THE bail of the 29-year-old man accused of raping an eight-year-old child from Clermont was reinstated by the Pinetown Magistrate’s Court on Friday after it found that the State had failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the accused had breached the bail conditions.

On July 11, while waiting for his appearance before the court, the accused was re-arrested for allegedly being in breach of his bail conditions, which include that he should not be in the Clermont area.

Ruling on the matter, the presiding officer said the State’s sole witness, the eight-year-old’s mother, had been “the worst witness” they had encountered in all their years practising law.

The presiding officer said the child’s mother had been an “unreliable” witness who “kept looking at the gallery for help”, which he commented could give “some credence” to the defence counsel’s arguments that there seemed to be a “hidden” or “political” agenda in the matter.

The matter has drawn the attention and support of some Clermont community members, including those affiliated with various political parties, which include the ANC, EFF and uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP).

Also read: Court to address accused rapist’s alleged bail condition violation

Last Monday, July 14, these supporters were left disgruntled after being asked to vacate the gallery at the court by the presiding officer, who took issue with their murmurs and whispered comments.

The soft-spoken utterances from the gallery were drawn out by a seeming breakdown in communication as the child’s mother, from the witness stand, attempted to point out to the court how far away the accused was when she allegedly saw him in Clermont in early June.

Handing down their ruling, the presiding officer said the child’s mother’s testimony had been inconsistent, in particular, about the distance between herself and the accused on the day the latter had allegedly been in breach of his bail conditions by being in Clermont.

Also read: WATCH: Mothers fight to keep rapist off the street

“It must be pointed out that on that day [Monday, July 14], the court interpreter had indicated to the witness that they could use the courtroom to show how far the accused was from her but the witness was unable to do this. That is when the soccer field example was introduced by the court and when the witness said the accused was 50m away, that is when the very big murmuring came from the gallery and she then looked hesitantly at the gallery,” said the presiding officer, who added that on her next testimony, which was on Wednesday, July 16, there was “a massive transformation” in the distance, which the child’s mother then estimated at between eight to 10m.

The presiding officer also highlighted other contradictions in the child’s mother’s testimony, which they said made her evidence “unrealistic”, hence it was “completely rejected” by the court.

The presiding officer further indicated that the ruling to reinstate the accused’s bail was neither a comment on the rape offence nor an indication of their innocence or guilt.

“The crime of rape, the rape of an eight-year-old child, is a heinous, horrendous offence and the accused must bear the full wrath of the court in trial,” said the presiding officer, who adjourned the matter to September 4 for further investigation.

For more from the Highway Mail, follow us on Facebook , X and Instagram. You can also check out our videos on our YouTube channel or follow us on TikTok.

Click to subscribe to our newsletter here