g. He k n ew t h at t he d r i v er had a w e a p o n. The p u r p o se for t h is v i s it w as to c h e ck out the p l a c e. In his e v i d e n ce in C o u rt he d e n i ed w h at happened there e a r l i er in t he m o r n i ng or k n o w l e d ge of any such plan to rob anyone or that he k n ew t h at a n y o ne w as a r m e d. A c c u s ed number 4 admitted in e v i d e n ce t h at he w as on t he farm earlier in the day but d i d n 't m e n t i on t h is at all in his statement to I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c h e. His reasons for going to the farm w as to c o l l e ct a r c h - w e l d e rs and g a s- b o t t l e s, e t c. T he w i t n e ss J o h a n n es E i s eb r e c o g n i s ed accused number 4 w ho w as o ne of t he p e r s o ns w ho arrived around 1 o'clock on t he farm and a s k ed about t he old Mr V o i g ts and the d i r e c t i on to t he f a r m h o u se and also enquired about a shop on t he farm. A c c u s ed number 4 did not deny this in his e v i d e n c e. A c c u s ed n u m b er 5 d e n i ed that he w as part of the group w ho w e nt to t he farm e a r l i er that day. On t he same day later in the a f t e r n o on a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 3 , 4 , 5, P r i m us A n g u la and the deceased again left for Mr V o i g t s' farm. They parked the v e h i c le d r i v en by t he d e c e a s ed some d i s t a n ce from the farmstead on t he r o ad l e a d i ng t h e r e t o. A c c u s ed numbers 3,4 and 5 a g r ee t h at a s p a re w h e el w as taken and accused number 3 and o t h e rs w e nt to a sk for t o o ls to fix it, a l t h o u gh t he u n d i s p u t ed e v i d e n ce is t h at t h e re w e re enough tools and equipment to fix it in t he v e h i c l e. Mr V o i g ts testified that he w as first a p p r o a c h ed by t h r ee p e r s o ns for assistance and tools so that t h ey c o u ld f ix a t y r e. W h en he returned from the w a t e r p u mp t h e re w e re f i ve p e r s o n s. A c c o r d i ng to accused number 4 the d e c e a s e d, P r i m us A n g u la and accused number 3 i n i t i a l ly left w i th a t y re a nd t wo p e r s o ns w h om they picked up in K l e in W i n d h o ek f o l l o w ed l a t e r. A c c u s ed number 5 also t e s t i f i ed that t wo s t r a n g e rs w e re p i c k ed up in Klein W i n d h o ek and they f o l l o w ed t he f i r st t h r ee to t he farmhouse. In his statement to I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he accused number 4 t e s t i f i ed that five p e r s o ns i n c l u d i ng the deceased left for t he farmhouse and r e t u r n ed to fetch t he tyre and then left w i th it. He t h en s t a y ed b e h i nd a l o n e. N e i t h er accused numbers 4 or 5, w ho a l l e g ed in t h is Court that they remained behind, even m e n t i o n ed t he t wo s t r a n g e rs after the shots w e re fired. A c c u s ed n u m b er 5 said that although he, Primus A n g u la as w e ll as a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 3 and 4 ran away and/or met on the road on t h e ir w ay to W i n d h o e k, he did not notice t he t wo s t r a n g e rs a f t er t he i n c i d e n t. I have no doubt that t he t wo s t r a n g e rs t h at w e re a l l e g e d ly picked up in Klein W i n d h o ek did not e x i st at a ll and w e re only brought into the story by a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 and 5 in order to substitute two p e r s o ns for t h e m s e l v es at t he scene of the incident. A c c u s ed number 3 a l so m e n t i o n ed in h is statement to Inspector T e r b l a n c he that t he five of t h em w e nt to the farm that a f t e r n o on and all f i ve h ad w e a p o n s. He did not m e n t i on t he two s t r a n g e rs at a l l. I n i t i a l ly in his e v i d e n c e - i n - c h i ef accused n u m b er 3 a l so o n ly m e n t i o n ed that it w e re h i m s e l f, the d e c e a s e d, P r i m us A n g u la as w e ll as accused numbers 4 and 5 w ho w e nt to t he farm that a f t e r n o o n. At a later stage at t he end of h is e v i d e n c e - i n - c h i ef he m e n t i o n ed for the first t i me t h at t h e re w e re also t wo other p e r s o ns w h om he d i d n 't k n o w. T h e ir e v i d e n ce of w ho exactly r e m a i n ed at the c ar is so c o n t r a d i c t o ry that it c a n n ot be a c c e p t ed and s u p p o r ts no o t h er c o n c l u s i on than that n o ne of t h em r e m a i n ed at t he c ar w h en the incident o c c u r r e d. A c c u s ed number 4 w as p l a c ed on t he scene by a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 w h i l e, as m e n t i o n ed b e f o r e, accused n u m b er 4 in h is statement to Inspector T e r b l a n c h e, w h i ch w as n e v er a t t a c k e d, as b e i ng i n c o r r e c t, save for t h is a s p e c t, said t h at he r e m a i n ed alone at the c a r. A c c u s ed number 5 t e s t i f i ed t h at he r e m a i n ed t h e re w i th a c c u s ed number 4. A c c u s ed n u m b er 5 n e v er n o t i c ed any w e a p o ns in t he p o s s e s s i on of a ny of t he o t h er accused, w h i le a c c u s ed number 4 n o t i c ed t he w e a p o ns and a c c o r d i ng to him, a t t e m p t ed to d i s c o u r a ge t he d e c e a s ed to go to t he farm. Mr B a r th found nobody at t he c ar w h en he a r r i v e d. If accused numbers 4 a n d / or 5 had b e en t h e r e, t h ey w e re h i d i n g, as they said. If they w e re i n n o c e nt t he q u e s t i on r e m a i ns for what r e a s on did they h a ve to h i de w h en a c ar a p p r o a c h e d. I am c o n v i n c ed that the only p e o p le w ho left for t he f a rm of Mr V o i g ts w e re the d e c e a s e d. P r i m us A n g u l a, a c c u s ed n u m b er 3,4 and 5. T h r ee of t h em a r r i v ed t h e re w h en t h ey m et Mr V o i g ts the first t i me and t he o t h er two joined t h e se t h r ee a little bit l a t e r. H o w e v e r, at t he t i me of t he a s s a u lt and t he r o b b e ry all five of t h em w e re at the s c e n e. T he only i n f e r e n ce that c an be d r a wn on all t he e v i d e n ce is that t he five of them p l a n n ed to go and rob Mr V o i g t s, as a c c u s ed number 3 alleged in his statement to I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he and that t h ey t o ok t he s p a r e - w h e el to p r e t e nd that t h ey n e e d ed a s s i s t a n ce in o r d er to get hold of Mr V o i g ts and t h en o v e r p o w e r ed him. It is a l so a p p a r e nt from t he e v i d e n ce of accused numbers 4 and 5 of the m a n n er that t h ey fled from t he car that t h e ir e v i d e n ce c a n n ot be t r ue and that t h ey in fact fled a f t er the i n c i d e nt from t he f a r m h o u s e. T h e ir d i f f e r e nt r e a s o ns for going to Mr V o i g t s' farm a l so s u p p o r ts t he only i n f e r e n ce that c an be d r a wn on all t he e s t a b l i s h ed f a c t s, namely that t h ey p l a n n ed t o g e t h er to r ob Mr V o i g t s. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed number 3 t h ey w e nt to c o l l e ct b e l o n g i n gs of P r i m us A n g u la and t he d e c e a s e d. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed number 4 t h ey w e nt to c o l l e ct w e l d i ng m a c h i n e s, e t c ., but p a r k ed so far from t he h o u se that t h at t h is r e a s on is not c o g e n t. A c c o r d i ng to a c c u s ed number 5 he t h o u g ht t h ey w e re going to a p a r ty at Mr V o i g t s' h o u s e. As i n d i c a t ed e a r l i er I h a ve no doubt that a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 4 and 5 w e re p r e s e nt at t he scene of t he i n c i d e n t. T h is is f u r t h er s u p p o r t ed by the i d e n t i f i c a t i on of a c c u s ed n u m b er 4 by Mr V o i g ts on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de of the 3 A p r il 1991 held at O k a h a n d j a. T h e re has b e en c r i t i c i sm of Mr V o i g ts i d e n t i f i c a t i on of a c c u s ed number 4 and it w as s u g g e s t ed that he did so b e c a u se he r e c e i v ed i n f o r m a t i on from J o h a n n es E i s eb in t h is r e g a r d. A l t h o u gh Mr V o i g ts h o n e s t ly c o n c e d ed that he t a l k ed w i th E i s eb about h is i d e n t i f i c a t i on e a r l i er on the 20th M a r ch 1991 of a p e r s on w ho had b e en on the farm, it w as denied by E i s eb that he d i s c u s s ed the a p p e a r a n c e, e t c ., of that p e r s on w i th Mr V o i g t s. I am s a t i s f i ed that t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es had b e en p r o p e r ly c o n d u c t ed and all t he necessary p r e c a u t i o ns to p r e v e nt p r e j u d i ce to t he suspects p r o p e r ly followed. T he f a c ts that t he s u s p e c ts w e re afforded t he o p p o r t u n i ty to c h a n ge t h e ir p o s i t i o ns b e t w e en w i t n e s s e s, that t he w i t n e s s es w e re kept apart and t a k en separately to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de r o om as w e ll as that w h en a w i t n e ss d i d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o ne it w as r e c o r d ed p r o v es t h i s. Even if J o h a n n es E i s eb c o u ld d e s c r i be a c c u s ed number 4 to some extent to Mr V o i g ts b e f o re t he p a r a de of 3 A p r il 1991, w h i ch I find did not h a p p e n, it w o u ld have been v i r t u a l ly i m p o s s i b le to a s s i st t he l a t t er as t h e re w e re d i f f e r e nt p e r s o ns in the line up t h an on t he 20th M a r ch and E i s eb had no i n d i c a t i on at t he t i me t h at Mr V o i g ts w o u ld be c a l l ed to a n o t h er i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d e, w h e t h er accused number 4 w o u ld be in t he line u p, w h at he w o u ld h a ve on, or in w h i ch p o s i t i on he w o u ld s t a n d. It must be remembered that Mr V o i g ts w as so e m o t i o n al that he c o u ld not identify anybody i n c l u d i ng a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 w h om he has e n c o u n t e r ed b e f o re a fact t h at he r e m e m b e r ed the e v e n i ng of the incident as w as c o r r o b o r a t ed by M rs V o i g ts and Mr B a r t h. On t he s e c o nd p a r a de he i d e n t i f i ed b o th accused numbers 3 and 4. E v en if E i s eb c o u ld d e s c r i be t he p e r s on he i d e n t i f i ed a f t er t he p a r a de of t he 20 M a r ch it must also be r e m e m b e r ed that he i d e n t i f i ed h im only as a p e r s on w ho w as t h e re the m o r n i ng and he had no idea that accused number 4 w as t h e re t h at e v e n i n g. Mr V o i g ts identified both accused n u m b e rs 3 and 4 as p e r s o ns w ho attempted to kill him. In r e s p e ct of w h at happened at the scene of t he i n c i d e nt I a c c e pt t he e v i d e n ce of Mr V o i g ts w ho w as an e x c e l l e nt w i t n e s s. T he only other v e r s i on is that of a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 w h i ch not only d i f f e r ed from his statement to I n s p e c t or T e r b l a n c he but w as also changed during t he c o u r se of h is e v i d e n c e, even during his e v i d e n c e - i n - c h i e f. T h e re is no d o u bt in my m i nd that t he five accused p e r s o n s, i n c l u d i ng n u m b e rs 3,4 and 5, had t he common p u r p o se to rob Mr V o i g ts and p r e c e d ed to his farm w i th that i n t e n t i on w h i ch t h ey c a r r i ed out by o v e r p o w e r i ng him and taking his p i s t o l, b ut w e re p r e v e n t ed to go any further w h en M rs V o i g ts f i r ed s h o t s. A ll t h e se three accused should be c o n v i c t ed on c h a r ge 8. In r e s p e ct of c h a r ge 9, Mr G r o b l er argued that t h e re w as no e v i d e n ce that shots w e re in fact fired in t he d i r e c t i on of Mr V o i g t s, as it w as not c l e ar w h om of t he a c c u s ed f i r ed s u ch s h o ts and b e c a u se there w e re no spent c a r t r i d g es of a ny h a n d - w e a p o n, n e i t h er could it be proved b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le d o u bt t h at t he hole in the cooler w as c a u s ed by a s m a ll c a l i b re b u l l e t. A c c o r d i ng to him, even if any shots w e re f i r ed by any of the a s s a i l a n t s, it is not the only i n f e r e n ce t h at c an be drawn that such a person fired at Mr V o i g t s, b e c a u se he m ay have fired in the a i r. Mr B a r t h, as w e ll as M rs V o i g t s, heard and c o u ld d i s t i n g u i sh shots c o m i ng from a small c a l i b re fire-arm b e t w e en those of the h e a vy r i f le f i r e. I am convinced that shots w e re in fact fired by u s i ng e i t h er a pistol or a r e v o l v er by at least o ne of t he a s s a i l a n t s. I c a n, h o w e v e r, not find that t he S t a te h as p r o v ed b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le doubt that any shots w e re f i r ed at Mr V o i g t s, or by w h om it w as fired, or that t h e re w as a ny i n t e n t i on to kill him. If any shots w e re fired at t he s c e ne of t he assault on Mr V o i g t s, w h i le he w as r u n n i ng a w a y, t h e re w o u ld have been spent c a r t r i d g es of a h a n d w e a p on f o u nd by t he p o l i ce but none w as found. C o n s e q u e n t l y, t he S t a te h as not p r o v ed beyond r e a s o n a b le d o u bt that t he a c c u s ed jointly or individually attempted to k i ll Mr V o i g ts by s h o o t i ng at him as is alleged in c h a r ge 9. A l t h o u gh s o me of them, in p a r t i c u l ar accused number 3, w h en he w as o v e r p o w e r ed and pinned to the g r o u n d, as Mr V o i g ts t e s t i f i e d, coupled w i th the a t t a ck it is not e n o u gh to p r o ve such intent separate from the intent to r o b. I am not s a t i s f i ed that what happened at that stage of t he a t t a ck c an be s e p a r a t ed from the robbery i t s e l f. C o n s e q u e n t l y, t h e se t h re a c c u s ed must be acquitted in respect of c h a r ge 9. B e f o re I turn to the G r a m o w s k y, S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and K r i el i n c i d e n t s, I must state it q u i te c l e a r ly that a ll t he a c c u s ed w ho w e re involved in the De L a n ge and V o i g ts i n c i d e n ts are not c r e d i b le and r e l i a b le in any w ay a nd c a n n ot be b e l i e v ed at a l l. T he G r a m o w s ky incident: T h is incident i n v o l v es c h a r g es 1 and 2, namely robbery w i th a g g r a v a t i ng c i r c u m s t a n c es as w e ll as a s s a u lt w i th the intent to do g r i e v o us b o d i ly h a rm in r e s p e ct of M rs K a h l. As both t he a c c u s ed linked w i th t h e se t wo c h a r g e s, namely accused numbers 3 and 5 d e n i ed t h at t h ey w e re p r e s e n t, the e v i d e n ce of M rs G r a m o w s ky of w h at o c c u r r ed on t he p a r t i c u l ar e v e n i ng of the 29th D e c e m b er 1990 c o u ld not and w as not a t t a c k ed and should c o n s e q u e n t ly be a c c e p t e d. The only m a t t er in d i s p u te is the i d e n t i ty of a c c u s ed numbers 3 and 5. M rs Kahl did not t e s t i fy and M rs G r a m o w s ky w as c o n s e q u e n t ly a single w i t n e ss and h er t e s t i m o ny should be t r e a t ed w i th c a u t i o n. A c c o r d i ng to h e r, t h r ee p e o p le attacked t h em but accused number 3 w as t he o ne w ho r e m a i n ed w i th her t h r o u g h o ut and for m o st of t he t i me he held her by her c l o t h es at her t h r o a t, c h o k ed her and in t he p r o c e ss she also lost her s p e c t a c l e s. She n o t i c ed t he p e r s on w ho attacked her m o t h er also on t he v e r a n d ah and l a t er in the b a t h r o om w h e re she saw him a s s a u l t i ng h er m o t h e r. She d e s c r i b ed him by his straight h a i r l i n e, c u r ly h a ir and broad n o s e. At t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de h e ld in O k a h a n d ja she did not identify h im but said she w as 9 8% c e r t a in that it w as him, but b e c a u se she w as not 1 0 0% s u r e, she did not indentify h im as one of t he a s s a i l a n t s. V a r i o us arguments w e re a d v a n c ed by Mr G r o b l er in r e s p e ct of t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on of a c c u s ed number 5 in Court as b e i ng t he a s s a i l a nt of Mrs K a h l. I must have c e r t a in d o u b ts t h at he w as in fact the p e r s o n, w ho w as one of t he t h r ee a s s a i l a n ts and t he one w ho a t t a c k ed M rs K a h l. C o n s e q u e n t l y, I c a n n ot hold that the State has p r o v ed b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le d o u bt t h at a c c u s ed number 5 is guilty of any of t he o f f e n c es he w as c h a r g ed w i th in respect of t h is i n c i d e n t. In r e s p e ct of accused number 3, M rs G r a m o w s ky r e m a i n ed a d a m a nt that she w as one hundred p e r c e nt c e r t a in that he w as t he a s s a i l a nt w ho a t t a c k ed her and r o b b ed h e r. She w as in his p r e s e n ce for a r e a s o n a b le long t i me and had e v e ry o p p o r t u n i ty to o b s e r ve h im and h a ve his face imprinted in h er m i n d. She w as a l so v e ry c l e ar in her e v i d e n ce in r e s p e ct of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de of the 12th A p r il 1991 at O k a h a n d ja that she d i d n 't e n t e r t a in any d o u bt as to t he i d e n t i ty of a c c u s ed number 3 and, in fact, i d e n t i f i ed him. T h is i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as severely a t t a c k ed as b e i ng u n f a i r, p r e j u d i c i al and not p r o p er by Mr K a s u t o. His a t t a ck on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as b a s ed on several g r o u n d s. In t he first i n s t a n ce he a l l e g ed that it w as i m p r o p er t h at M rs G r a m o w s ky t r a v e l l ed w i th W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l a n, w ho c o n d u c t ed the p a r a de and S e r g e a nt Z e e l i e, w ho w as t he i n v e s t i g a t i ng o f f i c er in her c a se from O m a r u ru to O k a h a n d j a. B o th t e s t i f i ed that they saw n o t h i ng improper in that as t h ey d i d n 't k n ow any of the suspects and c o n s e q u e n t ly c o u ld not a s s i st her in any w ay in t h is respect on t h e ir w ay to O k a h a n d j a. On t he e v i d e n ce n e i t h er had any k n o w l e d ge t h at c o u ld be c o n v e y ed to her to help her in i d e n t i f y i ng a n y o n e. F or t he same r e a s on the c r i t i c i sm l e v e l l ed at S e r g e a nt Z e e l i e 's p r e s e n ce in the room w h e re M rs G r a m o w s ky w as w a i t i n g, could not p r e j u d i ce accused number 3. W a r r a nt O f f i c er M a l an w as also c r i t i c i s ed for not filling in t he n a m es of the s u s p e c ts on t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de form, E x h i b it L L, but his e x p l a n a t i o n, to my m i nd it is q u i te r e a s o n a b l e, namely that at that stage he did not k n ow w ho t he s u s p e c ts w e re e x a c t ly in the line u p. He w as a l so c r i t i c i s ed for t a k i ng M rs G r a m o w s ky to an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w h e re t h e re m ay be p e o p le involved in t he i n c i d e nt and t h e r e by e x p o s i ng t he accused to being p o s s i b ly w r o n g ly i d e n t i f i e d. It seems quite n a t u r al that w h e re a s i m i l ar i n c i d e nt o c c u r r ed and p e o p le w e re apprehended that w i t n e s s es in a n o t h er s i m i l ar incident m ay be asked to look at t h o se p e o p le on an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de and see w h e t h er t h ey m ay h a ve b e en i n v o l v ed in that incident t o o. T h e re c a n n ot be a n y t h i ng w r o ng or p r e j u d i c i al to the accused in t h is r e s p e c t. H o w e v e r, accused number 3 also averred that M rs G r a m o w s ky w as part of a group of w i t n e s s es w h en he w as b r o u g ht from t he c e l ls to t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de and t h at p o l i ce o f f i c e rs p o i n t ed h im out by t he c l o t h es t h at he w o re and t he V o i g t s' i n c i d e nt that he w as involved in, in o r d er to a s s i st t he o t h er w i t n e s s es in t he i d e n t i f i c a t i o n. If t h is w as t r u e, and I shall deal w i th this soon, M rs G r a m o w s ky w o u l d n 't have had any p r o b l e ms in i d e n t i f y i ng a c c u s ed number 3, as he w as clearly indicated to h er b e f o re t he p a r a d e. A c c u s ed number 3, h o w e v e r, went further and a v e r r ed t h r o u gh s t a t e m e n ts m a de to Mrs G r a m o w s ky and I n s p e c t or M a l an that she first c o u l d n 't identify him and w as t h en t a k en i n to a b a t h r o om by a p o l i ce officer and w h en she r e t u r n ed she i m m e d i a t e ly identified him. It w as d e n i ed by I n s p e c t or M a l an and t h is w as not put to the p h o t o g r a p h e r. C o n s t a b le L . B e u k e s. It w as f u r t h er t e s t i f i ed by Inspector M a l an and W a r r a nt O f f i c er B e c k er t h at t he p o l i ce cell w h e re the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as in fact held, w as not part of the p o l i ce s t a t i o n. T he c o r r i d or r e f e r r ed to by accused number 3 in t he p o l i ce s t a t i on d id not exist or could not afford a n y o ne t he o p p o r t u n i ty to see what h a p p e n ed outside the c e ll w h e re t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de w as held. F u r t h e r m o r e, M rs G r a m o w s ky w as not at t he O k a h a n d ja P o l i ce S t a t i on for an i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de on the same day as t he S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g, w ho w e re allegedly part of the w i t n e s s es to w h om a c c u s ed number 3 had been indicated. I am s a t i s f i ed t h at t he State has proved beyond r e a s o n a b le d o u bt that t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de of the 12th A p r il 1 9 9 1, w h en M rs G r a m o w s ky i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3 w as p r o p e r ly c o n d u c t ed and not p r e j u d i c i al in any w ay to accused number 3 and t h at he w as in fact p o s i t i v e ly identified by M rs G r a m o w s ky as h er a s s a i l a nt on t he 29th December 1 9 9 0. A c c u s ed number 3 m u st c o n s e q u e n t ly be c o n v i c t ed on c h a r ge number 1 i n v o l v i ng t he i t e ms as listed in A n n e x u re 1. Mr G r o b l er submitted that charge 2 r e p r e s e n ts a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o ns if there is a c o n v i c t i on on c h a r ge 1. A p p l y i ng t he a p p r o a ch required in our law in t h is r e g a rd as set out b e f o r e, I cannot come to any other c o n c l u s i on t h at Mr G r o b l e r 's s u b m i s s i on must be a c c e p t e d. On the e v i d e n ce of M rs G r a m o w s ky accused number 3 d i d n 't p a r t i c i p a te in t he a s s a u lt on her m o t h er and the only w ay that he c an be c o n v i c t ed on the second charge is on the b a s is of c o m m on p u r p o s e. If t h e re w as common p u r p o se and t he i n d i c a t i o ns a re that t he t h r ee assailants attacked M rs G r a m o w s ky and h er m o t h er w i th the common p u r p o se to rob t h em by u s i ng v i o l e n c e, then the assault w as part and p a r c el of t he r o b b e r y. C o n s e q u e n t l y, accused number 3 c a n n ot be c o n v i c t ed on t he second c h a r g e. T he K r i el i n c i d e n t: In this incident a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1,6 and an u n k n o wn person w e re involved. S i m i l a r ly n e i t h er of t he a c c u s ed could attack the e v i d e n ce of Mr and M rs K r i el of w h at o c c u r r ed on that p a r t i c u l ar day and r e l i ed on a t t a c k i ng t he Mr K r i e l *s i d e n t i f i c a t i on of them, as w e ll as c a l l i ng c e r t a in a l i bi w i t n e s s e s. Mr G r o b l er i n d i c a t ed c e r t a in u n s a t i s f a c t o ry aspects in Mr K r i e l 's e v i d e n c e, but I am s a t i s f i ed that Mr Kriel w ho m a de a v e ry good i m p r e s s i on w i th h is d i r e ct and strong e v i d e n ce w as an h o n e st w i t n e ss w i th k e en o b s e r v a t i on and good r e c o l l e c t i o n. He is a l so s u p p o r t ed in his evidence by his w i f e, M rs D o r e en K r i el and a c c o r d i ng to her he remained calm and c o n t r o l l ed d u r i ng t he c o u r se of the events that occurred on that d a y. In respect of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de of t he 2nd A p r il 1991 I am satisfied that it w as c o n d u c t ed in a fair and p r o p er m a n n er without any p r e j u d i ce to any of t he a c c u s e d. In r e s p e ct of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de i t s e l f, it w as put on b e h a lf of accused number 1 to I n s p e c t or K o t z e, t he o f f i c e r - i n - c h a r g e, that Mr Kriel c o u l d n 't i d e n t i fy a n y o n e. He w as g i v en a further o p p o r t u n i ty and t h en left t he r o om but r e t u r n ed later and then i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b er 1 and 6 w ho w e re c o n v e n i e n t ly p l a c ed at that stage in t he first t wo p o s i t i o ns in the line u p. T h is w as d e n i ed by Mr K r i e l. A c c u s ed number 1, during e v i d e n c e, on t he one hand a v e r r ed t h at Mr K r i el only returned on a n o t h er day to i d e n t i fy h im and at a later stage that he returned a f t er a n o t h er w i t n e ss and then identified him. If it w as the i n t e n t i on of t he o f f i c e r - i n - c h a r ge of the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a de to a s s i st t he K r i e ls to o b t a in an i d e n t i f i c a t i on and later a c o n v i c t i o n, the q u e s t i on is w hy w a s n 't M rs K r i el a s s i s t ed in t he s a me m a n n e r. It c l e a r ly a p p e a rs from the e v i d e n ce and t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on parade form, E x h i b it Z, that M rs K r i el d id not i d e n t i fy a n y o n e. I accept the i d e n t i f i c a t i on by Mr K r i el of accused numbers 1 and 6 and that t h ey w e re in fact t he t wo p r o m i n e nt p e r s o ns of t he t h r ee w ho a r r i v ed at Mr K r i e l 's h o u se on t he 9th M a r ch 1991 and w ho c o n f r o n t ed t h e m, t i ed them up and stole the items listed in A n n e x u re 3 to t he c h a r ge sheet w i th the use of f o r c e. T h is is f u r t h er supported by the fact that E x h i b it 3 w as found at h o u se 0/94 in O r w e t o w e n i, O t j i w a r o n go w h e re a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 6 stayed from t i me to time and w e re p r e s e nt w h en t h e se w e a p o ns w e re found. Exhibit 2 w as found in the h o u se of a c c u s ed number 7, w ho tried to aver that it w as in fact E x h i b it 1 2, Mr De L a n g e 's r i f l e, that w as found in his h o m e. T h e re c an be no d o u bt that C o n s t a b le N a m p o lo found E x h i b it 2 in accused number 7's house and that it w as p r o p e r ly e n t e r ed into t he P o l .7 r e g i s t e r, E x h i b it W. A c c u s ed n u m b er 7 said in his statement to Inspector V i s s e r, E x h i b it Z Z, t h at t h is rifle w as g i v en to him by accused number 6 to k e ep for h i m. He a l so r e f e r r ed to the same 7,9 mm r i f le as one t h at he r e c e i v ed from accused number 6 in a n o t h er s t a t e m e n t. E x h i b it Y Y, w h en he w as accused of r o b b i ng Mr K r i e l. It is f u r t h er s u p p o r t ed by t he evidence of H e i ki M a t h e us w ho saw a r i f le in t he p o s s e s s i on of accused number 1 w h i ch r i f le w as w r a p p ed by a b e d s p r e a d. B o th Mr and M rs K r i el t e s t i f i ed that E x h i b it 2 w as w r a p p ed in a b e d s p r e ad w h en it w as r e m o v e d. A r a d i o - t a pe and a b r i e f c a se w i th c o m b i n a t i on l o c k s, w e re seen in the p r e s e n ce of accused number 1 by H e i ki M a t h e u s. A r a d i o - t a pe and a b r i e f c a se w i th c o m b i n a t i on locks w e re removed from t he K r i e l 's p r e m i s e s. A c c u s ed number 1 also told H e i ki M a t h e us that the r i f le w as t a k en from " b o e r s" w ho w e re tied up in t h e ir h o m e. A c c u s ed number 6 t e s t i f i ed that he w o r k ed on the p a r t i c u l ar day o u t s i de O t j i w a r o n go but in an attempt to keep a c c u s ed number 1 from the s c e n e, he t e s t i f i ed that he w as at h o me that d a y. W h en he w as c o n f r o n t ed w i th his p r e v i o us e v i d e n ce he a l l e g ed that he left early in t he m o r n i ng to go to w o r k. A c c u s ed number 1 t e s t i f i ed that he a r r i v ed in W i n d h o ek in F e b r u a ry 1991 and w as in W i n d h o ek on t he 9th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. He r e l i ed on t he e v i d e n ce of S i m e on K a n t o n d o k wa w ho said t h at t h ey had a p a r ty t he p r e v i o us e v e n i ng at J a s o n 's h o u se w h e re b o th he and accused number 1 w e re t o g e t h er and that he a l so saw h im a r o u nd 10 o'clock on t he m o r n i ng of the 9th M a r ch in K a t u t u r a. T he w i t n e ss Jason H a n d y e n go t e s t i f i ed that he w as t o g e t h er w i th accused number 1 from t he 2nd F e b r u a ry u n t il the 13th M a r ch 1 9 9 1. T h is w i t n e s s' e v i d e n ce in r e s p e ct of d a t es c a n n ot be relied o n. In the first i n s t a n ce he c o u ld t e s t i fy w h at h a p p e n ed on e a ch d a t e, but later he w as c o n f u s ed in respect of t he d a t es that he and accused n u m b er 1 w e nt to t he D e f e n ce F o r ce O f f i c e. I do not a c c e pt h is e v i d e n ce at all and S i m e on K a n t o n d o k wa m a de a s i m i l ar b ad i m p r e s s i on on the Court in his attempt to c o v er up for a c c u s ed number 1 and to p r o v i de h im w i th an a l i b i. I a l so do not b e l i e ve his e v i d e n ce of h is r e c o l l e c t i on of s p e c i f ic d a t es m o re t h an a y e ar a go w h i le he c a n n ot even r e m e m b er t he p a r t i c u l ar day of the w e ek during w h i ch the i n c i d e n ts w o u ld h a ve o c c u r r e d. I am s a t i s f i ed that the State has proved b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le d o u bt t h at accused numbers 1 and 6 w e re in fact t he p e r s o ns w ho r o b b ed Mr and M rs K r i el and that they s h o u ld be c o n v i c t ed of c h a r ge 6. I cannot agree w i th Mr S m a ll t h at b e c a u se a c c u s ed number 7 w as found in p o s s e s s i on of Mr K r i e l 's 7,9 mm M a u s e r, E x h i b it 2, he w as t he t h i rd p e r s on w ho w as at t he K r i e l 's house on that d a y. He still w o r k ed on t h at d a te for Mr De L a n g e. A c c o r d i ng to his s t a t e m e n ts to t he p o l i ce he kept that rifle for accused number 7. I am, h o w e v e r, satisfied that he k n ew that the rifle w as s t o l en as he h i m s e lf said in his s t a t e m e n t. Exhibit YY, and he s h o u ld be c o n v i c t ed of r e c e i v i ng stolen p r o p e r t y, k n o w i ng it to h a ve b e en stolen, w h i ch is a competent v e r d i ct on a c h a r ge of r o b b e ry in terms of s e c t i on 260 of Act 51 of 1 9 7 7. In r e s p e ct of c h a r ge 7, I am not satisfied b e y o nd r e a s o n a b le d o u bt that on the e v i d e n ce b e f o re me that accused n u m b e rs 1 and 6 p r e s e n t ed t h e m s e l v es as m e m b e rs of the N a m i b i an P o l i ce to g a in e n t ry into the K r i e l s' h o u s e. In any event, e v en had t h is c h a r ge been proved, it w as done in f u r t h e r a n ce of t he p u r p o se to rob Mr and M rs K r i e l. C o n s e q u e n t l y, t h is w o u ld c o n s t i t u te a d u p l i c a t i on of c o n v i c t i o ns and t h ey c an t h e r e f o re not be c o n v i c t ed on this c h a r ge w h en c o n v i c t ed on c h a r ge 6. S e e: R v M a l a k o. 1959(1) SA 569 (0) at 570 H. T he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg i n c i d e n t: T h is i n c i d e nt led to c h a r g es 3,4 and 5. Four to five p e r s o ns e n t e r ed t he house of Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg on t he 3rd F e b r u a ry 1991 and attacked them by a s s a u l t i ng b o th of t h em as w e ll as M rs M e r c k e n s, the m o t h er of M rs S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g, w h e r e a f t er their p o s s e s s i o ns as l i s t ed in A n n e x u re 2 w e re t a k e n. A l so in this m a t t er all t he a c c u s ed d e n i ed a ny i n v o l v e m e nt or that they w e re p r e s e nt on Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g 's farm on that p a r t i c u l ar d a t e. Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg b o th i d e n t i f i ed a c c u s ed n u m b e rs 1 and 3 as being part of the a s s a i l a n ts as w e ll as P r i m us A n g u la and the d e c e a s e d. S e v e r al of t he p o s s e s s i o ns of Mr and M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg that w e re t a k en from t h e ir farm w e re found in Ovambo at the house of accused n u m b er 3 * s m o t h e r. T h is included items that w e re p h o t o g r a p h ed w h en t h ey w e re i d e n t i f i ed by Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg at t he p o l i ce s t a t i on at O t j i w a r o n g o, namely E x h i b i ts 23 to 2 7. T h e re w e re a l so o t h er c l o t h es that w e re i d e n t i f i ed as a p p e a rs on t he p h o t os 1 and 2 in Exhibit S. T wo f i r e - a r ms of Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g, namely E x h i b i ts 8 and 9 w e re f o u nd in O v a m bo at t he house of accused number 3's f a t h e r. A c c u s ed n u m b er 3 d e n i ed that he had any of these items in h is p o s s e s s i on and alleged that the fire-arms c o n f i s c a t ed by t he p o l i ce w e re in fact his own and not E x h i b i ts 8 and 9. He c a l l ed h is sister C a r o l i ne w ho supported t h is and w ho g a ve e x a c t ly t he same d e s c r i p t i o ns of the f i r e - a r ms as he d i d. It w as a l so alleged that it w as only a single w i t n e ss w ho w as not t oo r e l i a b l e, namely F i l l e m on K a n a e l e, w ho t e s t i f i ed in r e s p e ct of the c o n f i s c a t i on of t h e se f i r e - a r m s. W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s hi w ho w as w i th K a n a e l e, died s u b s e q u e nt to t h is e v e n t. T he fact remains that E x h i b i ts 8 and 9 w e re s t o l en on t he 3rd F e b r u a ry from Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g 's h o u se and w e re r e c o v e r ed by the p o l i c e, w e re i d e n t i f i ed by Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and handed in to C o u r t. If it w a s n 't found by F i l l e m on Kanaele and W a r r a nt O f f i c er N g o s hi w h e re did t he p o l i ce obtain these w e a p o n s? O ne t h i ng t h at is c e r t a i n, h o w e v e r, is that the items that a p p e ar in p h o t os 1 and 2 on Exhibit S and identified by Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg as p o s s e s s i o ns w h i ch w e re stolen from his farm w e re f o u nd in t he h o u se of accused number 3's m o t h e r. T h is is c o n f i r m ed by F i l l e m on K a n a e le as w e ll as C a r o l i ne T j a p a, t h at it w as in fact t he same items that w e re t a k en from a c c u s ed n u m b er 3's m o t h e r 's h o u s e. This c l e a r ly r e n d e rs support to t he e v i d e n ce of F i l l e m on Kanaele that the w e a p o ns h a n d ed o v er by a c c u s ed number 3's father and w h i ch w e re b r o u g ht by h im f r om O v a m bo w e re the w e a p o ns handed in as E x h i b i ts 8 a nd 9. A c c u s ed number 1 shot Mr De L a n ge w i th a small c a l i b re r e v o l v e r, a .22, according to t he e v i d e n ce of Dr B i r k e n s t o c k, w ho examined the w o u nd and found a p a rt of t he b u l l et still imbedded in the face of Mr De L a n g e. Mr De L a n ge a l so said it w as a .22 t a r g et s h o o t i ng r e v o l v e r. A c c u s ed number 1 averred that he shot Mr De L a n ge w i th t he f i r e - a rm that w as found by Sergeant H e r r i d g e, a l t h o u gh he d id d e ny it in this Court that he p o i n t ed it o u t. It is c l e ar from the evidence that Exhibit 3 w as found by S e r g e a nt H e r r i d ge and W a r r a nt Officer M a r a is a f t er he p o i n t ed it out as Mr G r o b l er c o n c e d e s. That w as a .38 S p e c i al r e v o l v er w h i ch c o u ld not have been used to shoot Mr De L a n g e. A .22 t a r g et shooting pistol w as stolen from Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g 's h o u s e, i d e n t i f i ed as Exhibit 7, but w as r e c o v e r ed in the room of e i t h er a c c u s ed number 4 or P r i m us A n g u l a. H o w e v e r, it w as not p r o v ed that E x h i b it 7 w as in fact u s ed to shoot Mr De L a n g e. E x h i b it TT w as signed by accused number 3 and he g a ve p e r m i s s i on in t e r ms thereof that t h r ee f i r e - a r ms b e l o n g i ng to Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg c o u ld be h a n d ed b a ck to him. T h is w as d e n i ed by accused number 3. During s t a t e m e n ts by c o u n s el in respect of E x h i b it TT a c c u s ed number 3 a l l e g ed that he w as b r o u g ht u n d er the i m p r e s s i on that he s i g n ed a s t a t e m e nt r e f l e c t i ng that he did not w a nt to m a ke a ny s t a t e m e nt to the p o l i ce and said he w a s n 't shown t he w e a p o ns at a l l. In his e v i d e n ce in C o u rt he later said t h at he t h o u g ht he w as giving p e r m i s s i on to be f i n g e r p r i n t ed by s i g n i ng t h is d o c u m e nt and later he d e n i ed that it w as h is s i g n a t u r e. I am satisfied that t h is e x h i b it p r o v es w h at it p u r p o r ts to b e, namely p e r m i s s i on by a c c u s ed n u m b er 3 t h at t h e se e x h i b i ts w h i ch w e re in his p o s s e s s i on m ay be h a n d ed o v er to Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg and I a c c e pt t he e v i d e n ce of S e r g e a nt Haccou that accused number 3 w as in fact s h o wn t he f i r e - a r ms b e f o re signing t h is d o c u m e n t. I h a ve no d o u bt t h at a c c u s ed number 3 obtained t h e se f i r e - a r ms w h en he and o t h e rs r o b b ed t he S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r gs on t he e v e n i ng of t he 3rd F e b r u a ry 1 9 9 1. It w as further p r o v ed by w ay of i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es t h at a c c u s ed numbers 1 and 3 had b e en i d e n t i f i ed by b o th Mr a nd M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r g. Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg a l so i d e n t i f i ed Primus A n g u la as one of t he a s s a i l a n t s. S e v e re c r i t i c i sm w as levelled against these i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es and m a i n ly b e c a u se Mr S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg also i d e n t i f i ed a n o t h er p e r s on w ho w as not involved at a l l. He e x p l a i n ed t he r e a s on w hy he i d e n t i f i ed t h is p e r s on as the latter had b e en i n v o l v ed in c r i m i n al o f f e n c es that Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg a p p a r e n t ly k n ew of and it w as later p r o v ed that he c o u ld not have been at t he t i me on the farm w h en t he i n c i d e nt o c c u r r e d. It w as also argued that Mr S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e rg w as injured, faint c o n s c i o u s n e ss and c o u ld not o b s e r ve h is a s s a i l a n ts p r o p e r ly in order to i d e n t i fy t h em l a t er and that he could not give specific d e s c r i p t i o ns of any f e a t u r es w h e r e by he i d e n t i f i ed them. M rs S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e rg i d e n t i f i ed accused number 3 at O k a h a n d ja on t he 4th A p r il 1991 by p o i n t i ng h im out w i th a s t i ck and a c c u s ed number 1 at O t j i w a r o n go by p o i n t i ng h im out w i th a r u l e r. She had every o p p o r t u n i ty to o b s e r ve her a s s a i l a n t s. I am satisfied that b o th i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es that i n v o l v ed the S c h n e i d e r - W a t e r b e r gs w e re c o n d u c t ed p r o p e r ly and that all t he n e c e s s a ry p r e c a u t i o ns w e re t a k en to e n s u re that t he accused w e re not p r e j u d i c e d. In t h is r e g a rd I a l so reject t he a r g u m e n ts in respect of all t he i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es that b e c a u se there w e re no legal r e p r e s e n t a t i on at the p a r a d es that the p a r a d es w e re i m p r o p e r. In every i n s t a n ce it w as i n d i c a t ed that t he s u s p e c ts did not r e g u i re legal r e p r e s e n t a t i v es to be p r e s e n t. I am satisfied that the i d e n t i f i c a t i on p a r a d es w e re c o n d u c t ed in a p r o p er and fair m a n n e r. T he i d e n t i f i c a t i on of accused numbers 3 and 1 by the S c h n e i d e r- W a t e r b e r g s, s u p p o r ts the o t h er e v i d e n ce linking t he a c c u s ed