Norkem Park SAPS detective faces questions over Sithole investigation
A Norkem Park SAPS detective has faced questions over alleged delays, missing records and instructions not followed during the investigation into Adam Obed Sithole’s arrest.
Adam Obed Sithole appeared in the Kempton Park Magistrate’s Court on August 18, where the court heard testimony from a Norkem Park SAPS detective regarding the investigation into his arrest.
During Sithole’s previous appearance, the state concluded by calling for a 24/28 inquiry, in which the investigating officer and his commander were required to appear and account for alleged delays in the arrests in the matter.
Norkem Park SAPS Detective Sergeant Molomo was the first to testify.
Molomo told the court that when dockets are returned from court, they are referred to his superior, Colonel Jones, who provides instructions on the further steps to be taken.
ALSO READ: Motorist faces court after alleged 199km/h speeding offence
He said that when he approached Jones regarding the subpoena, the colonel indicated that he was aware of it, instructed Molomo to note it in his diary and said he would make himself available to testify.
The state had instructed Molomo to investigate the arresting officers for allegedly defeating the ends of justice by failing to arrest the police officer who allegedly hired Sithole to transport stolen pavement bricks.
Molomo testified that he contacted and interviewed the officers to establish why they had not arrested the official and why no case had been opened.
He told the court that he believed he did not have sufficient grounds to arrest the officers despite the state’s instructions.
ALSO READ: Court-ordered demolition sees 300 Witfontein structures removed
After discussing the matter with Jones, Molomo said his superior advised him that an arrest without sufficient grounds would be unlawful and instructed him to obtain an additional statement before proceeding with any arrests.
Molomo further testified that he twice visited an address provided for one of the officials who allegedly hired Sithole, but did not find anyone at the address.
He acknowledged that neither of the visits had been recorded in the docket or his diary.
The state questioned Molomo on the failure to record the visits, arguing that this amounted to gross negligence because information relevant to the investigation and potential court proceedings had not been documented.
The state also questioned Molomo about alleged failures by officers to follow instructions issued on May 13, June 19 and July 15.
It argued that this demonstrated a failure by Norkem Park SAPS to follow instructions from the State and suggested that Molomo was protecting his colleagues.
Molomo denied the allegation.
The state also questioned why an application under Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act had not been made to obtain RICA information linked to cellphone numbers allegedly belonging to the individuals who hired Sithole.
Molomo explained that he believed he would locate the officials at the address provided and therefore did not proceed with the application.
His testimony concluded with the state questioning him about the investigation and the steps taken to identify and locate the individuals allegedly linked to Sithole.
The matter was postponed to August 26, when Colonel Jones is expected to testify.
