There was no explanation of rights to the first accused in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial.
He said this as he continued with his cross examination by the state on Wednesday before the Pretoria High Court.
According to the accused, Muzi Sibiya, the testimony of Sergeant Vusimuzi Mogane, who claimed that he read and explained the rights to the accused during his arrest is not true.
Sibiya also told the court that the statement that was read in court by the state prosecutor has an incorrect name that is not his.
“In this statement that you read out now, it’s written Muzi Themba Sibiya and that is not my name. I have never been named Themba in my life. Yes, the surname is mine but the name is not mine, so they were not referring to me,” he said.
Questioned about signature
State prosecutor Advocate George Baloyi questioned Sibiya about the signature on the document.
“Besides the name, is the signature that’s on the document yours?” Baloyi asked.
“Yes, it’s mine but like I’ve been saying, when a police officer says ‘sign here,’ what do you do? You just sign,” Sibiya responded.
Baloyi continued to challenge Sibiya’s claim that he does not understand English. He pointed out that Sibiya had earlier testified that he completed matric.
“You told this court that you have matric as the highest level of your education,” said Baloyi.
“Yes,” he said.
“And at the bank you said you use English, correct?” asked Baloyi.
“No, I only use English when I withdraw money from the ATM. But if I have to consult a bank assistant, I speak isiZulu,” Sibiya said.
Baloyi argued that this contradicted Sibiya’s claim of not knowing English.
“I am saying I can hear English, but I don’t have a full understanding of some things in the English language.”
Understanding of English language
Baloyi further reminded Sibiya that he had once used the phrase “traumatic ordeal” when describing his alleged assault by police officers.
“I never said that. I only said I was traumatised. The other word that you used at the end, I don’t even know what it means,” said Sibiya.
The prosecutor continued to read a separate case involving Sibiya in Tembisa.
“I’m now confused. Because according to my understanding, I am in this box to answer on the murder of Senzo Meyiwa. Now I have to respond to the case that happened in Tembisa, a case I had already dealt with. Perhaps the prosecutor must go to Tembisa and ask for the transcript there. Because I can’t answer for three cases in one,” said Sibiya.
Baloyi explained that the purpose was to determine whether Sibiya’s rights were explained to him prior to his arrest.
“There are no rights that I know. No one explained my rights to me,” he stated.
Sibiya’s lawyer, Advocate Charles Mnisi, intervened. He argued that the Tembisa matter had no relevance to the current case.
Tembisa case testimony rejected
“This is unfair, my lord. The confessions were only related to the death of Senzo Meyiwa. What happened in Tembisa has got nothing to do with this. Let the state not confuse this.”
Baloyi countered that the late Advocate Thulani Mngomezulu, who previously represented Sibiya, had referred the court to the Tembisa case.
“Whether the rights in the Tembisa case were explained, what effect will that have on this case?”
When Baloyi failed to show the court where Mngomezulu had referred to the Tembisa proceedings, Mnisi accused him of misleading the court.
