ADV TEE
Now, the question of the three names is the part that would relate necessarily to the submissions I am going to make about Mr Skosana's evidence.  Mr Skosana was arrested and admitted quite frankly, and I submit, totally honestly that he was assaulted by the police.  Now, Skosana is a member of MK.  The people in MK were not softies.  MK was a very, very difficult soldiering work to do.  The fact that a MK soldier very soon changes his plea to guilty and then comes to give evidence against his former commander must be explained in the context of the admission made by Mr Skosana that he was assaulted by the police.  When it was put to him, did the police add those names to your list.  Well, he denied that, but he would deny that necessarily to remain as consistent as he can.  He would deny that to remain as consistent as he can with the evidence which he had given in his trial and in the trial of the Nkunas'.
	What is significant about Mr Skosana is that he has a number of competing versions where, I would submit, had it not been for the assault of the police which he has agreed occurred with him, would have been incomprehensible.  Why would he have one version for his mitigation, another version for the Nkuna trial and a third version here if his plea had been fully voluntary and if his evidence giving in the trial against the Nkunas' had been fully voluntary.  Those documents which are before the Commission tend to suggest that his plea was done voluntarily.  Those documents before the Commission tend to suggest that he was the chief witness before the, against the Nkunas' and that he was doing that voluntarily.  Well, if he was doing it voluntarily then, why the difference between what he said then and now and I submit that this Commission is singularly in a position to be able to take that into account.  Those names, I submit, this Commission can find were submitted by the police and they were put to Skosana and that was part of the evidence which he gave and ultimately it has become something which he now believes, but when one goes to the effect of the actual substance and probabilities on that evidence, the most significant question relating to that point arrived from the Committee this morning in relation to the attacks against the three people that were to be taken, that were to be performed on the night of November.
	Three people were to be attacked, but there were only two grenades.  There was no transport, two people were to be attacked, but there was still only two grenades.  It is inconceivable that at any stage the three people on that list is the truth.  There was only one.  In cross-examination yesterday Mr Skosana said that the documents had been stamped by the police.  These were the documents shown by Joe Nkuna.  The probabilities of Joe Nkuna having documents stamped by the police that contained a list of people that he should execute on behalf of MK are so staggering that it is laughable.  In that regard I would submit that the evidence is tainted, but it is not tainted because Skosana is a bad person. It is tainted, because Skosana has shown that he is singularly human, that eventually the police broke him down and that must necessarily be the way to deal with this.
	Now, I am not saying this simply out of, out of the blue.  In Skosana's application there is a document produced which I have read which is in Afrikaans which relates to correctional supervision and the fact that they are going to give the man parole after two-thirds of his sentence and a further document which was handed to us in a memorandum which is written in Afrikaans and I quote from this memorandum,
"The memorandum of background information with regard to Derick Skosana as well as completed SAP 62".