The sister submitted that her brother's wife's responses when he was found were 'evasive' and 'inconsistent'.
Picture: iStock
The High Court in Johannesburg has dismissed an application by a sister seeking permission to exhume her late brother’s body for a forensic post-mortem and inquest investigation.
The brother died on 17 August 2026 at the mission house of the Holy Cross Anglican Church, Orlando West, Soweto. He lived there with his surviving spouse, who is a respondent in the case.
His death was certified as being due to natural causes by Dr Kenosi Mosalakae on 18 August 2026. He was buried at Westpark Cemetery on 25 August 2026.
The sister approached the court with the support of their siblings. The wife had the primary right to determine matters pertaining to her husband’s burial and final resting place.
Sister’s case
The sister’s case is that her brother’s death was not due to natural causes and that there are reasonable grounds to suspect foul play.
In court papers, she claimed signs of a struggle were observed in the house on the night her brother was found dead. These included a broken pot plant in the dining area, another broken pot plant outside near the garage and broken glasses and crockery in the kitchen.
Multiple family members independently observed injuries on the deceased’s body inconsistent with a peaceful natural death. The injuries included bruising below the right knee; a red mark/bruise on the forehead; bruising in the area of the knuckles; an indentation on the wrist consistent with force having been applied, “such as from something being tied around it”; and scratches on the abdomen.
When the family washed the deceased’s body at the mortuary on 24 August 2026, they observed further bruises and scratches, described as “fresh” and resembling recent injuries, across his upper body, hands and forehead, which they photographed.
The sister also claimed the wife’s responses when the deceased was found were “evasive” and “inconsistent”.
The sister further claimed her brother had reported ongoing physical and verbal abuse at the hands of his wife.
She further claimed her brother’s death was certified as due to “natural causes” the day after his death without any autopsy or post-mortem examination.
Wife’s case
The wife’s case is that her husband died of natural causes and that her sister-in-law’s application is an abuse of court process.
She said her husband was in good health and showed no signs of illness beyond his chronic illnesses, specifically type 2 diabetes and severe hypertension.
The wife said on Sunday, 16 August 2026, a church counsellor witnessed her husband suffer what seemed to be an accidental fall in his office. He was sitting down, and when he got up from the chair to leave, he fell, grazing his right knee and bumping his arm on a table and a cupboard in his office.
The counsellor helped pick him up and assisted him back onto the chair. Later that day, during a power outage, her husband knocked over and broke a ceramic vase/pot plant in the dark. The wife said she told him to leave the broken vase and that they would attend to it the following day. That was their last interaction before going to sleep.
Late on the evening of 17 August 2026, the wife heard a knock at the main door. The churchwardens and church personnel arrived at the premises, and one of the churchwardens unlocked the main gate with their own set of keys.
The wife woke up and immediately turned to her late husband in their bed to awaken him. At that specific moment, she did not realise that he had already passed away. She then opened the front door to let the churchwardens and church personnel in. It was only upon returning to the bedroom together with them that it was established that her late husband had passed away in his sleep.
‘Natural causes’
Shortly thereafter, an independent registered emergency care practitioner permanently employed by the City of Johannesburg Emergency Medical Services attended the scene at the house. He was contacted by a church member.
The practitioner examined the deceased, and his declaration records a head-to-toe examination. It records no injury of any kind. It records that he declared the deceased dead at the scene at 8:40pm, that the deceased had diabetes and hypertension, and that the body did not sustain any injury while in his care.
Members of the South African Police Service (Saps) attended the premises later on the evening of 17 August 2026. Upon their arrival, the Saps members assessed the scene, observed the premises, and were informed that an emergency care practitioner had already formally pronounced the deceased.
The police officers found no signs of foul play or suspicious circumstances and therefore did not open an inquest docket or register a criminal case at the time.
The following day, a medical practitioner practising in Orlando East examined the deceased’s body and certified that he died of natural causes. After viewing the photographs of the deceased, the doctor further observed that the appearance of the deceased’s face, and particularly the drooping of his mouth to one side, may be consistent with a stroke. He also observed that the deceased’s hypertension and diabetes placed him at a significantly higher risk of a stroke or other sudden natural death.
‘Concerns’
The wife argued that neither family members nor the attending undertaker raised any concerns regarding bruises, scratches, or any physical marks on the deceased’s wrists or body.
The deceased’s body was viewed by the attending mourners on 24 August 2026; none of them raised any concerns regarding the condition of the body.
The wife further denied abusing her late husband, whether physically, verbally, emotionally, financially, or in any other manner. Like any long-standing married couple, they experienced normal, routine domestic disagreements, she said.
Judge’s analysis of sister’s case
In his analysis, Judge Thifhelimbilu Mudau said the sister’s case consists of lay inferences drawn from photographs taken a week after death. She did not cite any expert medical, forensic, or pathological evidence to contradict the doctor’s or emergency care practitioner’s professional opinions. She also failed to demonstrate that the injuries observed were inconsistent with a natural death or with the accidental fall witnessed by the church counsellor.
Her submission that the certification of death was done hastily lacks factual support and is inadmissible hearsay and speculation.
Further, the sister did not report her suspicions to Saps. Instead, she commissioned a private investigation, conducted interviews, and only later engaged with Saps.
She also did not present expert evidence before the court that a post-mortem examination conducted more than a month after burial would yield any reliable finding.
“An order for the exhumation of a buried person is a grave intrusion upon the dignity of the deceased and of his surviving spouse, who holds the primary right to determine matters pertaining to his burial and final resting place. Such an order should not be granted lightly, and certainly not because of speculation and lay opinion alone,” said Judge Mudau.
The sister’s application was dismissed. She was also ordered to pay the wife’s costs.
