Defence advocate Anneline van den Heever, who represents tender tycoon Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and his wife, Tsakani, began her cross-examination of police Captain Alfred Sekgobela.
On Friday, she said she would focus on the jurisdictional facts Sekgobela relied on to arrest accused number one, Musa Kekana, and conduct the subsequent search and seizure.
Van den Heever first established that Sekgobela arrested Kekana at 8th Road in Kew and spent some time at the scene before turning to the arrest of Michael Pule Tau and the detention of David Matlou.
“You also effected the arrest of Michael Pule Tau and a David Matlou?” she asked.
“No, Tau we arrested; Matlou was restrained for verification and then we let him go,” Sekgobela replied.
Why was Matlou restrained?
Van den Heever questioned the legal basis for restraining Matlou. “In the criminal procedure act, where does it state that you can restrain someone?”
“We restrained Matlou because he was suspected to have been involved, but after we verified that he just came out of a yard when the Viano stopped there, we removed the handcuffs,” Sekgobela said.
When asked whether Matlou was a suspect, Sekgobela said he was not
“No. When we approached the Viano, he was conversing with the people in the Viano,” he replied.
He confirmed that Matlou was searched, but said officers found nothing linking him to the occupants of the Viano.
“No, he had a tyre rim and he explained that he was going to give it to the people in the Viano.”
Sekgobela also confirmed nothing was found on Matlou that posed a threat to officers.
Warrantless arrests
Van den Heever then turned to the warrantless arrests of Kekana and Tau.
“You arrested Kekana and Tau with no arrest warrant and you arrested them for murder and possession of unlicensed firearms?”
“We arrested them for murder that transpired in Vereeniging. The firearm charges came later when the firearms were discovered in Kekana’s property as well as the charge for being in possession of a stolen vehicle (Hyundai i20),” Sekgobela testified.
Questioned about the information linking the accused to the Vereeniging murder, Sekgobela said the first information he received came over the police radio.
“Yes, however, I don’t know whether messages on the radio control are hearsay evidence.”
Sekgobela further testified that the Viano and the Kew address became a crime scene because of items discovered inside the vehicle. He confirmed officers searched Kekana, Tau, Matlou and the Viano, despite agreeing that the vehicle was neither stolen nor involved in the Vereeniging murder.
Legal basis for Kekana’s arrest
Van den Heever asked Sekgobela to explain the legal basis for arresting Kekana.
“We received information that the occupants of the Hyundai i20 were seen exiting No.34 Kew Road in the Viano.”
He also maintained police had obtained permission to search Kekana’s property before asking him to unlock the house.
When questioned about the Criminal Procedure Act’s requirements for conducting a search inside a home, Sekgobela said it says you search the house respectfully and to put things back the way you found them.
However, when asked whether the search was conducted in that manner, he said he wasn’t satisfied.
Standing order on crime scene management
The cross-examination came to an abrupt halt when Van den Heever grilled Sekgobela about an SAPS standing order governing crime scene management. After the captain said he was unaware of the instruction, Judge Cassim Moosa intervened.
“Produce the standing order before questioning the witness on it,” Moosa said.
Van den Heever told the court the document formed the foundation of her cross-examination and that the remaining aspects of her questioning flowed directly from it. Because the standing order could only be retrieved from her residence by Monday, she applied for the matter to stand down.
Moosa granted the request, saying there was little purpose in continuing without the document that underpinned the defence’s line of questioning. The trial will resume on Monday.
Matlala and his co-accused are on the trial after they have all pleaded not guilty to 25 charges, including conspiracy to commit murder, 11 counts of attempted murder, money laundering, fraud and the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.
- Defence advocate Anneline van den Heever cross-examined police Captain Alfred Sekgobela on the legality of arrests and searches involving accused Musa Kekana, Michael Pule Tau, and David Matlou.
- Sekgobela admitted restraining Matlou without legal basis, stating he was not a suspect and was released after verification.
- Kekana and Tau were arrested without warrants for murder and firearm possession, with initial charges linked to information from police radio transmissions.
- Sekgobela confirmed that the Viano vehicle and related property became a crime scene despite the vehicle not being stolen or directly involved in the murder.
- Cross-examination paused pending production of an SAPS standing order on crime scene management, crucial to the defence's questioning; trial to resume Monday.
Defence advocate Anneline van den Heever, who represents tender tycoon Vusimuzi "Cat" Matlala and his wife, Tsakani, began her cross-examination of police Captain Alfred Sekgobela.
On Friday, she said she would focus on the jurisdictional facts Sekgobela relied on to arrest accused number one, Musa Kekana, and conduct the subsequent search and seizure.
Van den Heever first established that Sekgobela arrested Kekana at 8th Road in Kew and spent some time at the scene before turning to the arrest of Michael Pule Tau and the detention of David Matlou.
"You also effected the arrest of Michael Pule Tau and a David Matlou?" she asked.
"No, Tau we arrested; Matlou was restrained for verification and then we let him go," Sekgobela replied.
Van den Heever questioned the legal basis for restraining Matlou. "In the criminal procedure act, where does it state that you can restrain someone?"
"We restrained Matlou because he was suspected to have been involved, but after we verified that he just came out of a yard when the Viano stopped there, we removed the handcuffs," Sekgobela said.
When asked whether Matlou was a suspect, Sekgobela said he was not
"No. When we approached the Viano, he was conversing with the people in the Viano," he replied.
He confirmed that Matlou was searched, but said officers found nothing linking him to the occupants of the Viano.
"No, he had a tyre rim and he explained that he was going to give it to the people in the Viano."
Sekgobela also confirmed nothing was found on Matlou that posed a threat to officers.
Van den Heever then turned to the warrantless arrests of Kekana and Tau.
"You arrested Kekana and Tau with no arrest warrant and you arrested them for murder and possession of unlicensed firearms?"
"We arrested them for murder that transpired in
Questioned about the information linking the accused to the
"Yes, however, I don't know whether messages on the radio control are hearsay evidence."
Sekgobela further testified that the Viano and the Kew address became a crime scene because of items discovered inside the vehicle. He confirmed officers searched Kekana, Tau, Matlou and the Viano, despite agreeing that the vehicle was neither stolen nor involved in the
Van den Heever asked Sekgobela to explain the legal basis for arresting Kekana.
"We received information that the occupants of the
He also maintained police had obtained permission to search Kekana's property before asking him to unlock the house.
When questioned about the Criminal Procedure Act's requirements for conducting a search inside a home, Sekgobela said it says you search the house respectfully and to put things back the way you found them.
However, when asked whether the search was conducted in that manner, he said he wasn't satisfied.
"Produce the standing order before questioning the witness on it," Moosa said.
Van den Heever told the court the document formed the foundation of her cross-examination and that the remaining aspects of her questioning flowed directly from it. Because the standing order could only be retrieved from her residence by
Moosa granted the request, saying there was little purpose in continuing without the document that underpinned the defence's line of questioning.
Matlala and his co-accused are on the trial after they have all pleaded not guilty to 25 charges, including conspiracy to commit murder, 11 counts of attempted murder, money laundering, fraud and the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.
