GEORGE BIZOS
That's really the ...[inaudible].  for that correction.  It was too broadly, a little too broadly stated in the statement but the validity of the statement that they were lying as to when the conspiracy was hatched is submitted on their statements and in the Record Mr Chairman.  The coincidence of what is contained in the statements and how much of it is in accordance with their evidence is of course an important factor as to whether the statements were taken freely and voluntarily or not.
	And then we say in 6.4.4., Walus admitted in his evidence that he had once driven past Mr Mandela's house during the summer of '92/'93.  Walus is deliberately evasive about exactly when he drove past Mr Mandela's house, after he admitted that he usually drove his brother's white bakkie which his brother had in 1991 and 1992.
	He further tries to confuse the date by making reference to having known where Mr Mandela's house is by using the list of nine names as a source.  We submit that the Committee should accept the evidence of Mrs Beyers, that she saw Mr Walus watching the house of Mr Mandela in July 1992.  Mrs Beyers gave forthright evidence and had the opportunity to observe Walus when both their cars stopped next to each other at the traffic light.
	She was a credible witness and the Committee should accept her reasons for not having come forward soon after seeing Mr Walus' picture in the newspapers in April 1993.  It is submitted that it would have been, could not have been necessary for her to come forward at the time as Mr Walus had already been arrested.  It is submitted that the Committee should find that the conspiracy to eliminate leaders of the ANC, SACP was entered into at least during the latter part of 1992 and not in February 1993.
	A point was made by Counsel for the Applicants that identification is a fallible process.  We agree with that but there are difficulties in the submission when you are asked to reject Mrs Beyers as evidence because here we have a person who admits that he drove a white bakkie at that time although he says that it didn't have bullet holes on it.  Well, he may be telling the truth about that or may not, or it may be that I'm told, that sometimes there are stickers with, resembling bullet holes on cars, it may be that there was one of them but be that as it may, he admits that at or about that time he had the use of such a motor car.
	He admits that although a little later he did go to observe Mr Mandela's house, he is obviously being untruthful as to what the purpose was.  He says that he was selling crystal glass from his father's factory which had gone bankrupt a number of years before in Houghton and he happened to be passing by.  Challenged to point one shopkeeper or one resident to whom he sold the piece of glass, he was unable to tell us.  
	If I remember correctly he said that he hadn't succeeded in selling anything to anybody in Houghton in order to justify the -.  Now why he should be in Houghton and by chance pass Mr Mandela's house which one can almost take cognisance of is on a, in a quiet suburb, a T intersection, off the corner at the time and why he should be seen there is inexplicable.  And this of course is further evidence that they were not truthful and forthcoming as to when the conspiracy was hatched, who were the victims to be and on that basis and the others we submit that amnesty should be refused.