"Yours was not to reason why, yours. . . was to take orders and do and die. That was our culture, to protect our leaders," raged an emotional Xoliswa Falati to this week's Truth and Reconciliation hearings into Winnie Madikizela-Mandela and her infamous Mandela United Football Club.
While the ever-glamorous "Mother of the Nation" responded only with looks of disbelief and disdain, Falati, one time bosom ally of Madikizela-Mandela, may well have signalled the end of an era for South Africa. This era has seen the former wife of President Nelson Mandela come back from the brink on more than one occasion.
For so long Winnie had surrounded herself with people who, it would appear, were ready to lie for her, commit perjury and even convict themselves in order to protect their "leader". Just last month Winnie appeared at a press conference with several youths who were to vouch for her side of the story; but on Wednesday one of those same youths admitted to having seen her actively participate in the beatings which led to the death of the teenage activist, Stompie Seipei.
Furthermore, one of the two convicted killers of Dr Abu-Baker Asvat has now told the Archbishop Desmond Tutu's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) that he was paid 20,000 rand (£3,000) by Winnie to carry out the murder and is expected to give a full disclosure today.
Falati actually went to prison for her part in the kidnapping and assault of the four boys, but her testimony at the TRC revealed a bitter and betrayed woman who is no longer prepared to pay the price for the woman she now describes as an ungrateful megalomaniac who believes she is a "demigod".
This has set the tone of the hearings into the conduct of Winnie and the Mandela United Football Club during the late 1980s. Her earlier trial for alleged involvement in the attacks on the boys abducted from the Rev Paul Verryn's manse saw Winnie go free on appeal in 1993 with an insignificant fine. But this time, as her alibis appear to fall away, things look very different.
This week, Katiza Cebekhulu, who mysteriously disappeared during Winnie's initial trial in 1991, returned from exile under the protective guard of a former British MP, Emma Nicholson, to render his version of the events in December 1988. Although dismissed by some as an "unreliable witness", he claims to have seen Mrs Mandela "kill Stompie", stabbing the body with a shiny object twice.
How and why he disappeared has long been a matter of intrigue. But in the book recently published by journalist Fred Bridgland, Katiza's Journey - Beneath the surface of South Africa's shame, it is claimed that Cebekhulu was helped out of the country, initially by Winnie herself, to prevent him giving evidence at the trial. The order to ensure he stayed outside the country, the book claims, came from the highest levels of the ANC ranks.
Indeed, Bridgland cites Nicholson as claiming that she was led to believe, from her conversations with President Frederick Chiluba and former president Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia (where Cebekhulu was held prisoner), that the orders to remove Cebekhulu from South Africa came from Nelson Mandela himself. However, in her testimony to the hearing, Nicholson appeared to go back on this claim, arguing that Kaunda had since informed her that the orders to send Cebekhulu out of South Africa came from ANC leader and patriarch, Oliver Tambo.
While the book has been criticised for inaccuracies, the impact of its allegations is far-ranging. The president's office was obliged to release a statement denying any involvement by Nelson Mandela in the affair.
A statement from Kaunda was also re-released saying that he did not in fact "receive a direct communication from Oliver Tambo himself on this matter. It was government officials who informed me that they had received such a request from officials of Mr Tambo. I had then, in good faith made the assumption that Mr Mandela had supported this initiative or action . The truth is that I have never received a direct or indirect message from Mr Mandela on this matter."
The statements are emphatic in their own right but the indignity surrounding the fact that the president of the country, the "Father of the Nation", has been forced to respond to the allegations has cast doubt over the role of those in the highest positions in dealing with the Winnie affair.
Methodist Bishop Peter Storey, who testified at the TRC during the week, gave voice to yet another concern in this domain. There appears to be no doubt, he argued "that the Crisis Committee" (brought together to examine the role and conduct of the Mandela Football Club well before the death of Stompie Seipei) was involved in "damage control".
As leaders of the Mass Democratic Movement - the internal front for the banned ANC - testified, "on the eve of liberation" no one wanted to tarnish the name of the movement. The Truth Commission pressed the committee during the week, that they had had ample proof that Winnie and her football club were responsible for the abduction and beating of boys and possibly the death of Stompie, and yet had failed to act. Why had they failed to report the abduction of the boys to the security forces? Why had they not sought an injunction to compel Winnie to release the boys?
Members of the committee uncomfortably maintained they had no mandate to undertake any drastic action which would have hurt the MDM or played into the hands of their pro-apartheid foes. Without doubt, to act publicly and officially could have caused untold damage to the image of the liberation movement.
So, did the Crisis Committee - made up of highly revered luminaries - have to make a choice? Bishop Peter Storey appears to think so. He argued that the committee had tried to suppress news of an abduction scandal surrounding Winnie. "There were deep political fears by the crisis committee, which was involved in a type of damage control," he said.
The drama unfolding has all the ingredients of a sordid best-seller: murder, sex, power and betrayal. And while at the forefront of it all is the fate of the regal persona of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, there appears to be more at stake. Should it be found that high-ranking officials were involved in spiriting a key witness against Winnie out of the country to avoid implicating her directly in acts of human rights violations and murder, and that the committee set up to curb the excesses of the Mandela United Football Club was involved in a "political agenda", as Bishop Storey said, then the impact of the case must be seen from a different perspective.
The perception of Winnie as a victim could have an impact on her candidature for the role of deputy president of the ANC, possibly boosting her already solid grassroots base and support from the ANC Women's League. The United Democratic Movement joint leader, Bantu Holomisa, has attacked the ANC for "ganging up" against her in order to ruin her chances in the deputy presidency race and questions why the ANC has not taken collective responsibility for the activities of the Mandela United Football Club. "We are seeing a selective collectivity," he said.
One of the country's major newspapers during the week argued strongly that as attacks continue against her, Winnie's supporters around the country increasingly see her as a victim. "They see the witnesses testifying about the Mandela United Football Club's reign of terror as `charlatans' being used to destroy the only person who continued caring for them long after the polling booths closed in April 1994," the article continues.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela herself has always painted herself in this light - as a victim, albeit a strong one, of the oppressor. Certainly the view that she was consistently surrounded by agents provocateurs acting on behalf of the apartheid state is one that remains strongly held by certain elements of the ANC.
Without doubt, the ANC hierarchy is unwilling to see he rise to deputy president of the party and is actively campaigning for Jacob Zuma as their candidate. But, as one party member warned, "the leadership would be well to remember that the vote is confidential. And where Winnie's concerned nothing is over until it's really over".