UNKNOWN
Mr Chairperson, I understand, but at the same time I feel as the representative of Mr Menera, that it is not fair to him that certain questions should be put to him about his knowledge of criminal activities, if the purpose is not to associate him or connect him with those activities, why else should we allow this line of cross examination to  go on, I understand the concerns, I understand that Mr Phelane is a lay person, but I'm asking the Committee to sort of guide him on how he should conduct the matter. For instance, Mr Chairperson, I'm left wondering why we would sit and listen to a person simply asking questions about, do you know about the death of someone, do you know about the death of X,Y,Z?  He has referred to a gangster, he has then said what the name of the gang was, he has then told us who the people that, he's not suggesting that the people who killed the people who he's referring to, were associated with the person.  We do not know who the women who were raped are and all we have is this kind of innuendo that my client knows something about these rapes and that he was somehow associated with them.  I don't think it could be fair to the applicant.