-
Chief Albert Luthuli.
Police crime scene analyst, Brenden Burgess, has testified in the re-opened inquest into the death of ANC leader, inkosi Albert Luthuli, in the Pietermaritzburg High Court that the version of the driver of the train that allegedly hit him is highly unlikely.
The first inquest in 1967 heard that the train driver saw Luthuli walking along the railway track towards the oncoming locomotive.
The magistrate found that Luthuli was hit by the train, but the family believes he was murdered. Fanele Mhlongo (Nguni also) reports…..
Burgess was part of a team who reconstructed the crash scene using evidence from the first inquest. He told the court that, among other things, he relied on reports from the initial inquest – a sworn statement by the train driver, Stephanus Lategan, and the Investigating Officer.
Lategan said in his sworn statement he applied the brakes the moment the locomotive hit Luthuli.
Using specifications of the steam locomotive, measurements taken on the crash scene, and with help from steam train experts, Burgess was able to determine the speed of the train and the time it would have taken for it to stop.
Based on this, he found that Lategan’s version of events is highly unlikely.
“The possibility of an accident scenario occupies described by Mr Lategan is highly unlikely, taking into account the stopping distance required to stop the locomotive where it came to rest at the scene … that is a minimum of 767 meters. The brakes to the train would have to have been applied at least 170 meters before the entrance to the northern side of the bridge. However, for the train to have stopped where it did, the speed of the train would have to have been below 20 kilometres an hour. The probability of the point of impact being on the southern side of the bridge is highly unlikely,” says Burgess.
Questioned by evidence leader, Advocate Annah Chuene, Burgess testified the driver would have had to break before the crash to stop the train at the place where it came to a halt.
“Given that the brakes the brakes would have had been applied near to the northern end of the bridge for the locomotive to have stopped where it is alleged to have stopped, it is probable that the driver may have seen something laying on the bridge close to the southern side causing him to apply brakes,” says Burgess.
Chuene: Is it my correct understanding that you are saying the brakes could not have been applied at the time the train driver in his words struck the individual , or struck the African male?
Burgess: That is correct my lady.
Chuene: In your opinion, when would he have hit the brakes ?
Burgess: If I am correct it’s about 170 – 180 meters prior to entrance of the northern end of the bridge.
Burgess has testified that although he could not determine the cause for Luthuli’s injuries, he is of the opinion that Luthuli was not struck by the train, or by someone inside the train.
“The nature and extent of the injuries sustained by Mr Albert Luthuli, to come to any conclusion as to the cause of the injuries sustained by Mr Luthuli, until such time as further information is forthcoming, the probable cause of the injury sustained by Mr Albert Luthuli in my mind remains inconclusive,” says Burgess.
Chuene: Based on your analysis, is there a possibility that Chief Luthuli would’ve been struck on the head with a stick or an iron rod or heavy object from someone who may have been on the train whilst it was still in motion?
Burgess: Extremely, highly unlikely!
Chuene: And why do you say that, Sir?
Burgess: The reason I say that is because the finding already points out that the driver would’ve had to have applied brakes prior to entering the bridge to stop where the train stopped. So, therefore, once again if the train is in motion and something is struck or someone play something from the train, the train would never have stopped where it stopped or documented to have stopped.
The NPA is expected to call more expert witnesses as the inquest continues this week.
LIVE STREAM:
