During the bail hearing of two accused*, amusement broke out in the Nelspruit Magistrate’s Court after defence advocate Vusi Sekgodi disputed accused number one’s leg injury, which resulted from an alleged police assault on the day of his arrest.

Sekgodi previously alleged that the accused was assaulted by police on the day of his arrest and therefore limped.

ALSO READ: Mbombela businessman kidnapping: Accused allege police assault after arrest

State advocate Maluleka, however, disputed the defence’s allegation, saying the injury resulted from an operation the accused had previously following a car accident.

Sekgodi asked the court to allow him to walk in the courtroom to prove that he is in fact not limping. The investigating officer, Lieutenant Colonel Mkhonza, who was on the witness stand, and others in court shared a silent chuckle as the accused walked around.

The charges

The two accused face charges of attempted extortion and kidnapping of a businessman who was abducted near Shandon Estate on April 14.

ALSO READ: Two arrested in connection with kidnapping of Mbombela businessman

Although the victim’s identity is known to Lowvelder, the publication has chosen not to publish it for legal and ethical reasons.

Defence cross-examines investigating officer

Sekgodi continued with his cross-examination of the investigating officer and told the court that because no ransom was paid and the victim had returned home unharmed, the accused should be eligible for bail.

Mkhonza disagreed and told the court that the victim was heavily traumatised, had bruises and a severe burn on his left leg from hot water poured onto him, and suffered from severe body aches.

ALSO READ: Mbombela court hears businessman was allegedly kidnapped for R30m ransom

Sekgodi said the accused co-operated fully in providing SAPS with their passports.

The state, however, disputed this claim and said accused two had lied about his passport after stating in an affidavit that he did not have one. The state told the court that he later admitted that he had one at his residence.

Sekgodi argued that the case was not a high-profile matter as there was not enough media interest. Mkhonza disagreed, telling the court it was indeed high-profile because it involved organised crime.

“The accused were hired to kidnap the victim and handed him over to other people,” Mkhonza explained.

State warns of threat to family

The investigating officer further testified that should the accused be released on bail, they might use their firearms in other crimes. State advocate Maluleka supported his testimony and confirmed that the firearms used during the crime were allegedly never recovered. Mkhonza confirmed that the investigation is not yet complete and that they are waiting for outstanding photo evidence and a J8 warrant.

In closing arguments, the state and defence presented their final submissions. The state concluded that the accused were a direct threat to the family based on threats made during the kidnapping and that it was in the interest of justice to remand them in custody to prevent further crimes. Sekgodi maintained that the suspects co-operated with police by handing over their passports and argued that the state’s evidence was weak.

ALSO READ: Kidnapped Mbombela businessman returns home

Court postpones judgment

Magistrate Patrick Morris postponed the case to August 4 for bail judgment.

*The identities of the accused have been withheld. In terms of the South African criminal justice system, the media may not publish the identities of accused persons facing extortion-related charges before they have pleaded in court.