In legal proceedings, communication patterns such as missed call records can provide evidence about the nature of interactions between parties, potentially revealing who was seeking assistance or initiating contact, even when the content of the communications is not available for review.
Deep Dive
Prerequisite Knowledge
- No data available.
Where to go next
- No data available.
Deep Dive
MADLANGA QUESTIONS CALL PATTERN | MOGOTSI MAY HAVE SOUGHT HELP FROM CHASKALSONAdded:
to avoid the possibility of interpreting these chats in a manner that disproves what Mr. Mkhize is saying.
Is that not a possibility? That is that they are calculated for that purpose.
Chair, in response, I will submit that the interactions and the events that took place, the end result was the belief that if Mr. Mkhize does not provide information or useful information or helpful information, the condition that he will be protected I'm [clears throat] not sure that that answers the question I've put to you. My question is about isn't there a possibility that the dece- the the deletions are calculated to create uh the impression that Mr. Mkhize is pushing for.
So, he deletes whatever may be at variance with or at odds with what the chief evidence leader is saying. Is is that not a possibility?
Chair, it is a possibility.
And it's also a possibility that none of us know the contents of these deleted telephone calls.
We we know we know the chief evidence leader has put up everything, so we know we do know.
But Chair, it's it's it's it's the same information >> Except except of course for for calls We we are not in a position to know the content of the calls themselves, but as for as for texts, the chief evidence leader has put up everything. So in that regard, we do know. Hence chair, I when when when I responded, I I spoke about the calls specifically.
>> Yes. I I said, where we are seated and where the commissioners are seated, none of us know the contents of these deleted phone calls that took place between the two parties.
Now, having said that, I I would not be in a position to submit whether the deletions were to push a certain agenda or to conceal a certain intention because I was not privy to the calls and neither was the commission. It's two individuals where one says I deleted for this specific reason and this was requested of me or it was asked of me. And there's an individual who then says I did not ask this, I asked that. So the dispute now tends to be a factual dispute about what was contained in the phone calls. I I I cannot make any submissions on that.
>> Here's what I understand the respondent's case to be.
Um most of the calls, the bulk of the calls were by Mr. Mkhize and not the other way around.
Do do you do you agree with that?
Chair, I'll I'll agree with you and in in my agreement >> Let let let me continue with the point.
I just wanted to see if you agree or not. So you say you agree.
Now, if I understand the respondent's case correctly, it is that Mr. Mkhize was persistently knocking at the door of the chief evidence leader and he was the one through amongst others calls.
The many calls which you accept came largely came from him, Mr. Mkhize. So, he was knocking at the door of the chief evidence leader seeking to be assisted.
So, he is the one that was seeking to be assisted and if I understand the case, that is amongst others shown by the fact that he made several calls. He is the one that largely made calls to the chief evidence leader and not the other way around. That's how I understand the case. So, we may not know the content of the calls, but the point appears to be that from the fact that he is the one that made most of the calls, that appears to be an indication that he is the one that was if I'm am to speak loosely, was seeking the chief evidence leader out.
Do you get my point? Go for a for example to page 95.
96 as well.
And there you will see missed voice call, missed voice call, missed voice call, missed voice call.
And all of those and next page 96, missed voice call, missed voice call.
There's another one, missed voice call and all the way down. I'm sure you could go on and on. 97 as well, same thing.
All of those are missed voice calls coming from Mr. Mkhize.
Related Videos
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
8 Hidden Things About Mackenzie Shirilla Netflix's 'The Crash' Didn't Show You
MarvelousVideos
2K views•2026-05-28
MP Garnett Genuis warns Canada’s MAiD system has ‘gone too far’
WesternStandard
187 views•2026-05-28
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02











