‘Rusty’ ex-agent denies Timol torture
‘I CANNOT remember, cannot hear” and “a rusty mind” were the standard answers provided by a former security police agent called to the stand yesterday during the reopened inquest into the death of anti-apartheid activist, Ahmed Timol.
Seth Sons, now 80, was an investigator stationed at John Vorster Square at the time of Timol’s death 46 years ago. He was the last witness for the day in the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria.
Sons, who is now deaf, said he had never met Timol in his life. “I do not know him to this day. I only know him from the newspapers,” Sons told Judge Billy Mothle.
While several questions had to be repeated to him, Sons was adamant he knew nothing about detainees tortured or assaulted while being interrogated. Several torture techniques used by the apartheid regime security police at the time, were cited to him by counsel for the Timol family, Howard Varney.
Sons said he had never heard of “the shock technique”, people dangled by their feet out of windows or detainees who were punched or kicked during that time. When asked about detainees being deprived of food or forced to urinate on the spot, as they were denied going to the toilet, he indignantly answered “most certainly not”.
Like his former colleagues who gave evidence during the inquest, Sons also had no knowledge of anyone who was tortured during his time at John Vorster Square. He said he had read about possible tortures in the newspapers.
This is exactly the answer which was given by former security agents Jan Rodrigues and Neville Els, when they were questioned about torture.
Sons was more forthcoming when Varney produced affidavits by two detainees during the 1980s, who claimed they endured assault at the hands of Sons during interrogation.
The one claimed Sons took away his spectacles and made him stand naked in the interrogation room. The other claimed he was hit against the head.
Sons’s answer to both allegations remained the same: “I cannot remember, your honour.”
When he was grilled on this issue, he told the judge that “his mind was a bit rusty due to age”.
But he remembered exactly the route he had followed when he had returned to John Vorster Square after he took several security police officers to the home of Timol’s parents on October 27, 1971 – on the day Timol died. He remembered that he had parked the car in the western block of the complex and that it was around 4pm. He also remembered that several people came out of the lift and said that someone had fallen out of the window.
Sons said he was not bothered to ask who had fallen, nor interested in going to see the body. He said he went up to his office on the 9th floor to continue with his work.
Asked by the judge why he did not at least enquire who had died, Sons said he was not “nosy”. He added that he also “could not stomach” seeing a body after it had plunged 10 storeys to the ground.
He said he was not privilege to a lot of information in those days, as the security agents did not fully trust the “non-white members of the branch”.
Closing arguments in the case will be heard next Thursday, after which the matter will be postponed for the judge to consider the issues before writing his judgment. Judge Mothle will have to make a finding as to who was responsible for Timol’s death.
It was concluded during the inquest held in 1972 that he had committed suicide by leaping out a 10th-floor window.
This finding was disputed by the Timol family, who maintained he was pushed or thrown out of the window by police after he had been severely tortured by them.