The ongoing trial of the murder of South African footballer Senzo Meyiwa took an unexpected turn when the defence raised questions about the absence of an arrest for Kelly Khumalo, Meyiwa’s former partner and a well-known singer.
The defence team interrogated Sergeant Batho Mogola, one of the investigating officers in the case, regarding the evidence against the five men accused of Meyiwa’s murder.
The defence attorney, Thulani Mngomezulu, claimed that Longwe Twala, the son of musician Chico Twala, was responsible for Meyiwa’s murder. Mngomezulu put forth the argument that the evidence presented by the state against the accused men was fabricated.
[ Defence Challenges Cellphone Analyst’s Testimony In Senzo Meyiwa Murder Trial ]
The defence continued their cross-examination by questioning Mogola about the affidavit of Warrant Officer Amanda Steenkamp.
Sipho Ramosepele, the legal representative for Bongani Ntanzi, took Mogola through Steenkamp’s affidavit, which contained interviews with the occupants of the house where the murder took place.
Ramosepele pointed out that the descriptions of the suspected intruders provided by the occupants did not include a detailed description of the second intruder, who was allegedly wearing a hoodie.
Ramosepele suggested that this lack of information raised doubts about the accuracy of the identification of the accused.
Mogola responded by stating that she did not submit any affidavit concerning Steenkamp’s statement and that she had never encountered the person who deposed the affidavit. She expressed her inability to comment on the matter.
The state prosecutor, George Baloyi, objected to the defence’s line of questioning, arguing that the identification of the suspects had already been testified to by some of the occupants.
Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng addressed the accusation made by the defence against Mogola and the investigating team, alleging a cover-up. Mogola firmly denied any involvement in a cover-up and stated that there was no evidence to support such claims.
The defence pressed on with their questioning, pointing out that the detailed description of the second suspect provided by one of the witnesses was not communicated during the compilation of the identikit.
Advocate Zandile Mshololo, representing Fisokuhle Ntuli, questioned Mogola about the existence of a second docket, which recommended charging Kelly Khumalo and the other occupants of the house with murder and defeating the ends of justice.
Mogola stated that she initially wasn’t aware of the second docket, which was compiled separately from the main docket by Warrant Officer Meshack Makhubo and Colonel Joyce Buthelezi.
She only became aware of its existence because she was responsible for bringing dockets to court. Mshololo further inquired about the draft warrant application for Kelly Khumalo’s arrest and asked why it had not been authorized.
Mogola indicated that she did not know the application or the alleged communication between Ntuli and Khumalo.
When asked if there would be an offence if such communication was proven, Mogola declined to comment. It was alleged that Khumalo received two phone calls from Ntuli before Meyiwa’s murder, according to cellphone data analyst Colonel Lambertus Steyn.
The five men on trial for Meyiwa’s murder, Ntanzi, Sibiya, Ntuli, Mncube, and Maphisa, have all pleaded not guilty to the charges. The trial continues as the defence raises questions about the evidence and the absence of an arrest for Kelly Khumalo.
Catch up with the latest news from The Times Post on WhatsApp by following our channel. Click here to join.
