A contested affidavit sparked tense exchanges between the defence and state in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial.
There was tension in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial on Thursday as the defence and the state clashed over the handling of what was described as “new” evidence.
The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has been hearing arguments concerning the section 174 application brought by accused four, Mthokoziseni Maphisa.
He is seeking the dismissal of his charges on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
Maphisa was arrested and charged in connection with the murder of Bafana Bafana goalkeeper Senzo Meyiwa, who was shot at the Vosloorus home of his then-girlfriend, singer Kelly Khumalo, on 26 October 2014.
Two armed men, believed to be accused two, Bongani Ntanzi, and accused three, Mthobisi Mncube, allegedly entered the house that day, demanding the occupants’ cellphones.
Dispute over witness statement in Senzo Meyiwa trial
On Thursday, proceedings focused on the statement of Thabang Makeleni, a man who reportedly told police that he saw individuals fleeing the Khumalo residence.
Makeleni, who allegedly died from poisoning on 23 January 2019, had provided a statement to the police.
Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng asked who had placed Makeleni’s affidavit before the court.
“I just want that to be clear because the law doesn’t permit me to introduce that document after [the state has] closed its case and any of the accused invoke Section 174,” Mokgoatlheng said.
ALSO READ: Accused in Senzo Meyiwa murder trial involved in car accident amid bid to have charges dropped
State prosecutor George Baloyi confirmed it was the defence who had first introduced the statement. He explained that the account was given orally to retired police officer Amanda Steenkamp on 27 October 2014.
“It was already on record. It was introduced by the defence themselves,” Baloyi said.
Baloyi added that Ntanzi’s attorney, Sipho Ramosepele, had referred to the statement during the cross-examination of a witness in July 2023.
Ramosepele confirmed that he used the document to verify the description of the alleged intruders provided by other witnesses.
‘It’s nothing new’
Baloyi told the court that the state had cited Makeleni’s statement this week only to reinforce its argument that Maphisa and the co-accused were placed near the crime scene.
“There was [an accusation] from my colleagues [the defence] that we are introducing something new. It’s nothing new,” he said.
The prosecutor argued that the statement should be considered alongside all other evidence in the interest of justice.
He explained that the state only submitted a corrected version of the affidavit.
“Yesterday, I gave my colleagues the version that has been cleaned up. It’s basically the same document.”
READ MORE: Tensions rise again in Senzo Meyiwa murder trial over ‘hired gun’ remark, evidence tampering claims
Baloyi further confirmed that Makeleni’s death certificate had already been entered as an exhibit.
However, Mncube’s lawyer, Charles Mnisi, challenged the relevance of the submissions to Maphisa’s section 174 application.
“If the state feels like there is something that they have missed in the presentation of their evidence, they would still have the opportunity [to address it],” Mnisi said.
Watch the trial below:
Mnisi argued that while the state may later apply to bolster its “struggling evidence”, the application before the court must first be finalised.
“If I were to stand up and start to address the issues that the state is now raising, this procedure would be very precarious.
“It would be unheard of in any civilised legal system,” Mnisi said, warning that the state appeared to be introducing evidence “through the backdoor”.
Baloyi rejected this, maintaining that Makeleni’s statement was already on record and the matter at hand arose from the defence’s complaint raised this week.
“These are the issues that are already on record that must be factored into the equation. I don’t understand the objection by my learned friend,” he said.
Defence ‘perplexed’
Maphisa’s lawyer, Zithulele Nxumalo, said he could not respond to the state’s arguments, as he had never relied on Makeleni’s affidavit.
“So how does it find its way through this court in this application?” he asked.
“I would respectfully ask the court to reject that evidence,” Nxumalo added.
Ramosepele remarked that the defence had been left “perplexed”.
“We are touched by blood that was not meant for us,” he said.
Mokgoatlheng advised the defence that they could supplement their arguments to address the issues raised regarding the affidavit.
The trial is set to resume on Tuesday.
NOW READ: Correctional services denies torture of Senzo Meyiwa accused
