Read more
The state and defence engaged in an exchange during Monday’s court proceedings.
The accused speak with their legal representatives during the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial at Pretoria High Court on 18 April 2024. Picture: Gallo Images/Phill Magakoe
Tensions flared once more during the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial as a defence lawyer stood firm on a comment directed at a state witness.
Proceedings resumed on Monday at the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, with the cross-examination of Sergeant Moses Mabasa continuing.
Mabasa, a data analyst with the South African Police Service (Saps), has been testifying about images retrieved from the cellphone of accused number three, Mthobisi Mncube.
Last week, Mncube’s legal representative, Advocate Charles Mnisi, challenged the authenticity of the photographs found on his client’s phone, questioning the dates.
Mnisi also referred to Mabasa as a “hired gun” for the state.
Senzo Meyiwa murder trial: State calls for retraction
On Monday, Advocate Ronnie Sibanda, acting for the prosecution, requested Mnisi withdraw the remark.
“The witness should be treated with courtesy, and such allegations cannot be made against the witness. There are other ways to argue the witness is not correct other than to make such allegations against the witness,” Sibanda asserted.
He further suggested that the defence team should bring its own equipment for displaying images during cross-examination, referencing the accusations of evidence tampering.
“From now going forward, we request that they will use their own gadgets to do the demonstration without involving the state. I do believe they have laptops,” he added.
ALSO READ: Judge offers to recuse himself from Senzo Meyiwa murder trial after racial remarks
Mnisi, however, refused to apologise for calling Mabasa a “hired gun”, insisting he saw no reason to retract the statement.
“I don’t know whether hired gun is a demeaning word, pejorative, or it’s insulting,” he said.
The lawyer claimed that the term appears in court documents and, therefore, is not inappropriate.
“I don’t know what does the state have in mind when suggesting that I should retract that word,” Mnisi continued.
Sibanda maintained that the term was indeed inappropriate and read out the definition.
“[It’s] an expert hired to do a specific and often ethically dubious job.”
Watch the trial below:
Right to a fair trial
Furthermore, Mnisi contended that the accused was funded by Legal Aid and does not have access to such equipment.
He pointed out that the defence had previously requested the assistance of an ICT expert.
“However, that seemed to have fallen on deaf ears, but that has been my request for quite a while,” he said.
READ MORE: Justice committee chair slams Mokgoatlheng’s ‘unfortunate’ comments in Meyiwa trial
Mnisi cited section 35(3) of the constitution, which deals with an accused person’s right to a fair trial.
“Accused persons must be provided with facilities in order to conduct their defence, and it goes further to say that they should be at the instance of the state in circumstances where the accused is unable to afford theirs,” he argued.
He remained adamant that the photographs in question were manipulated.
“It’s a fact,” Mnisi remarked.
Defence criticises state in Senzo Meyiwa murder trial
Later, Sibanda clarified that the in-house ICT technician is employed by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and therefore cannot assist the defence.
Mnisi disagreed and cautioned the state against taking the matter personally.
“They are not on the same boat. The guy works for the NPA, he is not prosecuting. He is just a technician; he is an operator of [a] gadget.
“So if he is available, he can come and assist, but Mr Sibanda must just avoid to take things personal. There is nothing personal here.”
READ MORE: ‘That is the law’: Judge intervenes as lawyers squabble in Senzo Meyiwa murder trial
Advocate Sipho Ramosepele, representing accused number two Bongani Ntanzi, also criticised the state’s conduct.
“I have never seen pettiness like this,” he remarked, saying he was “baffled” and “amazed” by the level of unprofessionalism.
Sibanda countered that Mnisi had earlier told the court he no longer wished to be assisted by the state.
“Now I am being called petty and emotional,” he said.
Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng remarked that he was choosing to remain silent to avoid being labelled or criticised for addressing such behaviour.
Mokgoatlheng has previously faced criticism for reprimanding members of the defence.
The trial continues.
