On 05 April 2019 Maryna Lamprecht was approached by Carte Blanche for an interview and comments on the investigation report. The interview was declined but NB Publishers issued this response:
The Investigator Wouter de Swardt responded to these statements and allegations:
(his response highlighted in yellow….)
Mr. X was interviewed by Die Burger. Neither Chris, nor the publisher know his true identity or whether he has decided to give a statement to the police or not. In addition, Chris Steyn has obtained the identities of a couple of other alleged victims following the publication of the book. NB Publishers is aware of the fact that De Swardt was in PE for only about 11 days and that he spoke to very few people before drawing his conclusions. He admitted to the media (Rapport article) that he did not even try to speak to Gordon Lamastra or the doctor who allegedly performed the operation on the injured boy. His report also contains many inaccuracies and we therefore do not regard it as credible. Despite De Swardt saying he doubted that the surgeon even existed, Chris Steyn has provided proof of her correspondence with him – and recently received corroborating information that the operation was in fact performed.
Mr. X was interviewed by Die Burger. Neither Chris, nor the publisher know his true identity or whether he has decided to give a statement to the police or not.
Answer:
This is just false and very weak journalism. A man comes forward presenting himself as a victim and poses for a photo to be taken but NOBODY knows his identity or whether he gave a statement to the police? As it turns out – Mr X disappeared into thin air and never spoke to the police. He was just yet another fraud to market the book.
In addition, Chris Steyn has obtained the identities of a couple of other alleged victims following the publication of the book.
Answer:
Again – another wild, false and desperate statement by Chris Steyn and the publisher to maintain the public interest. Not a single victim of the alleged crime came forward because there are no victims because this particular crime was never committed.
NB Publishers is aware of the fact that De Swardt was in PE for only about 11 days and that he spoke to very few people before drawing his conclusions.
Answer:
I did not HAVE to speak to more than a few people and my
conclusionswere based on forensic facts. I was appointed by the Foundation for Human Rights to first and foremost investigate the death of Mark Minnie because the suspicion was - according to Chris Steyn - that he was assassinated. I started my investigation on the Saturday. By the following Tuesday - four days later – I already had conclusive forensic proof that Mark Minnie planned and executed his own death. By then I already had traced down the main witness – William Hart – who confirmed under oath that the so-called facts in the book were all false. The rest of the time in Port Elizabeth was spent trying to find so-called victims which I by then knew did not exist but I tried anyway.
He admitted to the media (Rapport article) that he did not even try to speak to Gordon Lamastra.
Answer:
This is just a cheap lie. I tried contacting Lamastra but by the time that article in Rapport was published he had not responded yet. I eventually DID speak to Lamastra per phone. He will confirm that he was in George at the time and declined to be interviewed or comment.
...or the doctor who allegedly performed the operation on the injured boy.
Answer:
Again – just a statement to discredit me. I could not find the doctor while I was in Port Elizabeth because Chris Steyn would not share information about him with me. I did find him, eventually. He is Dr Andy Hillock and he gave a sworn affidavit that he did NOT perform an operation on a boy with a gunshot wound in the anus.
His report also contains many inaccuracies and we therefore do not regard it as credible.
Answer:
Really? Again, just another wild statement in an attempt to discredit me. Why does she not NAME these inaccuracies? IF it was so inaccurate – why did the Foundation for Human Rights then accept it as correct?
Despite De Swardt saying he doubted that the surgeon even existed, Chris Steyn has provided proof of her correspondence with him – ...
Answer:
Yes – at the beginning of my investigation I had doubt that the surgeon existed because of all the lies I exposed but as is well know now: I found him.
...and recently received corroborating information that the operation was in fact performed.
Answer:
Yet again an example of Chris Steyn’s wild innuendoes and false statements made for the effect and to discredit me. What
corroborating informationcould she possibly have received if the doctor himself gave a sworn affidavit that he did NOT perform the operation?
ooooo00000ooooo