MR PRINSLOO
With regard to the first applicant, I would like to submit to you that the applicant has made a full disclosure of the events which took place.
	The facts which are established in this case, are that the deceased was shot and that the applicant himself sustained an injury in his arm, and clearly then, two shots were fired.  The applicant maintains that three shots were fired.  The third applicant says that there were three shots.
	The ballistic report indicates that two empty shells were found as well as a bullet point, a projectile point.  With respect Honourable Chairperson, the first applicant's version that he went to Pretoria along with the other two applicants, and that this took place as a result of an order given by the BWB, the Boere Weerstandsbeweging, of which he was also a member of the BRL, those facts are undisputed.
	It also appears further with respect that an aspect which is not argued is that the applicant upon arrest said that they were in Pretoria, that the police were aware of this, and that sketched what their intention was in Pretoria, the plan was to take firearms or weapons from guards who were doing duty, not to remove weapons from a safe, and that a fellow member in his ranks, Mr Van Rensburg, was aware of this and that they had reconnoitred that place together on a prior occasion.
	The applicant performed military service at Devon Air Base and it appears also from the evidence given by the witness Mr Swart, that before these events took place, the police took occupation of the place, but the applicant was still under the impression that this was still an Air Force base as it was.
	It is also indisputable that the members of the Air Force on guard duty, performed guard duty with automatic firearms, unlike the police.
	If we look at the aspect that the applicant had already intended to take those weapons in Pretoria, but because of circumstances and there being too many guards, it was not a viable option, and he then decided upon the Air Base, and this supports his contention that the weapons were to be taken from guards and not a stockpile or an arsenal.
	His action with regard to Devon, when he decided on the way back from Pretoria to stop at that place and take weapons, if one considers the applications of the fellow applicants, there is no indication that it would have been only to reconnoitre that place, but also to obtain weapons there.
	The applicant's evidence with regard to the action there, as indicated from the beginning, supports his allegation that he entered the room and said that the people shouldn't try to be Rambo's.  Mr Swart conceded that this is possible. His evidence is that they were from a right-wing group and that they wanted guns.
	Mr Swart maintains that he can't specifically remember that, that everything happened very quickly.  If one looks at the entire impact of his evidence with respect, there are many possibilities and understandably so, somebody who would suddenly find himself under such circumstances where he is being threatened with death, can absolutely not have a very clear picture of the events as they played out.
	Indeed during cross-examination concessions were made that as the applicants say things happened, they could very well have happened so.
	Honourable Chair and members of the Committee, it has continuously been the case of the applicant and unfortunately I don't have the judgment of Justice Grobbelaar with regard to the court case, initially I couldn't find it but I have found it, and I have photostatted it, however, it is in Pretoria, if you wish to obtain it, I could furnish you with these documents.  It will also include his plea.