The lead investigator in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial believes the late national football team and Orlando Pirates goalkeeper was a victim of a contractual assassination rather than a robbery gone wrong.
Gininda took the stand for cross-examination when the highly contentious case resumed at the Pretoria High Court on Monday, indicating that Meyiwa’s death in 2014 was not a random act of violence as previously believed.
Instead, the evidence points to a meticulously planned hit on the iconic soccer player.
This startling discovery casts doubt on the first story, which claimed that Meyiwa’s then-girlfriend Kelly Khumalo’s home was broken into by two unidentified men demanding cash and cellphones.
Five men — Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Bongani Ntanzi, Mthobisi Mncube, Mthokoziseni Maphisa, and Fisokuhle Ntuli — have entered not guilty pleas to the charges in the trial, which is currently in its second run.
The court is debating the admissibility of confession statements purportedly made by accused one and two, respectively.
While the information disclosed in Gininda’s affidavit may prompt diverse perspectives regarding the trajectory of the case and the evidence before the court, presiding judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng has declared that the information is hearsay.
“What Gininda is reading there is hearsay; it is not admissible,” said Mokgoatlheng.
“I said he must read it because you [defence lawyer Thulani Mngomezulu] were insisting that there are certain contents there that render that application unlawful.”
Mngomezulu and Gininda were debating the validity of Gininda’s application for a warrant of arrest for accused numbers one and two.
Jurisdiction challenged
Mngomezulu challenged the jurisdiction in which the application was made, suggesting it was filed in the wrong court.
Gininda disagreed, stating that Boksburg and Vosloorus fall under the same jurisdiction. He also pointed out Mngomezulu’s alternative interpretation of Section 43 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
“The reason why I want to dwell much on Section 43 is because I want to make fruitful submissions during my argument,” Mngomezulu said.
Mngomezulu said he is watching the court closely, hinting at a Section 317 application to note irregularities observed during the trial.
Gininda, however, thinks that rather than a tactical legal analysis, his expression might have been more emotional.
“The fact that I differ with him regarding the version that he is putting based on the evidence in court is not a sign of disrespect,” said Gininda.
“I have never spoken to him with any sign of disrespect, and I would like him to treat me the same.
“I am here to assist the court; I will answer him in so far as the questions that he wants to know, and there is no reason to get emotional.
“Let us get to the business of the day, be professional about it, and move on.”
#SenzoMeyiwaTrial back in court with a continuation of a trial within the trial. The court seeks to determine the admissibility of confession statements allegedly made by accused 1&2. Lead investigator Brigadier Gininda is expected to take the stand for cross-examination.
— Nompilo Zulu (@Nompilo_nz) January 22, 2024
