MR MBANDAZAYO IN REPLY
Yes Chairperson, justbriefly.  Chairperson, I think I will start with the question of the gun.  Ithink Mr Thobejane made it clear that for instance he was not sure about whatit was, because he thought, the other, that it was a camera and it is clearfrom what he told the Committee that the dogs were barking, so definitely thoughhe did not put it in so many words, he expected Mr Swanepoel to come up witha gun and in fact he saw a gun.  Under cross-examination he admitted that hewon't dispute that it was not a gun.  So definitely if he was fabricating that,he would have stuck it out and said "look, I don't care who says what,he was carrying a gun."
        Coming tothe question of that, Chairperson, I would not go to the question that theydid not make out the question of political motivation because Mr Swanepoel wasnot a right-winger, he was not belonging to any political organisation, it hasbeen stressed that irrespective of what, the farmers were the targets.  Chairperson,I would like to come to this question of armed robbery.  I am sure I would beseen to be monotonous to the Committee, I have been arguing this question, theapplication in respect of the applicants.   It is always you find that mostof the time these people make them in jail and they don't understand the wholeprocedure of the court, when they are being convicted and all that, they don'tunderstand the whole of this thing.  Most of the time you find that they alwaysleave out what they are supposed, in fact if you can go to all of them, onehas left something like explosives, the other has not applied for another thing,because the problem is that it is read to them, it is Greek to them what isbeing talked about in court, all this being separated, all these crimes, andnow it creates problems when he is not assisted.