MR O'FARRELL
Madam, I'm by no means an expect in either field, however I leave it up to the committee to make the decision, there are several breaks in the applicant's - me, by talking by the truth.   First of all, where the applicant states, and he drags the deceased's name through the mud, stating that the deceased firstly shot him in the leg.   My evidence was that the shot was fired in front of him, approximately two feet in front, a foot or two feet in front of the applicant, of which a bullet was also recovered from that certain area, as I think it's on page 32 of this book, of the judgment, of the main scroll, where it states that Brigadier Alberts testified that such had been done.   The fact that the accused also states that he then shot Warrant Officer Van der Spuy from the front position.   The degree of the wound that penetrated Warrant Officer Van der Spuy penetrated him in the top right shoulder, proceeded through his one heart, through his lung, through his other lung and then exited his left side, which, as I said, the accused and Warrant Officer Van der Spuy are much of the same height, in order for such wound to have been inflicted, the applicant would have at least been able to stand at a certain angle, at which stage on that time of the shooting, we were on a flat surface, so he couldn't have shot the accused at such an angle, unless he had a damn ladder near him.