ADV MEMANI
That is correct, Mr Chairman. I agree their evidence was in fact that they did not recall the incident.
	The next matter I would like to deal with is the matter involving the bombing of the clinic, that is 2.4. Mr Chairman, Mr Ngo again finds some corroboration in his description of this incident from Motsamai who says that on the occasion when they went to bomb the clinic, along the way to Brandfort he saw Ramoseou's car parked in the - facing in the direction of Brandfort. That is some corroboration for Ngo who says that he was with Ramosoeu and Bester in a vehicle and they were there to make sure that the house, the clinic was bombed.
	Mr Chairman, I do not want to add anything this to application unless of course there are some questions about the evidence regarding the bombing of the clinic.
	The next incident that I am dealing with is 2.16, the conspiracy to murder Khotoi. Mr Ngo, as I have already pointed out, was only with the Bloemfontein police as a policeman for a period of three months. He would not have had intimate knowledge of their affairs outside Bloemfontein before that, and the fact that he knows about the two persons, Pitso and Ntsoabole, whom he says were informers of Ramosoeu, tends to strengthen his evidence. That must be seen in the light of the fact that Ramosoeu was not in Bloemfontein but was in Brandfort. Ngo tells us that these people were informers.
	Ramosoeu had told us that no, he never keeps informers but he only kept contacts. However, he then said, when confronted about these two people, Pitso and Tsalo, 'no, I only tried to recruit one of them as an informer'.
	Mr Chairman, it is clear that Mr Ramosoeu was not being truthful about whether he kept informers or not. It was pointed out to him that a contact is not a person who gives information deliberately, but someone who is somehow tricked into giving information. And his answer was not in the negative; it was a matter of saying, 'well, I don't know that'. Mr Chairman, he is an experienced policeman, he should have been able to say that no, a contact is not that type of person but a contact is this and that type of person, or that we don't have any name for that type of person, but he did not do that.
	Ngo would not have known or have the slightest idea that Ramosoeu even tried to recruit this person as an informer because Ngo was not working in Brandfort on his version. because Ngo never worked with him so how could then Ngo have come to know that Ramosoeu in particular had something to do with Pitso and Ntsoabole? The evidence of Ramosoeu compel us to accept the evidence of Ngo.
	Mr Chairman, I now wish to deal with the matters 2.9 to 2.12 - 2.8 to 2.12. These I have lumped as the Mamelodi incidents. On all these matters the only evidence which we have about how the houses were burnt is that of Ngo. There has not been any denial that the houses were not burnt.