The legal system’s obsession with granular consistency often mistakes the natural fragmentation of memory for a lack of integrity. This trial illustrates how justice frequently hinges more on narrative performance than on the objective truth.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
High-profile attempted murder trial continues - 22 July 2026
Added:My court file.
>> My files are in my in my office. My >> files.
Now you can see Thank you, Miss Lu.
>> Thank you, my lord. Um I'm calling case number SS98 or 2025. Um today then on the 22nd of July 2026 port 4F and is a care still under oath.
>> Good. Just give me a moment please.
Yes. This is SS98 stroke 2025.
The matter continues today with the cross-examination of Mr. Tele by account by Mr. Provier for accuse number two. Um before we commence with the proceedings, I believe it important that I just place on record the reason or reasons as to why the matter did not start at 10:00. And this is specifically directed to members of the public who do not understand the inner workings of what happens during the course of a trial. And I've been alerted to the fact that there has been some criticism leveled regarding the fact that this court time for starting is not as punctual as that of the Madlanga Commission.
It's simply to assist those members of the public relating to these issues. One needs to be very guarded about making comments in the public domain without being properly appraised of all the true facts before one goes out and makes comment on the public social media.
The reason simply for members of the public who are not before the court is that normally if the court does not commence at exactly 1000 hours, it would normally mean in the ordinary course of business that this court is seized with matters relating to this particular trial. And to that extent, before the matter commenced this morning, this court was seized with having to deal with a few issues with council and members of the media before we commenced this morning.
So under those circumstances, this court is of the view that it is only appropriate that it informs Joe public as to why it did not start exactly at 10:00 and to prevent the unnecessary causing of of sensationalism in the public domain. Thank you, Miss Luru. Do you confirm that this court was seized in seeing counsel in chambers as well as members of the media relating to matters concerning this case?
>> Indeed. So, my lord, >> thank you very much.
>> Lord, may I ask sorry to to um judge if judge could speak a little bit louder.
Um judges, >> I promise you're not going to say that I'm screaming.
>> No, I promise I won't. I won't. No, it's it's sometimes very difficult to hear.
Judge, especially if you look down, it's just for the benefit of everybody. Thank you, judge.
>> If any of the council feel that my tone of voice is so loud that I'm shouting, then please inform me. What do they say in Isizulu Faga Amaw?
Okay, Miss uh Miss Fifa, I'll increase the wattage.
>> Thank you, my lord.
>> Thank you so much, Mr. You gave evidence yesterday and we then stopped at the point where your crossexamination by council for accuse number one was completed and we're going to commence today with the your crossexamination by the legal representative of accuse number two.
Do you confirm that you are still under your former oath to speak the truth?
>> Yes, my lord. The witness confirmed that he's still under oath to tell the truth.
>> Good. Thank you so much. You may take a seat.
>> Thank you, Mr. Kier. You may continue with your cross examination.
>> As it pleases the court, my lord.
>> Good morning, sir.
>> Morning.
I want to ask a few questions just to clarify certain aspects of your evidence of yesterday before I proceed with my main examination.
Yes, you can go on.
>> I note that you mentioned yesterday that when you saw the white BMW, it was in slow motion.
Yes, it's correct. And you also mentioned immediately thereafter that the left side window of the BMW was lowered down.
My question to you in that regard is at what stage did you notice that the left hand side window of the BMW motor vehicle was lowered down after he Wolf and the Ferrari >> after the white Golf and the the red Ferrari parked at the parking lot.
My question to you relates not to the Ferrari and the Golf, but to the BMW.
You saw the BMW driving towards the Centurion Golf Estate. Is that correct?
>> You've told us that at one stage there was a U-turn, mate.
>> Yes, that's correct. Now my question to you is where was the BMW at the time that you realized that the left window was turned down?
>> It was there perhaps just to assist people that's not that familiar with the scene.
The robot is that where you turn towards the golf estate, the Centurion Golf Estate.
>> Yes, that's correct.
Now the road where the robot is, am I correct that that is John Foster Avenue?
Robot >> John Foster Avenue.
>> Yes, they are calling that.
>> Yes.
Just so that everybody can understand when you travel from Johannesburg towards the eastern side of Ptoria where you go under the power train bridge that's the area where the John Foster turnoff is up from the N1 highway.
>> Yes.
>> Now, that robot that you referred to is where the BMW motor vehicle turned in towards the estate.
The robot that I'm talking about is the is the robot that is before the estate.
John Foster Avenue robot Avenue robot.
>> Yes.
So as the vehicle turned off from John Foster Avenue towards the Centurion Golf Estate, that is when you realized that the window was there.
Yes. Lower down a bit.
You said yes and then something you added something Mr. Interpreter.
>> It lowered down the window.
>> The window was lowered down.
>> Lower down. Yes.
>> Now you've described the position where you were at as the eastern side of the estate entrance.
side.
Yeah.
Yes.
>> And you've also referred to it as the left side pavement.
>> Left side pavement.
>> Yeah, that's correct. Now, just to get clarity on that, if you were to stand at the entrance of the golf estate and you look in the direction of the robot, in other words, away from the estate, then that pavement where you were standing would then be on the left.
Yes, that's where I was standing.
Now I had the opportunity of going there last night and this morning to see what it looks like as we did not have the evidence presented in the manner in which the state intended to do it.
And I have noticed that on the eastern side, which is now the left hand pavement from the entrance to the estate towards the robot there are a number of trees. Is that correct?
There are a number of trees on the pavement on the eastern side.
side.
Okay.
You only saw the cheese.
I'm putting it to you that there are trees on both the eastern and the western side.
Now, >> I'm I'm still repeating my question. You only saw the trees.
>> No, sir. I'm not putting it to you that I only saw the trees. I am putting it to you that I noticed that there are tall trees.
>> Yes, that's true.
>> Now, the tree that you mentioned yesterday that Mr. Mazibuka was hiding behind. Is that one of those trees on the eastern side of the area in front of the estate?
One of them. Yeah.
One of them. Yes.
Now, are you able to estimate how far from the entrance of the security you were in relation to where the robot was, where you were during the shooting incident? Would you say it's halfway towards the robot from the entrance to the estate or is it closer to the estate or closer to the robot?
measuring tape.
>> I did not have a measuring tape with me.
You can measure.
>> I'm asking you for an estimation whether you were closer to the robot or closer to the entrance of the estate.
thinking I'm not good even my problem I'm not good even in MS >> that's my problem >> it is my problem I'm merely trying to get the approximate area and I'm going to deal with it with you with more detail as I see that you have difficult ulty, I will then rather show you photographs that can assist you. But before I get to that, Next time, >> next time you must request my number so that we can go myself and miss to go and do the measurements.
>> I have to object the witness has already indicated that he um has difficulty in in um estimating distance which I can align myself with. I'm also not good with it. Um, and the daddy's not good with math. So, um, I really think that, um, this line of question does not go anywhere. Maybe my learned friend can just put a statement to the witness and show him the photograph that he's got, which is now interesting for me that I was not allowed to um, show the scene to this witness, but now the defense is taking that line with this witness.
>> Yeah, I think Mr. is going to proceed with the photographs. So, I'll allow you to proceed.
>> I'm not there yet, though. There's a few questions that I'm putting to the witness just to get clarity before I show him the pictures. No problem.
>> Perhaps I can try a different approach.
Can you guesstimate how many paces you were away from the entrance to the estate?
science what it seems it seems as if now we repeat one and the same thing now because I've already argued that I'm not good in maths >> even when now you are engaging me old even what you is tiring me now because now you are asking me about maths and I'm also not good even in science now you are engaging me again in science >> well sir with the greatest of respect >> want to simply know >> you were you are employed as a security officer you were standing on the scene. He simply is asking you if you don't have a tape measure and you can't estimate with in with with precision. All he's saying is that if you had to walk, how many paces would it be between point A and B? Am I right, Mr. That's where you want to go?
>> Just to estimate, just to guess, he used the word gueststimate.
Unless my lord, maybe if I can be given an opportunity or a chance for me to go there after the adjunment and to go there and count for myself the paces.
Maybe I will come back and able to tell the court the paces from where I was standing to the robots. Yes, sir.
It's going to become very difficult if you're not going to do your best to answer my questions cuz I'm not going to go away. I'm going to continue asking those questions until you answer them.
So I'll put it to you in a different way. Is it more than 10 paces that you would walk from the entrance?
>> What's your number?
>> This place where you were at the time of the shoot 10 pieces.
for me.
Unless my lord with great respect I'm repeating myself I'm saying that I'm not good in math unless I can be given an opportunity to go I personally to go there and count for myself for now my lord with great respect I'm unable to answer.
>> Can I perhaps ask you, are you able to maybe from where you are seated, if you look in the courtroom, are you able to maybe just estimate from where you were standing to that point if you are able to in any way just point out in the courtroom?
My lord, uh I would say from where I'm sitting up to the woman who's sitting at at the gallery there at the corner, I'm sorry to use her as an example because I know that it might be a mistake with a person as an example from here I'm standing up to there to that woman a bit after her.
>> Are you referring to the lady sitting right in the corner and you say a little bit further than that?
Yes. Little bit further.
So approximately the length of his court from that wall to the back wall or more or less a little bit further my lord. So that would indicate because there there's a wall there uh in that corner. So he says a little bit further. So it cannot just be the length of the court.
>> What would we estimate the distance to be?
>> My lord, I'm now taking him to the back.
>> Yeah. What would you estimate the distance to be >> 25 approximately?
>> Mr. Are you comfortable with that?
>> I am.
>> So let's say m you wasn't so difficult.
I would like to picture to make it easier for you. If you have visuals then it's easier for you. So I want to show you this photo first of all we haven't been shown these pictures.
It's now coming as a surprise to the to the state.
>> Mr. Pier um I'm hearing something about the identity of photographs >> for over weeks now >> and been chastised if we don't discover everything but I mean it's a two-way street >> Mr. I'm hearing something about the authenticity of the photographs.
Who took them? When were they taken?
Who's the author? Are you calling the author?
>> With the greatest of respect, these are still photos and I'm going to use this witness to identify the photos.
>> My lord, it is unacceptable. What is good for the goose is good for the ganda. So, we were stopped from presenting visuals of clear video footage of the incident. And now the defense wants to follow the same line.
It is just not fair to the stage.
>> Well, with respect, I'm helping the state. They were unable to show the video. So, unfortunately, the evidence that's before your lordship hasn't been properly placed in context in relation to the scene. So, I'm really making it easier. These photographs were taken by myself at 6:00 this morning on the way to court.
>> No witness in this case, >> Mr. Kia. What the I think the cause of complaint on the side of the state was that yesterday she actually wanted to set the scene and provide perspective to the court relating to the scene of crime. And when that effort was made, it was vigorously shot down by the defense on each and every technical point and aspect available to them regarding the authenticity of it. Now today the defense is producing a photograph and Miss Laru in my view is quite correct to raise an objection relating to this particular document because we don't know who the author is. We don't have the evidence of that individual. We don't know what it's meant to depict.
And if the court allows that to happen, then I suggest what we should perhaps maybe do is just allow the state to lead the video evidence which will cut out at least 2 hours of unnecessary cross-examination time. my lord with respect if a court and my learned friend can give me a few minutes for this witness to identify what I'm showing to him if he has a difficulty in what he sees if he's not able to describe properly what he see what he is seeing we have done this for many many years show photographs to the witness and ask them are you able to identify what you see on the photograph so the witness himself is identifying The evidence, it is not complicated evidence such as surveillance footage. That's footage of the entire scene and we don't know how it was done. These are simply just a photograph of what it looks like.
>> My friends got a problem. We can go on inspection in >> with the greatest of respect. This is the easiest and simplest way and it's actually assisting the state with respect. It's sour grapes because she was unable to get the video evidence in.
Now I want to object to photographs. I'm asking the court to give me an opportunity to prove these photographs through this witness. Very simple. If I just understand the principle behind this, the defense is leading wanting to lead the evidence of photographs of the scene that were taken by the legal representative accused number two. Yes, sir.
>> Those photographs have not been previously discovered to the state.
>> Correct.
Yesterday the challenge we had, if I understand it correctly, is the state wanted to lead the footage of the area in order to give a perspective of the scene of crime and as to what had transpired. That's how I understood the evidence of the state to be.
>> They wanted to do a lot more and then challenge of the actual incident. the the the the challenge was that the authenticity of that particular material was placed in dispute.
Now, similarly, what I hear the state to be and I and I could stand to be corrected, the state also is today challenging the authenticity of the photograph that is being put to the witness. Am I correct, Miss Mur?
>> Someone would. But my lon friend goes further. He places on record that I took the photograph. I'm asking the question, is he now a witness in his own case?
>> No, I'm not.
>> Mr. You stand by your application.
>> My lord, I most definitely stand by my application and there is nothing complicated. These are simple still photographs of how it looks in front and the witness can then describe to us in relation to the photograph, this is how the vehicle traveled. This is where the U-turn was made. This is where I was.
This is where the BMW was. We've done it since forever.
There is nothing complicated. This is not technical evidence of video footage of a CCTV of an actual incident. It's a still photo of the estate, just what it looks like at the outside. If I can't use the photographs, then I will ask if we go there and we all go and look at it. Then we can see the trees and we can see where the witness was and we can see where the car was traveling.
Mu, >> my lord. Um, in fact, can I just put the following also on record? We are now standing going on to 4 years after the incident. That is when these photographs were taken.
What I can state is that with the video footage, I requested a still photo album also to be produced of those video footages. We can use that because that is evidence that I was in any event going to introduce. So that we can use but not those photos that were taken last night. A photo is a photo. If my own friend wants to use a different photo, surely this witness can say this is not what it looked like. I cannot recognize what I see and then that's it.
If I can't prove the photograph to the witness, then so be it. But surely I should be given an opportunity of showing him what the estate looks like so that his evidence can be sensibly placed before your launch.
>> Can I just ask you the state indicates that the photographs album that is in possession of the state was taken I think soon after the incident. So it would be approximately 4 years ago. The photographs that you have today are obviously post four years from the incident. Would you be perhaps amable to use the photograph album?
>> With respect, no. My lord, >> would you be able to use the photograph album that was produced shortly after the incident?
>> What is important to me, my lord, is certain angles and what is visible. I haven't seen these still photographs, but they taken at night and it's from what I've seen hard to see. These photographs are very simple photograph of what the estate looks like. If my learned friend looks at it and she says, "I have a problem. That's not what it looked like."
Different story. But I'm sure that's something that the witness can deal with.
>> Miss Lo, you still stand by your objection?
>> I still stand, my lord. And I can I just make it clear that the still photo album was actually produced from the video footage itself. So I did certain snapshots from the video footage. So it is the most it's the best evidence and it is the perfect evidence to set the scene of the of of what happened.
>> This is case number sorry miss funer.
This is a matter simply between council for accuse number two and the state.
>> Lord, with the greatest of respect, >> I'm not going to hear you. Thank you.
>> So, your law would not permit me to address you on the issue at that even though my client is charged on the basis of common.
>> It is not affecting you currently. Thank you.
This is case number SS 98 stroke 2025 and during the course of the crossexamination by Mr. on behalf of accused number two.
He traveled this morning to the scene of crime and conducted an inspection in loco on his own and took photographs and during the course of his cross-examination wanted to present the photographs to the state witness in order to determine the scene of crime.
The simple reason that he wants to use these photographs is to obtain a picture of what the scene of crime looked like so that everyone in this courtroom is able to follow the position.
Miss Laru appears in behalf of the state objects to the production of this particular photograph on the basis that one no proper basis has been laid for this particular photograph to be used during the course of the proceedings and after and more so objecting after the legal representative of accused number two indicated that he took the photographs himself.
At the heart of the objection as I understand it is one the authenticity of this particular photograph and two the second cause of complaint raised by the state is that this photograph has been taken approximately 4 years after the incident.
The state council then proceeded to invite the legal representative accused number two to use the photographs that were produced by the state from the video footage that was taken on the night of the incident and to use the stills which were taken soon or shortly after the incident in order to be able to put proper perspective to what had transpired on that particular evening.
I pause to mention that Mr. is on his feet representing accused number two and cross-examining the state witness and the objection has been raised by the state and in the view of this court is simply a matter between the state and council or the legal representative accused number two. This particular part of the cross-examination does not impact or impinge upon accuse number three and therefore under those circumstances.
This court deemed it appropriate not to engage council for accuse number three because this aspect does not affect him.
She is representing accuse number three.
And when the time comes for the cross-examination of this witness by council for accuse number three and four, I shall then allow council a firm, fair, and a fruitful opportunity to raise whatever concerns she intends to raise.
And on that basis, the court is of the firm view that this matter simply does not impact upon accuse number three at this stage and therefore none of his fair trial rights have been trampled upon. In the circumstances, the court has carefully listened to the objection raised by the state and the cornerstone of the objection is simply that this document has not been properly authenticated.
The legal representative of accuse number two has indicated that he's the author of the document.
And having carefully applied one's mind to the rules of evidence, this court is of the view that the objection by Miss Laru is not so far-fetched. It's reasonable. In the circumstances, the objection by the state for the use of this particular photograph is sustained and that is the order of this court.
Thank you.
me this element so that we can that I can view the still photographs that the state is relying upon. Good >> and depending on whether it is all visible what I need to point out namely the position of the cameras the position of the lights the position of a parking area if it is not possible to deal with it I will have only two choices the one is very tedious very long cross examination to pull teeth to use the expression from the witness about where what was and I would therefore probably need to ask for the court to go on an inspection in loco because there is no evidence before this court. This court doesn't know where the parking area is in relation to the entrance. This court does not know where the witness was at the time of the shooting. and my attempt to make it easy for everybody to follow the evidence has now been prevented. So I will ask for an adjournment to view the photographs, make copies of them and then proceed.
May it please.
>> Good. Mr. Little, would you please make arrangements to allow Mr. Croier to view those photographs?
>> Indeed, my lord.
>> The court is then going to the application by Mr. from here for to allow the matter to stand down and to be provided an opportunity to study the still photographs is hereby granted.
>> I support Jesus.
>> Thank you.
Mr. Ro, do you have an understanding how long it perhaps would take?
>> I don't know what my learned friend has.
I have seen only one page of a still photos which is probably 5 cm by 5 cm.
That's all I've seen of a still photos.
So I now first have to look at it and see what it is. I do not know whe to have copies made. So my request that we will inform your lordship as soon as we are.
>> Good. Thank you.
>> And of course this impacts on all the other accused too and we would also need time to to make a decision and take instructions.
Okay.
>> Objection that was a disclosure of maybe 10 minutes.
>> Yes. The court having ruled that it the objection by Mr. Laru is sustained. Mr. Dr. Croier has indicated that in those circumstances he would appreciate the opportunity to be able to view the still photographs and after viewing those still photographs will make a decision regarding the way forward. The court is of the view that it is a a proper application made by him and accordingly his application is granted.
In the circumstances, the court is going to take the short adjournment and I shall await the further direction of the parties before we convene again. Good.
Thank you. Uh the witness is warned that he's still under cross-examination and that he's not to discuss the merits of his evidence with anyone during the time that the matter is standing ajourned.
Understood my lord. successful.
>> Thank you so much. The court will then take adjournment.
>> All rising court.
I can Yeah.
Um can please I only need to see the latest.
Can you order it quickly to me? Thank you.
Not for long.
I'm buying buying all I must say. Victoria and it's especially sound cool.
Okay, hopefully before we get to the end of the case, we can get together.
Now, I must say I would have preferred to stay traffic, you know, I have to bring >> Oh, sorry. So I have to leave at 6:00.
>> This thing is off again.
>> Mr. No, please. M doesn't work. I'll just go back on my own.
I think the the reasons for that is obvious in the light of objection that we had previously.
Um unfortunately in this particular matter we also don't have a map of the incident and that sketch plan of the site. So, I'm going to ask the witness to assist me in that regard cuz if I do my own sketch frame, the state is going to say, "I'm the offer. I can't use it." So, I'm unfortunately going to have to ask a witness to do it for me.
>> Good. So, um, and as I understand it, there's still no agreement between the parties in relation to the photographs you took. Am I right?
>> Well, I asked my learned friend. I approached her to say um would she agree to that specific photos and I showed the photos to her. The response was here's the states album. So I didn't get it.
>> Okay. No problem. Thank you so much for that. You may then you may then continue.
>> Thank you my lord.
So where you turn at the robot towards the estate, if you were to come down John Foster Drive from the N1 highway side, then one would turn left to enter for the road approaching the left.
>> Yes. Left. Left.
>> Yes. We turn on a list.
>> And when you turn left and you drive straight, then you will get to the security entrance. Is that security.
Yes.
>> And there are two lanes. The left hand side lane for residents and for visitors you have the right hand lane. Is that correct?
Left.
Can we start it again?
>> If you turn left at the robot and you stay in the left hand lane, >> you will be in the lane for the residents to enter into the estate.
>> Yes.
And then the lane next to it on the right hand side of that is the lane for the visitors.
>> That's correct.
>> Now where you enter into the estate on the right hand side of the driver going into the estate would then be the security office.
gate boom gate.
>> It's not a gate actually. It's a boom gate.
Thank you for that. And then on the other side of the office, the same applies. There's two lanes, one for visitors >> and one for residents.
That's correct.
>> Now the parking area is from close to the robot to the security building in the middle of the entrance and the exit.
Can you repeat it for me please?
>> The place where where visitors can park or people can park that's not going into the estate is not like on the left hand side or on the right hand side cuz there are walls and pavements.
The parking area is in between where the vehicles travel in and where the vehicles travel out. That space.
>> Okay.
>> In front of the security house.
Yeah.
Now there are demarcated parking areas between where the vehicles travel in and out.
Can you give us an estimation of about how many parking bays there are?
>> Yeah.
Can you give indication where they are?
How many how many parking bays?
>> I've never counted them.
>> My work was to to guard, not to count on parking.
>> Yeah, I'm not trying to trick you and I'm not asking for an exact answer. An approximate is it approximately 10, 15, 20 B?
>> Only one or two.
Because you were there in the morning.
Why didn't you count them?
>> I did, sir. You indicate to this court that you were there in the morning and you also took some photos.
>> Yes. And now the court has ruled that I can't show that photo to you.
>> I can't give evidence as to how many parking bays there are. So I now have to get it out of you.
Maybe you can help us because you were there. You counted them. My my work there was to to guard not to count how many trees or how tall are the trees.
I saw.
>> Okay, we will then take it from a different angle.
You saw the red Ferrari turning into the road leading to the estate. Is that correct?
Estate.
>> Yes, that's correct.
Did it appear as if the Ferrari came from the N1 highway side from in John Foster?
Ferrari N1 highway.
That's correct. So the Ferrari turned left >> to approach the Centurion Residential Estate and Country Club.
>> Yeah.
And that's a country club.
>> Yeah. That's correct.
>> And then in order to park in the parking bays without entering the estate, the Ferrari then would have had to turn to the right 90° in order to park there.
I'm not sure how many degrees but it turns right.
>> As I said before that with science I'm not conversing even about the decrease the decrease.
>> So let me make it simple for you. When the vehicle stopped there, it would be the left hand side of a Ferrari would be closest to the security entrance.
security there and be >> next to it will be not far from the left hand side. You said it will not be far from >> it will be closest to the security entrance.
And then the side where you were the eastern side or as you refer to it at times the leftand park the left hand side on the curb.
The front of a Ferrari would then be facing in the direction where you were.
Right.
>> Right. Now, the Ferrari was followed by a white Golf. Correct.
>> That's correct.
>> Do you know the model of a golf model?
I'm not good.
I'm not good in cars.
>> It's a It's a It's It's a Golf Four Golf 7 white in color. Even yesterday and I I said it that um I'm not conversent with the motor vehicle.
>> I'm happy with that. We've been told that it's a GR, but if you don't know, it's immaterial.
Golf.
Yes, it's a Golf 7R. Maybe you can help us with the model so that you can be clear. No, >> I'm very happy with the Golf 7R. Thank you, sir.
>> Golf 7R.
>> Even myself, I'm happy.
>> The Golf followed to Ferrari. Am I correct?
>> Golf 7 Ferrari. Gujal. Yeah, >> that's correct.
And the Golf similarly as the Ferrari also parked in the demarcated parking bays on the right hand side of the entrance lane.
Yeah.
Yes, I'm clear now. White lines painted on the paving area to indicate where vehicles can stop.
area.
>> Thank you for for me to understand the word.
>> Thank you sir. Now the golf parked next to or close to the Ferrari but on the side closest to the robot. In other words, furthest away from the security entrance.
Ferrari.
>> It was not next to the Ferrari.
>> Was there an open parking bay between them?
Was there perhaps a small tree in between them?
as well as motivating.
>> Yes. Now you are helping us because there there are trees.
>> Yes.
>> A lot smaller than the ones that you were there.
>> They are smaller trees than the trees that's on the eastern and the western side.
Looks like young trees that's planted there.
>> They are trees. But if you say there are smaller trees, >> smaller than the ones like the one where you went to hide on the eastern side, they are tall trees.
These ones in the middle of the parking bays are younger trees.
corn as well.
>> Yes, there are small trees here.
>> Right now, I want to put it to you that the way that the trees are planted is it appears there's two parking bays and then there's one tree and then there's again two parking bays and another small tree, another two parking bays and another small How many are there? No. So you're not to ask questions. I ask the questions, you answer them to the best of your ability.
Can you tell the court approximately how many of these small trees are there?
The reason for me to be there, I was not there to count. I was there to go.
But involve me.
>> It would have been easy for me if I could show you the picture, but now I can't. So, you're going to have to bear with me.
It's how many there are in any event.
County, you know, I was there.
You are bland. I was there to counties.
Not to counties, to guard.
not to count. I was my duty there was to to to to guard and uh I can repeat again what I said yesterday but that's not my business.
>> I do not want you to repeat what you said yesterday about whose business it is. I'm asking you to assist the court and giving an indication of to the best of your recollection how many of these little trees are there.
It's two parking bays, a little tree that we've established and then another two parking bays and another tree. And there are more than two. Do you agree with me on that? There are more than two of these small trees.
is love. Is paving photos. I don't mind.
Let me put it in this way. When the court at I can go there to count how many trees are there. I will shoot how many trees are there >> also the paving I will also shoot to show you the paving how how it looks there >> yes >> after we are here >> yes sir if it's necessary we will do so but in order to try and utilize the court time as well as we possibly can now doing it this way that you're unfortunately going to have to try and assist me by describing what it looks like seeing that you may not be shown what it looks like.
Yes, I do want to help the court. Indeed, I want to help the court. But now I cannot now able to have the court since I don't know how many trees are there, how many short trees are there, how many long trees are there that I cannot that will make me not able to help the court.
>> So sir may I request with all due regard and respect to the court that when you are unable to answer a question that's all you need to say I am unable to say then we can move on.
So you don't know if it's more I cannot explain about the trees. Let's leave the trees alone. also the paving.
>> So once you have once the vehicles have turned into the road leading to the entrance before the demarcated parking bays begin there is a light.
light.
>> Yes, there is a light.
Now, the first parking bay after the light, is that where the Ferrari stopped or did it go a little bit further before it parked?
No, it did not stop at the first parking area. It stopped a bit down that parking area.
>> Are you able to say approximately how many parking bays down?
>> Let's say from the light.
I'm not good in math. You can just estimate. We don't need to be good in maths. Is it more than two?
>> No, no, no.
>> I don't want to implicate myself about counting. I said to you even at school, I was not good in maths.
>> That's fine. We will move on. Sir, you have been at the time of the incident working at the Centurion. a residential estate and country club for approximately 5 months.
Is that correct?
>> Five months.
around there.
>> And the duties that you were performing at the time of the shooting incident was to look after that area outside the entrance to the estate where people can park and where they drive in and out.
That was the area that you were posted, right?
I will start it. I will I will start.
propert.
You know when you are employed there are duties no requirements that you need to do as an security officer. When we employed, you must be on guard. You must guard the cars, the property, the resident and inquire also from the resident whether they are okay or they are safe in that area.
>> Yes. And it sometimes becomes quite a busy area. Am I correct?
pit.
>> Yeah.
>> Yes.
>> There's like school buses that picks up children there in the morning, drop them off in the afternoon. There's lift clubs. It's a busy area, very in front of the security.
Yes, it might be. There are buses now, but at the time when I was employed there, there were no buses.
>> Maybe now there are buses.
>> I accept that.
But it's nevertheless a busy place where people park in front of the estate.
>> It's never >> it's a busy place. People park there regularly.
area.
Yeah.
Yes. People are will park there if that area is busy. But if it's not busy, there will space there will be some vacant spaces there.
>> Yes. Now the parking bay where the Gulf was parked, it was closer to the to the intersection. Am I correct? Than the Ferrari.
You call me you are making a mistake. You know when you are from those robots I remember now there's a tree. You must drove past the tree before you get to a parking area. Mhm.
>> So they're not parking before he start.
>> There's no parking.
>> First it's a tree, then it's a street light, then the parking starts.
>> Yes. Now, did it park underneath the light?
parking light.
>> Or did it park a little bit of a distance away?
>> Did it park?
You said the park where it for me >> under the light or a little bit closer to the estate?
But not at the estate but at the party.
>> I understand your answer to be not very close to the entrance.
The witness need a contact break. He's request requesting a comfort break.
Okay. So, just before we take the comfort break, the last question is on the floor. So, it is not very close to the entrance. What is your answer?
The parking area is not nearer to the road. No, nearer to the east. It's just that in the middle >> where the golf has parked.
>> Sure to go.
>> You want to take your comfort break first?
>> Yeah. Um do do you require the court to adjurnn or you'll take your comfort break and we'll wait for you?
Okay, I'm coming back. Wait for >> Okay, we'll wait for you. Just remember, you mustn't discuss your evidence with anyone.
This is uh this is an announcement to the people in the gallery.
The court noted yesterday when the witness stepped out for a few moments that the gallery decided that it needed to start selling peanuts.
This is a court of law and I'm not going to tolerate disorderly behavior. If the witness is stepped out, there's no need for you to communicate and to speak in a loud tone of voice. If you've if you are impelled to say something to each other, I suggest you step outside. You have your discussion and you come back.
Anyone that is going to be disruptive in their behavior is going to be held in contempt. Thank you.
Good. Mr. It's glad you're back. You confirm that you are still under your former oath to speak the truth.
>> Yes, my lord. The witness confirmed that he's still under oath to tell the truth.
>> Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Croier, sir. You may proceed.
>> Thank you, my lord.
So the BMW then came from what you perceive to be the same direction from where the Ferrari and the Golf came. In other words, also turned left at the RA.
Then now it will be different between the BMW and the Golf 7 and the Ferrari.
The two when they came they were following each other. The BMW and Ferrari.
Then I need us to listen very carefully because even yesterday I did explain this. This is what I said yesterday.
the BMW.
It drove past the estate and it passed the first robot and on the second robot I said that there at the second robot it made a lieutenant.
So are you then saying >> I omitted something and when it was passing it lowered down a window a bit and at the second robot it makes a U-turn.
>> Are you now referring to John Foster Drive?
John Foster Drive.
>> Yes, we're talking about John Foster Drive.
Right. So, do I understand your evidence incorrectly that the BM turning into the road leading to the estate turned right and not left.
How would it make a U-turn if it was um let me just explain let me just the the BM how was supposed to make a U-turn if it was turning to left hand side. Now I'm wondering now why are you so much concerned with this BMW? Why are you protecting this BMW?
>> Is that your answer to the question?
Sir, can I proceed?
of the road that leads to the estate and John Foster Drive, whether the BMW turned right in order to approach the estate or left >> against the Ferrari and the Gulf.
drive.
Yes. Because when it pass the estate at the robots, it makes a U-turn and it turns right because it wanted to enter.
Thank you, sir. At the entrance where I understand. Can we move on, please?
at the entrance.
>> You turned right to go towards the east to >> what the east at the entrance where every everyone is is accessing the entrance.
>> And you've indicated yesterday and this morning that the BMW was driving slowly as if it was looking for something.
Yes.
As if you know they wanted a direction.
>> Well, we don't have to speculate about what the intention was, but it was driving slowly. Correct.
Yes, it was driving slowly.
Did it drive past the Golf and the Ferrari driver Ferrari?
>> Yeah. Just going on.
>> Yes. But a little bit.
>> Okay. So it went a little bit past the Ferrari and the Golf and then okay just pass a bit from the road that is to the left hand side and it went past from the road for where people are driving from the east. When it passes that road, then it made a U-turn.
Then that's where now came and enter to the entrance where everybody's entering.
I don't quite follow your answer. Did it make a U-turn to be in the road where the people coming out of the estate?
state.
Yeah. It drove past the entrance.
>> Then it it it it passes the entrance.
>> It drove the the the parking. It drove past the parking a little bit.
exit.
>> Then it drove past >> exit >> a a bit and an exit road.
>> Then it make a U-turn >> from the to to the right hand side entrance.
>> Then it makes a U-turn and it and it drove into the entrance.
>> Yeah.
So I I would ask you I've put a page there in front of you and a pen. Will you then please do us a drawing showing the two lanes that leads to the entrance of the estate, the parking bays and the two lanes going out.
sec.
Now the problem is started again.
Sir, I'm not asking you to do a perfect drawing. I'm not asking you to draw all the trees, all the parking bays. A very rough sketch with a road leading in >> and the road leading out and the parking bays in the middle. I'm sure you can do that.
You have a trick, don't you?
What do you want me to draw? I'm not an artist. No, >> I don't need an artist drawing. I just need a rough sketch.
>> But >> with two layers, you'll see. Can you first draw the two lanes that leads towards the entrance of the estate?
>> I'm not an artist.
>> Yes. I'm not asking you to be an artist.
You have metriculated not so.
>> Yes, I did make my pass.
So please do us a favor and try to do the drawing.
>> Sorry, there's something that I omitted before before I can interpret already question put the question on you because I think you must interpret everything.
>> Yes, >> please Mr. interpreter >> because what before you can put another question I was saying that >> yes my apologies finish his answers first >> anyone business whe metriculated or not >> then we are not at school here >> sir that evidence is already before the court you have metriculated can you please do me the drawing I'm not going to do that. I'm not an artist. If if I was an artist, I'll do that.
I don't want to.
>> Is this line of questioning really relevant in the first place? And does it bring us any closer to what is in dispute? Is the is the crimes in the dispute?
>> My lord, with respect, this entire exercise would have taken me less than 15 minutes if I didn't show the picture to the witness. It is now unfortunate that the state unless I now agree that he can look at the photograph and he doesn't have to do a drawing then he can draw the way the car was traveling on the photo. But seeing that the state is objecting, I'm going I'm insisting that the witness endeavor to draw two lines which would be the two roads going in, the parking bays in the middle and the two road rows going out. That is not a complicated thing to draw. He doesn't have to put any details into it. I merely want a very rough sketch because we have nothing. We don't have a sketch.
>> Yeah. Can I just inquire? The state mentioned about the scene of the crime being in dispute.
>> Is the scene of the crime the scene of crime is in dispute?
>> My apologies. Now Lord, it is very relevant to the line of questioning with regard to this witness as to the incident that transpired, the shooting incident that I establish the manner in which the vehicle was driving. If a witness is not able to describe it and not willing to make the drawing and the state is not agreeing to the photo, then I'm simply going to have to do it in a very slow manner so that we can try and get that evidence. But with respect, it's very relevant to the line of questioning. That's fine. Can I perhaps just inquire in the spirit of perhaps maybe wanting to move on? There seems to be no consensus between the parties relating to the crime scene. That means the entrance of the Centurion Gulf Estate and the parking bays and all those aspects which you've already canvased to the witness. Am I correct?
Can can it be in dispute between the parties for the purposes of moving on with the cross-examination?
If one refers to the pictorial depiction of the Centurion Gulf estate as depicted on Google Earth, can one then argue against it either on the side of the state or the defense to say it is something that's in the public domain? Google Earth is there. It shows the entrance of the thing and that maybe perhaps that could assist you with with trying to get the answers from the witness and you can maybe just point it out to him and maybe everyone can be on the same page. But it's something I'm leaving for you to consider. It's ultimately you are running your case.
certainly something that we can consider my lord >> because it's not a complicated aspect and all I'm trying to establish from the witness is the manner in which his vehicle >> drove.
>> Yeah. And I think if you just >> maybe that might assist us if I just take a quick adjournment you can access Google Earth you can get the relevant picture you can pan you can tilt you can zoom you can do whatever you want to and then you on the same page as the witness is. We're not bogged down with the authenticity of the documents because it's it's open to everyone and nobody has what you call tampered with it. Uh I suppose it could work to be a bit faster. Let me hear Mr. L. What is your view?
>> I'm a meanable to that my in fact I have one at hand >> the Google Earth.
>> Yes, I've already done that exercise.
>> So do you want you want me to just take an agenda or >> if my friend makes it available then we can just move on. Can we just quickly can we do the following? It might be even better cuz yesterday there was quite an aversion to that screen that's standing on that side. Can we perhaps maybe put the put the Google Earth picture up onto that screen so everyone can see it and then the witness is sitting there. He can look at the screen and then you can take him through the entire thing. So all of us are following it so that I don't hear an argument and say, "Oh, but you know, because you've got an HP laptop, it it displays differently to an Apple and then I've got to call evidence from California."
>> I'll be most grateful if the state can assist us in that regard. It's a state equipment. So I >> Mr. uh Laru just put it up onto the and let's just agree if that is what is going to be used before we do anything further >> for the purposes of uh of us trying to do that would you have an objection the witness is still seated in court >> no problem >> no problem okay let's see uh m seated while >> most definitely thank you so much so we are as I understand we took took the left turn from the N1.
We came onto John Foster and now show us the entrance of the Centurion Golf is it golf club and golf estate. The security entrance where the entrance comprises of two lanes. One is the visitors lane and one is the residence lane. And simultaneously next to it on in the middle is the security house and on the right hand side of that is the exit lanes. one for the visitor and one for the resident. And in front of the security house, as I understand it, there's a parking area for mo for the for visitors who want to visit people in the estate but who do not enter with the motor vehicles onto the estate. I think that's where we are and perhaps maybe we'll see when it was latest recently updated then we'll know what is the age of the trees as well.
Perhaps my friend can assist us in giving us a Google photo of what it looked like at the time of the incident.
>> Could be. Let's let's let's just see.
Let's use technology cuz I think it'll assist everyone and it'll I think prevent a lot of it'll prevent a lot of frustration on your part. Mr. Kier, I see where you're going and I I can hear the answers and I just think that this could be the most practical solution for everyone. I'm indeed to the court for the suggestion.
Thank you.
>> Good. Thank you.
>> Houston, we have a problem.
>> Yes, ma'am. Um, it's called the Laroo problem.
>> It's called the Laroo problem.
>> Oh. Oh. Oh.
>> So, um, my technology knowledge is not always very good.
>> So, I suggest what you do just go www.google Google Earth and then open your Google Earth app.
>> Yes.
>> And then in your Google Earth app, type in Centurion Golf Estate Security.
>> I should maybe send the picture to the defense and they can just have a look at it. What I've got here.
>> No, but shouldn't we just display it?
So, it will get displayed from your computer, from your laptop, via your your your projector. So just go onto your laptop and just type in Google Earth.
>> We just need to connect.
>> No problem.
>> The defense does have rout available if the state needs any assistance in connecting, but it seems that she's able to do so.
Thank you.
It's not cuz >> of course it's okay.
It's fine.
suggestion. I should have a good idea.
Can we ask a short agenda so that I can just um maybe connect with the defenses hotspot?
>> Will that be in order, Mr. Kro? I'll just take a short adjournment so that you can and and I suppose if if the defense is able to access it on on a laptop or a device or whatever it is, I'm certain you can just connect it to the projector and then you can take it from there.
>> Okay. Just one second. My lord, I see it's close to the lunchon adjournment already. May I suggest that I carry on with other aspects until 1:00 and then we can deal with that during the lunchon?
>> That's perfect. That's a good suggestion. Is everyone comfortable with that?
>> I'm happy.
>> Mr. Sing, do you have an objection?
>> Comfortable. Thank you.
>> Are you sure?
>> 100%. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kier. The witness, you are still under your form to speak the truth.
Thank you so much. Thank you Mr. Kiera.
You may continue. Thank you my lord.
So I'm going to move to a different aspect and we will deal with the map after we launch an adjournment.
Mrs. >> Okay.
>> Now, when advocate listen was questioning you yesterday, he dealt with two of your statements that you made with regard to this matter.
Yes, that's correct.
Now we have heard the evidence that there's three statements that you made.
>> Yes.
>> We have already dealt with the initial statement that you made on the day of the incident or may I ask you first in that regard. The first statement that you made, was that in the early hours in the of the morning or during the afternoon of the 11th of August?
send the ex four years back.
Hey, >> this incident happened 4 years ago.
>> Let me try and help you, sir.
>> At the bottom of the statement, there's a stamp by the police that indicates the 11th of August, 2022 when you made the first statement. And the commissioning stamp has a 21 colon 0 written in it. I take it that it means 900 p.m. at night on the >> 11th.
>> But I don't know if it's correct because where you signed there's also a time written 023.
So I don't know if it's 233, if it's morning, if it's evening or if it's 2100 hours. So that's why I'm asking you perhaps that might help you to jog your memory. If it was in the evening, early hours of the morning or in the afternoon of the following day.
If you don't know, then you must just say so then I can move on.
Okay.
M >> 21 exhibit B because we just need to be clear for purposes.
>> We are indeed referring to exhibit B A6A. Thank you.
>> Yes, my lord. But I don't know whether I must interpret or you know I'm I'm now lost because before I can interpret what the advocate is saying now this is state so many >> apologies Mr. Interpreter can you please explain to the witness I have indicated that the statement that we're referring to is A6A which was already received by this court as an exhibit and the exhibit was numbered as exhibit B. That's a statement we dealt with yesterday. We don't have it. You see, that's Lord. Can we have the witness bundle? That's what I was speaking about yesterday. The witness bundle should be there with the exhibits in front of the witness so that the witness can look at it.
512.
>> I have many copies of the statement that I intend using and we have one extra copy of A6A. So perhaps we can show it to the witness in the entrance if there's a problem in finding the exhibits which should be in an exhibit file.
>> Witness bundle is file exhibit.
>> Is it an exhibit file?
>> Yeah, this see if you got exhibit in that file. Thank you.
I suppose this uh is it the same that you gave to us yesterday online um I'm not sure whether it was placed there this morning doesn't look like it but we will definitely make sure that it um it will be there >> okay for now just put that file away you've got exhibit B on its own let's just deal with it yeah in the lunch break Miss Laru will sort it out you've got exhibit B for Betty which was handed in yesterday the 21st of July 2026 at I was 45.
>> We do have it.
>> A6 capital A.
>> We do have it.
>> Go to the last page. Page number three.
>> We are there.
>> Mr. Kier is there. Thank you, Mr. Kier.
>> Thank you, madam.
With the assistance of the time appearing on the document, are you now able to answer the question as to when you make made that statement?
Sorry Mr. from you sir. You are referring to the time that is firstly under the signature and the date and then you're referring to the second time wherein it appears that the document was commissioned.
>> Correct. Yes ma'am.
>> Right.
>> Can you see that the first one there's a signature on the left hand side and it says 11:08 2022 and it would appear that it was commissioned at 02 hours 33. Yes, >> that means at about 2 shortly after 2 in the morning and Mr. Proier then is now referring to the U commissioner's certification which indicates that that was 2100 hours in the evening.
>> Yes ma'am.
>> So that in essence it would appear that the document was commissioned before the statement was made.
>> Is that where you're going Mr. No, but that's quite >> correct, my lord.
>> On the face of it, it does appear to have been commissioned before it was signed.
>> I'm more interested in >> when the statement was made. I take it that that was when the docket was first opened in the matter and the witness gave a statement to the police.
>> So, Mr. Dr. Kovia simply wants to know from you if you can just assist us because of there's a few uh questions that need to be answered here. He just like to know what time did you make the statement if you can remember 0233ment statements.
Somewhere somehow there is where maybe this according to me when I'm seeing I'm looking at this to me is a fraud Something fishy happened. It seems as if my statement was taken somewhere and they stumped they they changed the the details on my statement and they stumped this to me is is a fraud. It's like a fraud. I understand that.
>> But the question still stands from council. Approximately what time did you make your statement on the 11th of August 2020?
>> 11th August when I would say I made my statement or it was obtained from me around 0233 in early hours of the morning the night of the incident.
>> Exactly.
>> Exactly.
>> My lord. And just for clarity on that, if he signed 2:30 in the morning and it was commissioned that night, then it was actually commissioned after it was signed.
>> Well, we can accept it that he could never have deposed to the affidavit at 2100 hours because the event had still not even taken place.
>> No, but it's the 11th of August, not the 10th. Oh, sorry. It's the evening of the of the 10th.
>> Yes. But if I can then move on from there. My lord, this is the first statement that you made when the docket was opened when the case was registered.
Is that correct?
>> On record, I think I just want to prevent a confusion I think now. So um the time of 033 on the 11th was in fact early that morning and the commissioning actually took place then later on the 11th that night. So um it doesn't seem to be commissioned before it was signed.
>> That's exactly what I just said that it wasn't commissioned before it was signed. It was commissioned only back even.
>> Yeah. So if you understand it that uh the statement was taken at 023 after midnight and then on the same day at 2100 hours was commissioned.
>> Yes.
>> Are we on the same page?
>> Yes.
>> So this is the first statement that you made the night of the incident in the early hours of the morning.
Yes.
Now, subsequent to the statement you supposed to on the 11th of August, you then made a further statement on the 16th of August. Mr. Advocate Fing has yesterday dealt with that. So22perate.
Yes.
>> Yes. I I I did make a statement. These police officers were desperate.
You know, they were making ts on me.
>> So you can just answer the question then we can move. is a little bit quicker when it's possible.
>> So the second statement 5 days later I would assume that there was at that stage an investigating officer appointed to the case. The docket was booked out and the investigating officer needed clarity on certain aspects. So he asked you to make a second additional statement.
Five days later.
Yes, that's true.
>> And something that I want to tell this court There were a lot of police officers who came to me. Some of them they were calling me talking in police meaning that we are the police.
So then so there were new faces.
How possible is that?
You know my lord, you know I was called by someone unknown to me over the phone and telling me that he's a police officer and remember it was after this incident and that that person say you must come let's meet at little police station. How possible is that?
>> My lord um I notice that it's already 5 1. I do not know whether it's a convenient time for the court to take the lunch and adjournment.
>> I'm still going to deal with that, but I'm going to be quite a while with the two statements.
>> Indeed. So, yes, thank you. Any objection?
>> No.
>> Thank you. Good. Um, Mr. Tell, we're going to take the long adjournment now and we'll return at 2:00. Please make sure again the court is just reminding you because you are in a cross- examination, you are not to discuss your evidence with anyone.
The accused persons, ladies and gentlemen, you may rise. We are going to take the long amendment.
We'll see you at 1400 hours. Good. Thank you.
>> All right.
>> Thank you. The court will take the agendment.
Okay.
extra copies.
Make it much more. I've asked my attorney to try and get some copies, but it was too difficult to get copies for everybody. That's why I think my friends cuz she got it and and I just share it with an email with everybody else.
>> Okay. But can can I just uh can we just maybe perhaps make it easy for everyone if we can uh just use this picture here and the witness can just use the pointer and can just indicate to us on this particular thing.
>> Have you got a pointer there?
>> Yeah.
was stationary for 3 seconds and it moves here to central drive and it stops there.
going down this way.
Yes.
>> Up to this parking where this is between these two.
This one here this one here.
>> And it turns here and stops.
I think we should still take the court's um guidance here.
>> Yes.
>> And let the witness indicate for us on the correct screen.
>> Yeah. Take a look on the photograph and then for purposes of clarity, >> uh I prefer the witness must do that.
stops.
Second, >> Mr. Interpreter, you've got the laser pointer there with you.
>> Yes, I do. Just give it to the witness there for a moment.
>> Yeah, Mr. Tell just for the purposes of the exercise so that there's no uh misinterpretation and we're not at cross purposes, can you just use that laser pointer and then proceed to point to us slowly and just tell us exactly what what transpired as you use the pointer. Yes.
>> So, let's start and tell us where the BMW where was the spot where you first saw the BMW.
>> Tell us what you're pointing at. Tell us once you tell us.
>> Yeah. The point is pointing at now is where the the BMW was um >> waiting for wait for 3 minutes >> al stop for 3 minutes in in that point.
>> What?
>> So Mr. Are we in agreement that is pointing >> at a point in the middle of the intersection of John Foster and is it Centurion Drive?
>> Yes.
>> Yeah. And that point is where he says it's three. Is that where he says it stood for 3 minutes?
>> For 3 minutes.
>> For three. Not >> 3 seconds. Sorry.
>> 3 seconds.
>> Yeah. It was moving slowly.
>> Okay. And then >> And it makes a U-turn there.
>> And Yes.
>> The BMW is traveling now.
>> Slowly.
>> Slowly.
>> Slowly.
>> Yes. Slowly.
when it was there.
>> Okay, just stop there.
>> The witness indicates that once the BMW was in the middle of the intersection or towards the part of the intersection closer to the entrance of the Centurion Golf Estate, it then took a U-turn in the middle of that intersection and would have turned right into the main entrance of the Centurion Golf Estate. It drove a short distance and in the car in the area where the car parks cars park in the middle it then paused there. Is that what you said?
>> Yes, correct my lord.
>> And then he drove a little further >> onto the other side where the motor vehicles exit from the estate and then it stopped there. Is that how the court understands it?
>> You have a right.
>> Yeah. Right.
>> Yeah. Okay then myself.
>> Does does that capture it? Uh are you comfortable with that Mr. Kia?
>> I'm comfortable with it. Don't believe my colleagues. No.
>> What was conveyed to us before by the interpreter differs from what we've just been shown and I want the record to reflect that.
Sorry.
>> You also explained to your lordship.
>> Sorry, just help me. When you say what was explained by the interpreter to you, I take it that the witness did not explain that to you. The interpreter >> he he conveyed >> conveyed yes >> to your lordship thereafter to counsel by utilization of the hard copy. what he says he was informed by the witness and what we were told in that conveying differs from what was shown at this point was shown with the >> in which way does it differ.
>> Um if I can have my heart problem we were told that the BMW made the Uturn where you see the words willowest ministries >> slowly make moved down. Sorry. Is there Can you just point out the Willowrest Ministries on that on that uh picture on the screen >> in the um in the middle of that?
>> Is it here?
>> It says on the one we Well, then we've got different ones here because on the one we've got it says here Willow Crest Ministries >> here.
>> Yes. in the middle where the U-turn was made, >> right?
>> Nothing was indicated to us that the BMW paused there where it made the U-turn in John Foster onto that, let's call it where that open area is. It was then indicated to us that the veh that the vehicle moved slowly down. It moved um it turned. It made a Uturn in between the vehicles. As it made the turn facing John Foster again, it paused there for 3 seconds.
>> It then moved down and and um came to a standill a bit down there.
>> Sorry. Can you just just indicate to us when you say >> the vehicle passed for 3 seconds, >> can you just draw tell us where that was?
The picture differs a bit but it's somewhere here on this the moment it made the Uturn it went up made a Uturn and then it paused this side for 3 seconds.
>> Mr. You have heard what council has said.
Can you please clarify the position?
That means from your own mouth, can you tell us? You were there. You used your own eyes. Tell us what did you see and what did you observe so that we're not at cross purposes.
I'm not good into drawings, but at least as as I've explained before my lord I'm not good in in drawing my lord and this is what I've drawn here my lord but meot whether the car stops for 3 seconds or what my lord we are We we are not here because of this. We are here because of the firearms.
Let's just leave this my concentrate on the the firearms. But can you just use that pointer again?
>> Yeah.
>> And the draw that the picture that's on the screen there. Can you just once again tell us what did you observe using the pointer on that screen so that council are clear in what you are saying.
Yeah, just there. There.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Hear my lord.
>> It was there stationary for 3 seconds, >> right?
>> Yes. Sorry, one second. Just stop there.
Uh if I understand uh council miss fun here you indicated that that was indicated to you by this by the interpreter that that at that point the vehicle stopped for 3 seconds >> which is contrary to when your launcher asked you to use the pointer at the first >> and we indicated the the 3 seconds but a different point >> but what we want to understand is what was conveyed by the interpreter to you is exactly now what the witness is saying.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Good. Thank you. So at that point, at that point where the pointer is, that's where the BMW paused for 3 seconds.
>> BMW for 3 seconds.
>> For 3 seconds.
>> Yes, my lord. For 3 seconds. Just pause there for 3 seconds.
>> Thank you, Mr. Pro. You may continue.
>> Thank you, my lord. So can you then also please indicate to us and I will give you a colored ki if you can or a highlighter if you can just make a cross in the approximate place where you were standing or lying down rather at the time of a shooting incident.
Now you're talking of two places. You want to know where I was lying or where I was standing lying.
>> Well, let's take it then a little bit slower.
Can you show to the court when you were observing the BMW driving in the manner which you now described? Where were you at that stage?
somewhere there.
>> I don't know if you can also use the pointer to just indicate on the screen.
>> That's try and save time.
>> By that time radio I was approximately >> paving >> there at the paving. That's where I was standing at the p paving >> even though now we is vibrating.
>> Yeah.
>> See I was standing there.
>> Yes.
>> Have you marked it on the >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yes, I did.
>> In front of you. And then can I give you a different color to indicate to the court where you were lying down at the time of the shooting?
There's something left.
Okay.
Yes. Can our PC first diff >> I think the difficulty is that the one that's on the screen and the one that's printed out is not exactly He was >> my lord. I think we must also just placed on record that what lordship sees on the screen there is not the hard copy that's been provided and I think it is imperative.
>> Yeah, it it's because of various issues and I think it's important that we place it on record. I'm going to ask my learned friend to ensure that we also have that particular picture that's currently depicted on the screen sent to everybody. But for now, I think we can use the hard copy that we found.
>> Can can we just take it and accept that the picture that's on the screen is what we call a bird's eye view and the picture that you have been provided the perspective is slightly different but it does not materially differ to the extent of knowing where where the place is.
>> I would agree with that issue.
>> Thank you.
there was standing here. He was shooting from this point.
Can I just mark my face?
>> I couldn't go.
>> Yeah, that's why shooting from there.
>> Yeah, he was shooting from there was >> Yeah.
on big of bushes.
>> Yes.
>> Shooting >> from here. Yeah.
>> Okay. And standing.
>> Standing. This is the table.
>> Yes.
>> About here where I've got it.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
Okay.
Take a picture of this.
Okay. Okay.
Okay.
Oh my god. Um so um we suggest that it be indicated on the map because we see now a point which is marked in the color it looks like orange. We can all agree on that. Orange and green. The orange is where Mr. Taylor was standing and the green is from where he was shooting. I think we just >> I think we just mark it on the map.
>> Mark it as such.
>> Yeah. Just mark it. put an arrow there and then right uh tell was standing and the other one the the orange was where he was standing from and the green is where he was lying on his tummy and shooting from >> shooting. That's good.
I wanted to think something has been published. Tell her we tell her tomorrow.
>> Okay.
>> Are we done?
>> We are done.
>> Okay. Good. Tell it tomorrow in the morning.
>> Thank you, Mr. You may continue.
>> Thank you, my lord. If the Google map photo can then be received by this court as exhibit C.
Is there any objection?
>> I've got no objection.
>> Thank you.
Did you remain in one?
>> Are you still busy with it? Uh, Mr. Cricket.
>> Um, my lord, perhaps it would be good for the witness just to have it in front of him while he's testifying. And I will request that it be handed up when we're done if it pleases the court.
Were you stationary in one place while you were shooting?
>> I was in one place.
>> Was the BMW right in front of you at the time that the shooting occurred.
>> It was It was in front of me.
>> I wouldn't shoot it from behind. It was in front of me. That's good.
>> So, the side of a BMW that was facing you would then be the left side of the BMW. Is that correct?
>> Yes.
Because now the the BMW is facing at the robots. then I'll be on the left hand side.
>> I'm not referring to any robots at the moment, sir. So, you're confusing me with your answer.
>> The place where you were lying down where you were when you fired the 15 shots. That BMW, according to your statement and according to your evidence, was right in front of you.
And I'm merely asking you the side of the vehicle that was facing you was the left side. Not the front, not the back, not the right side, but the left side.
Left hand side passm.
It was on the left hand side of the BMW.
It was on the left hand side of a BMW.
>> Are you raising your voice to me, sir?
>> That's that's how I'm I'm talking.
Okay. So whilst the gunman from the BMW was shooting, the BMW was still in front of you with a passenger side of a vehicle, the left hand side of a vehicle closest to you, facing you. Correct.
leftw.
Okay.
I don't know how to explain it. Can I show you counselor?
>> Yes. Because interpreter >> there's something >> two people when the BMW was stationary for 3 seconds, two people are lighted here >> and it drove and it came to a stationary here.
Okay, I follow the judge.
When it was when it paused for 3 seconds, he two occupants of that motor vehicle are lighted and then it came and stopped here.
Thank you so much.
>> At the time, sir, that you were firing shots.
>> So, did you counsel?
>> My apologies.
>> And to Miss Lu as well >> and just show it to the accused as well.
This way.
>> Yeah, >> maybe the interpreter can just again because my learned friend seems to have heard something else. Maybe the explanation can be given aloud to us.
What? So we can understand >> you are saying the stop for 3 seconds.
>> You can pause here for 3 seconds and then when you pause you no two are lighting >> at the drove up to your station.
Salt.
He says, "Two people got Yes, we are done.
>> Thank you, my lord. May I now proceed?
>> Yes, you may.
>> When you were firing shots, sir, were you firing in the direction of the BMW or were you firing in the direction of where you showed us that two people got out of a vehicle?
I was shooting at the BMW and I take it that at that stage the shooters was then in the vicinity of a vehicle.
What up?
>> Repeat your question again.
>> Ask him where they were. Just ask him where they were.
>> Where were the shooters at the time that you fired at BMW? Let me Okay. They were on the street >> but near the BMW or some distance away from the BMW.
>> There was they were not far from that BMW.
>> Can you indicate a distance here in court?
Please take into account I'm asking about the time that you fired, sir.
How far away from the BMW?
>> Can I use this court?
>> Yeah.
>> Is the distance from where I'm testifying from to your distance? 6. I just want to make sure that the witness understands that it's not the distance that he was from the BMW, but where the shooters were from the BMW.
>> Just repeat that.
>> Just clarify with the witness the question.
MMW I think there's a there's a misunderstanding. Um my learn my colleague here indicates that there may be a misunderstanding between the interpreter and the workers.
>> Mhm.
>> Right. What was the what Mr. Kia? Just let's start at the beginning.
>> What was the question that you were looking for? You you wanted to know if the shooters were in the proximity of the BMW >> at the time that the witness fired.
>> Yeah. So at the time when you fired when you fired shots, council wants to know whether the shooters were in the proximity of the BMW. And your answer was they were on the street not far from the BMW. Then the council asked you can you estimate the distance now what is it that you want him to estimate >> the distance from the BMW to the shooters >> right so the distance where the BMW was parked the left hand side was facing you it's standing on the street what was the distance between the BMW and the two shooters ism.
Okay. Yes.
I would say the distance is from where counelor is standing up to the lady who's wearing a green jersey >> in the front row.
>> On the front row?
>> Yes, in the front row.
>> You say about 2 to 3 m.
>> 2 m. as the court pleases my lord.
>> You >> and then >> can you please tell the court whether the BMW was between you and the Golf and the Ferrari?
space.
>> Yes. According to the space. Yes.
So you were firing at the BMW which was in the middle between you and Ferrari and the golfer.
Yes.
Thank you.
And you have some of the shots that you fired hit the left passenger side of a BMW. Is that correct?
BMW.
Yes.
>> And you indicated that you struck not only the vehicle but also the mirror and the windows.
Yes, I shot at a motor vehicle. Yes, I did struck the the the mirror, sight mirror and windscreen.
And then even the shooters also they were now confused at the other side.
They could even shoot it shoot each other.
Okay. And you have indicated yesterday that it was in fact the left side mirror of a vehicle that was struck, which is in line with what you've now described to the court.
Yes.
After the incident, you went and took a picture of the cover of the side mirror that fell. Is that correct?
Yes. After the police were done about their investigations.
So you only went to take a picture of a mirror after the police were already done. Leave. Were they gone already?
So they left behind.
>> Yes. Maybe is the way they are operating.
>> I'm not asking. Maybe you were there.
You know, you took the pictures of the mar cover after the police left.
>> Yes.
And where was this mar line?
Was it in the road or the vehicles that drive out of the estate?
It was lying on the road. That road of a scene.
>> Yes. But that's the road where you've described where the BMW was at the time of the shooting.
Yes, that's correct. And as it was the left mirror, would it have been the left side of the road where it was lying?
>> Yes.
>> Thank you, sir.
Did you tell the police about the pictures that you took?
I am >> No, I did not tell them.
Now I want to continue with what I was dealing with you before the lunchon interval with the statements.
Now we have dealt with the statement A6 A6 A exhibit B that was the one you've already dealt with and exhibit A the type statement A27 A6 A6 A is B.
>> Yes. And >> and I'm now going to deal with you with A6.
>> A6 A6.
>> We having A6B and A6 A we are dealing with now >> with A6. The one that doesn't have the A. I don't know if you have the statement. I have asked my for the state for the original. I don't know if it's been placed in your file already.
>> Exhibit B.
>> I do have an exhibit B which is A6.
>> Yeah, you've got it there.
>> Yes, I do have it.
>> Excellent. It It contains It's comprised of three pages.
>> Yes, ma'am. I do.
>> Excellent. All right.
>> It's got the signature 11th August 2022 023.
>> Yes, ma'am.
>> Excellent. You're on the same page, Mr. Groia. You may proceed. Thank you.
>> It's not my lord. It's A6. It's not A6A.
A6A is already handed to the court. And >> which exhibit number you referring to?
>> This one doesn't have an exhibit number yet.
>> I think Guban is going to assist in >> Oh. Oh. So, we're not dealing with exhibit B now.
>> No m.
>> Okay. Mr. Gubani, you can please assist.
Thank you. Oh, it's not.
>> So, what is that there now? Yeah, this is >> A6.
>> This is A6. Yeah.
>> What is the date of that statement?
>> The date, my lord, is uh help 16 August.
>> It's um 16th August 2022.
>> Right. So, we're on the same page between council coming on witness. Thank you.
Thank you, my lord. Now you will recall that just before the lunchon interval I dealt with you with the fact that it was 5 days after you made your initial statement A6A that you then made this further statement A6.
Yes, I do remember.
>> Did you make the statement on the request of the investigating officer at the time?
>> The statement was yes, that's correct.
>> And the investigating officer wanted a further statement from you to clear up certain aspects.
Is that correct?
>> Okay.
That's correct.
>> One of the aspects that I see that is dealt with in more in detail in A6 is the amount of people that was in the Gulf because in your first statement you said there were two people in the Ferrari but you didn't mention how many people were in the golf.
That's the one I speak one had one occupant.
>> Sorry, Mr. Interpreter.
>> The G had one occupant.
>> So, are you saying now that the Ferrari when it arrived had only one person inside?
Yes.
>> And the golf had how many people?
>> Oh, golf had one occupant and Ferrari had two occupants.
>> Yes. So, I don't know why we had this confusion now.
>> That is what the investigating officer wanted cleared up with you at the time.
But you must say how many people were were in each one of the vehicles. And you explain two in the Ferrari, one informing inform the investigation officer about the occupants of the both motor vehicle.
>> Yes. Now there's another aspect dealt with in this second statement and that is with regard to the actual shooting circumstances.
Yes, I can hear you.
>> Now, in this second statement that we well first labor basis, you and the investigating officer who took down the statement from you, you understood each other. Am I correct?
Yeah.
>> Yes, we did understand each other.
>> Okay. Now, the process of taking the statement, did you did he first ask you questions and then he wrote down what you told him or was he writing sentence by sentence as you were speaking to him?
word by word >> what happened even though I can remember that he was obtaining a statement word by word I don't remember whether I narrated to him first and after I've narrated to him first then he obtain wrote it down. I don't remember >> you see where you signed the statement on the second page.
>> Yes, I do agree this is my signature.
>> Right above your signature is paragraph 8. Is that correct?
>> That's correct.
>> Can you read it to the court, please?
>> Yes, I can.
>> I know and I understand the content of this statement. I have no >> objection in the present >> in taking the prescribed oath >> prescribed oath.
>> Yes, I assist the practical and oath to the >> I binding to my conscience.
>> Sorry my lord just can I help there? It >> says I consider >> I consider >> the prescribed oath >> to be binding on my conscience.
>> Is that correct? Is that what it says there?
Is that correct?
>> Is that indeed correct?
>> Yeah.
>> So when you signed a statement, you knew and you understood the contents of a statement.
>> Yes.
Understanding the contents >> and you also initial the first page.
Yes, >> it's clear that you're able to read English quite well. Can you recall whether the statement was read to you by the police officer or whether you read it yourself before you signed it?
No, I read it for myself.
>> And you were happy with the content.
>> Yes, I was happy with the content.
>> Okay. I submit that a proper basis has been laid, my lord. I will now continue to deal with the content of the statement.
it.
I want to refer you to paragraph 4.
I don't have there's a certain section that's blocked out. So I see only one and then the next number I see is four.
But you see number four more or less in the middle of the page.
>> Yes.
Four. We are there.
Can you read that paragraph to the court, please?
>> Yeah. Two vehicles arrived at about 2236.
It was >> It was a golf.
>> It was a Golf. White in color and red Ferrari. Three males were in the two vehicles.
One male in the white Golf and two males in red Ferrari. Two males in the red Ferrari went to the white VW.
Uh >> and they were talking >> and they were talking. I then noticed a white BMW came to the >> parking >> parking area and the occupants fired >> bullets at the three males from the red Ferrari and the white golf then that's it.
>> Can you read the first sentence of the next paragraph? Paragraph five as well please.
First collect your card.
>> My lord, I apologize if copies hasn't been handed to your lordship and my colleagues. We are in possession of copies. If your lordship wishes to have a copy in my lord, >> it's on the screen.
>> Oh, it's on the screen. Thank you my lord.
>> Any objections regarding the authenticity of that document on the screen? Thank you.
>> Thank you my lord.
So read the first sentence of paragraph 5 please.
>> I then analyze the situation first and then fired shot not the BMW end >> at >> at the BMW and its occupants. I fired um 15 times according to my >> observation >> obser observation and I could have injured one of the suspect the firearm >> the person >> the person was firing kept on firing and saying he meaning die your dog >> okay you don't need to go further I've just asked for the first sentence so am I correct that in this statement you explain that the white BMW came to the parking area >> and the occupants fired gunshots at the three males from the red Ferrari and the white Golf.
BMW and then you analyze the situation first and then you fired shots >> at the BMW and its occupants.
Yeah.
after they have started shooting.
>> What do you mean what they are doing?
>> I wouldn't shoot at the people who came to park at the parking lot and starting shoot them as now I am an inquisitive person. I won't do that.
>> Yes. So it's very clear that you state what happened is you saw the people from lighted from the golf that shot at the occupants of a Ferrari and the golfer and then you analyzed it and then that's when you went into action and fired the 15 shots.
I cut.
>> Please don't be long.
>> Just cut. You're questioning.
>> Now in the first statement, sir, A6A, not this one. The first statement, the one made on the 11th, exhibit A. uh exhibit B you gave a different version >> and that is I'll put it to you why you made the statement in your first statement you made mention of the fact that they were actually firing shots at in your direction statement.
Yeah. You >> Yes. is them.
In your first statement in paragraph 3, A6A, exhibit B, you said that I think two shots were fired in our direction.
Two shots.
Yes. They were shooting.
>> They were shooting towards our direction. Not me, them.
Yes. Now, I put it to you that the second statement that is taken from you 5 days later, there's no longer any mention of shots that were fired in your direction.
M after Wednesday I'm I'm narrating the statement according to the questions.
If the person who's obtaining the statement from me ask me a question, I will answer the question.
I I will not out of the blue telling him what he did not ask me.
So isn't it that the investigating officer first discussed your statement and the events with you and consulted with you and then realized that he needed to do a second statement to clarify two aspects. The one, how many people were in the vehicles of the Ferrari and the Golf? And the other one regarding the shooting where you specifically say they were firing at the occupants of a Ferrari and the Golf >> and you analyzed the situation and you then went into action and you fired. You don't say anything about any shots being fired at you or in your direction.
>> I'm going to do this one advocate, but I'll request you to be very much short so that they can >> My apologies Mr. Interpreter.
>> I will I'll request you to repeat it so that they can interpret.
You made an initial statement.
Thereafter, the investigating officer discussed the matter with you on the date that you made the second statement.
You've already confirmed Yes.
>> Now the second statement differs from the first statement in that in the first statement you made mention about being shots being fired at you.
And now you make a second statement that you say they shot at the occupants of a BMW in the Gulf. And you analyze the situation and then you decided to shoot at them.
out of nowhere.
>> They were the one who started the shooting. I will not >> I will not shoot at people from nowhere.
They are the one who started the shooting.
>> Yes, sir. That we agree on.
You eventually made a third statement A27 which is exhibit B.
>> Statement is exhibit A.
>> My apologies. This is quite correct.
Exhibit.
>> But while we're on this point, I'm I'm still repeating my previous objection.
is is this crime scene really in dispute and in the end what are these discrepancies really going to prove is the fact that Mr. Siboni was wounded that there were shots fired at victims that are now um complainants in attempted murder um charges is that re is this kind of cross-examination really taking us anywhere closer to the point of dispute? He does not even identify any of the shooters. Mr. Kier, >> I don't know if that's an objection.
If it's an objection against the line of questioning to the witness that he contradicted himself and changed his version in the three different statements, then I respectfully submit that the relevance appears from the questions and the answers. That's what I'm dealing with at >> Are you are you tackling the crossexamination on the basis of determining the credibility of the witness? My lord, with respect, I will show very shortly the reason why I'm dealing with it and what I'm putting to the witness. Right for now the court will allow the rest in that regard.
>> You see sir again in exhibit A27 in paragraph 6 the last sentence the typed statement Mr. Interpreter.
>> Exhibit A.
>> Exhibit A. a type statement paragraph six that's the first line instead of eight >> yes we are there >> okay I'm going to read to you to try and speed up the proceedings the last sentence of paragraph six I could hear that some of Bullets were coming towards me from the suspects, but I continued shooting at them.
>> Paragraph >> six.
>> Last sentence.
suspect.
I could hear some bullets on there.
My lord, my lord, I'm tired of this.
I mean, I mean, my lord, you're not going anywhere. Really, I'm tired about this.
>> Why? My lord, I'm tired about this.
I'm really tired, my If it was a sin, my lord, to protect a client, I really my lord, I don't know.
It seems as if >> it's like I'm the one who started the scene >> and desperation. Don't be too desperate, my friend.
Lord, >> no. I'm tired. Lord, no.
I can't do it anymore. I'm tired.
Seriously, >> Lord, I've noticed throughout this witness's cross evidence both yesterday and today that the witness doesn't act in accordance to what one expects of a witness to act. He keeps on asking questions which is not permitted to do.
He's an accountant towards um uh in answering questions. He doesn't want to answer the questions and that is not permitted of a witness that gives evidence. And I'm going to ask your lordship in the execution of your lordship's duties to admonish the witness at this point that he's here to answer questions and he's not here to act in the manner that he's currently acting. May please the court.
>> Mr. My lord, perhaps I can just move on in the sake of progress and try and deal with this as quickly as possible. I don't believe we should get involved in argumentative Mr. I thought I heard Mr. Kier saying after the objection of the state that he is in fact going to make a point. We are all waiting patiently for it. Hopefully he'll make that point very soon. So I'm asking you to please listen carefully to the questions. Mr. Provier has the right to put questions to you as many as he deems appropriate in the circumstances.
You just need to be patient. Hopefully we going to get to a point very soon.
Let's wait for it. It will come.
Yeah. Hi. Yes.
>> So, yeah, I do understand. Yeah, we are all on a journey and the bus driver is council for accuse number two. He's taking us along a journey. Let's just follow his lead and then he will take us to the destination.
>> And you must remember Yeah. And you must remember this court does not know where council is going. does not know what is important and what is relevant. And it cannot simply stop the legal representative of accuse number two from asking these questions because then at the end of the day, accuse number two could very well argue that his right to a fair trial was impinged upon on the basis that his legal representative was not provided a firm and a fair opportunity to be able to cross-examine you.
last.
So, but my lord I will ask he must not repeat the same thing >> same question >> same questions >> but sometimes maybe your answer is not very clear which is causing him to try and continue to clarify matters Can I perhaps just ask you, Mr. >> I I can hear you, man.
>> Are you are you okay to continue for the rest of the afternoon or what is your position?
Let's continue.
>> Thank you very much. But you understand what the court has explained to you?
>> Yes, my lord. I understand.
>> I can I can perhaps maybe following your evidence understand that sometimes you are becoming a little frustrated.
But the nature of the proceedings are such that we have to have certain matters ventilated and ventilated properly.
That is why but the court will give you its assurance that where it is necessary for you to be protected the court will immediately come to your assistance.
But in the main for now, thank you. Just sit back, relax, take a deep breath and just listen to the questions that are coming and just give a straightforward answer to those questions.
Okay, >> thank you so much. Are you comfortable?
>> Yes, I am.
>> You understand what the court explained to you?
>> I do understand, man.
>> And do you have your permission to continue?
Let's continue.
>> Thank you very much for that. Mr. Pro, you may continue. Thank you. Thank you, my lord.
So, I'm pointing out to you that you made three different statements. One on the day of the incident, one 5 days later, and one a considerable time thereafter in 2025 last year.
days when the senior statement 2025.
>> Yes, that's correct.
>> In your first statement, you said I think that shots were fired in our direction.
Yes, that's correct.
In your second statement, there's no mention of shots being fired in your direction.
I will repeat myself that I will answer the questions the way I've been questioned.
If the IO or investigate investigation officer did not engage me in that I won't tell and then in the third statement you said that you could hear some of the bullets were coming to towards you.
income.
>> I'll tell you what impression I get from that.
>> You will recall that you conceded that the BMW was between you and the Ferrari and the Golf and the occupants.
Yeah.
>> Yes.
>> And I put it to you, sir, that you as a security guard acted according to how you assess the situation. As you stated in your second statement, you analyzed the situation of people shooting at other people before you got involved in also shot.
Now, let me continue with my question.
I'm breaking it up for you so that the interpreter can follow.
Mr. was shot twice in the stomach.
>> It's the first time I I hear I'm putting it to you.
>> I don't know how many.
>> Those are the facts. You can accept that. He has two bullet wounds.
>> I'm putting it to you. So, you can just accept it.
>> I won't agree with you. I'm not a doctor. I was not there.
>> You don't have to agree. I'm putting it to you. I'm telling you what happened is he was shot twice.
But maybe you are having a knowledge of that.
>> Yes, I do. The state has given it to us.
>> Yeah.
But >> just listen to the question, sir.
>> I haven't finished the question yet.
>> Dispute the fact that Mr. Sabuni was shot twice.
even more than twice.
>> Can you dispute it?
>> I I won't dispute it.
>> Thank you. Mr. survived.
>> Yes, he did survive.
And is it not correct that you are working for him >> after this incident where council is asking you a simple question.
It doesn't require a long explanation.
He's just simply saying or putting a proposition to you. Is it not correct that you are employed by Mr. Sabin? It's either it's either a yes or a no answer.
What is your response?
>> My answer is no.
>> Have you never worked for him?
>> I work for him through another company.
>> Oh, so you did work for Mr. Are you still working for him?
>> Sorry. Before the witness answers that, the answer he gave is that he works for Mrs. Saboni through another company. I think it's only fair to give him the opportunity to explain that.
>> Thank you. Please explain.
>> I'm not working direct with Mr. He's not the one who's paying me. I'm working for him through another company.
>> Yes.
Now, if someone was shot twice in the stomach with an AK-47, I doubt if he would have survived.
AK47 based on why does my learning friend make this assumption?
>> Mr. >> is he now a medical expert?
>> Yeah, >> Mr. I I I think maybe you should just rephrase that question because you're going to pick up criticism and an objection to say that you're not a ballistics expert and uh perhaps you should re rephrase and say there's a reasonable possibility if a person is shot with a high velocity fire that his chances of survival are minimal. I think that that would you find that to be palatable?
>> Yes ma'am.
>> Thank you my lord. believe a witness can then answer that question.
>> So what what what Mr. Kier is putting to you is that if a person is shot with a high velocity firearm and to that extent being an AK-47 firearm, the chances of a person surviving that attack upon himself is minimal. What would your response be?
AK47 I don't >> I do not have an idea of that knowledge of the Now, is there a possibility that one of one or more of the shots that you fired could have hit Mr. No mm of 9 mm.
When you shoot or shoot someone with 90 mm, it cannot have entrance wood and exit wood.
>> Even if you can shoot at a motor vehicle, it's rare >> that a 9 mm can do that.
>> Actually, what do you want to say to me?
>> I engage you now on a test. Let's go and test an expert, >> sir. Are you now an expert?
when somebody's fired shot with a 9 mm whether there has to be an exit wound and how do you know what the evidence is in this matter? How do you know whether there's exit winds or not?
Never.
school.
Yes, with 9 mm, you know, you you can't shoot with a 9 mm small, I don't know whether lack of better word, the shotgun or what or 9 mm. You cannot shoot maybe at at the car and then the bullet and can have an entrance and exit because it depends on the caliber of the firearm.
If it's an rifle, then that can happen, but not a small firearm.
>> So, the evidence in this matter will be that there were at least six bullets that hit the BMW motor vehicle allegedly.
You fired 15.
>> So you missed the vehicle nine times or possibly nine times.
times those who were using a rifle or AK.
Did they tell you that even the horse of the there at St. There were bullets on the halls? Even the houses, >> even the houses, did they did they tell you that? Did they inform you?
>> Sir, I'm not here to answer your questions. You are here to answer my questions. Now, my question to you has got nothing to do with a caliber of a firearm and whe a bullet wound has an entry and an exit wound. My question to you is a very simple one.
you firing for according to your evidence at the BMW.
The BMW is between you and the Golf and the Ferrari and the people.
You want to interpret first interpret?
Yes. Going to give you a further opportunity to now respond to the question. whether there's a possibility that one of the rounds that you fired or two of the rounds that you fired could have struck Mr. What about the runs of AK? What did they do?
Sir, I've given you now a second chance to say to the court what your response is to the statement that it's possible that you could be the one who shot Mr. I'm not agreeing to that.
>> Thank you.
Now I put it to you that the impression that I get is that initially you were quite scared after you and I fired for 15 rounds and Mr. Sibon was injured that you made up the story that you gave in your first statement that night.
Mhm.
This is >> This is a miracle.
No, it's it's not like a dog now entering my premises or inside my my my house. Really, this is a miracle to me.
Just move on.
>> Any response?
>> Can I move on?
>> I've never What was the reason for me to have shot him?
>> Well, what about accidentally?
That is from you, my brother.
>> Now, on your version, they were on the other side of the BMW.
The Ferrari and the Golf, or let me rather put it this way, the BMW was between you, the Ferrari, the Golf, and its occupants. So, if you missed the car, you could very well have shot one of them.
I'm still asking what those what What were they doing there? Those people, were they there for a dance or what?
What was the reason for them to be there?
>> So I have now on numerous occasions put it to you that you are not to ask questions from me. Respect to the court.
I'm asking the questions and you are supposed to answer the questions to the best of your ability.
I I I did not know that I must ask Lordship some questions. I thought I'm here for us to share some information.
I think I think >> the council is putting to you that you accidentally shot Mr. What is your answer?
No.
>> The second aspect he put and I think you need to give an answer to. He says that when you made up you when you made your first statement, you actually made up a story to protect yourself because you had shot him. What do you have to say about that?
No, I wouldn't do that.
>> You saw you saw how quickly the question came and how quick the answer was.
You see, do the same with Mr. He'll be gone very soon.
Understood, man.
>> Thank you, my lord.
Sir, you will recall that when you testified yesterday, you were referring to the other one that was trying to get out of a motor vehicle and you said, "Come back. If you go there, there's no protection." When somebody wanted to go in the direction of the intersection, the robots Yes, I do remember.
>> So, people were running in different directions.
I'm now referring to the occupants of the Golf and the Ferrari.
Yeah. At the time they were talking they they were talking they were around BM.
They were no longer there by the Ferrari.
>> You probably mean the golf not to BM.
call.
Okay. The two cars were involved in a shot. It was a BMW and a Golf. Mhm.
>> Because the occupants of that BMW, they were shooting at the golf.
>> And the people from a vicinity of a golf was running in different directions.
They run towards the BM.
>> They run towards the BM that they were that they were that they were traveling with you know if they ever tried to board inside. I don't know.
They're very brave to run into the direction of where people are shooting at them from with an AK-47.
But I will leave that. I will leave that for argument.
AK47.
Yes. Leave it because my my lord of lack of better word my lord you know say what he said.
>> Yes it's difficult. Let's leave it because I can see that it's difficult for you to make a point on that your attitude that you are displaying towards council who is asking a questions and towards me clearly appears from the record. So I'm not going to say anything further about that.
Let me move on to something else. You and Mazibuka were together the timer at the BMW, right?
I I just want to answer on the character that you are saying of my behavior. I need to answer the door.
You see when we are inside this courtroom we have different characters and then we differ in delivering a speech of how we are talking of how we are talking you can disagree with me if I'm saying that have you heard My last question, sir.
>> You can repeat the question. You and Mr. Mazibuko were together at the time that the shooting incident occurred. Correct.
Yes. Correct.
You testified yesterday that Mazibuko spoke to you.
Yes.
>> Can you still remember what he said to you?
The first word of Mr. was one or two shot >> after they fire they fired two shot at us.
>> Then he said let's go and refuge oursel no hide oursel.
Mhm. What else?
>> At the time when shots were firing at us.
>> I was standing there and I was scared at the time.
>> No, not standing but hiding.
>> Or at a time when I was hiding there, I was scared.
Then you know who said to me how can you die? How can we die whilst you are in the position of a firearm?
actually is the one who remind me and said how can we die whilst you are in the position of this of the fire up >> maybe for the for him to remind me is because of the shooting that was take place maybe that makes me my mind to forget because of the shooting So it is then clear that according to your testimony, Mazibuka was well aware of the fact that shots were being fired at the two of you.
Yeah.
>> Yes. And you see we have been provided by the state with his affidavit >> and he says in his statement he doesn't know in which direction they shot >> I have to object to this the statement is not before court and the defense can't even rely on the fact that we're going to call that witness >> I've been provided with an affidavit by the state. That is what the witness says. It is on the list of list of witnesses. I'm giving this witness an opportunity to respond to it should Mr. Mazibu come and say that. So I'm merely trying to assist him in that regard because it's a clear contradiction.
>> Also the case law entitled to use >> case law says you're entitled to use a statement a witness before he's testified. I cannot really um even weigh the the the value of this statement at this stage. The statement is not proven and the and there's no guarantee that we're going to call this witness.
>> So, Mr. K, can I just ask you um you obviously want to show you want to obviously indicate to him that this witness did not indicate that they were being shot at.
>> Indeed. So yes, >> perhaps the only thing a better way to perhaps navigate it would be to say if someone were to come to this court and say that shots were never fired at the two of you. What would your comment be?
>> My lord, I wouldn't have an objection to the question being rephrased in that >> I think you can. That may be a better way to navigate it.
>> Have you heard the question by the court?
>> So Mr. If someone were to come to this court and give evidence and say look at the time when this incident was taking place no shots were being fired at yourself and Mr. What would your comment be?
I would disagree with that person.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir.
The court can just bear with me for a moment.
If somebody was to come to this court and say that the BMW the mirror cover was damaged, but it was not the left mirror, it was the right mirror. You can't be correct. Am I right?
BMW.
>> I won't disagree with I will disagree with that person.
>> You are 100% sure it's a left mirror.
>> Left.
Yes, >> I'm sure.
>> May I just approach case number two?
Thank you my lord.
So it is your evidence that the language that you heard being spoken between the occupants of the BMW was Zulu. Correct?
>> Yes. Accuse number two will say firstly that he was not present and secondly that he's not Zulu speaking. He's not Zulu speaking.
>> Let's break it out into separate separate opposition being put to you. He said accused number two will dispute and deny ever being present on the scene on that evening. What do you have to say?
I choose number one or I choose number two or number three or number 10. Why?
>> Yes my lord. I will not dispute that my lord because in my testimony I never mention their name. I've never said that. I've never mentioned the name of accuse number one or appoint number one. No, accuse number two or accuse number three or accuse number 10.
The second aspect that is being put to you that accuse number two if called to give evidence will come and dispute and deny that he speaks.
Hey, I will agree with you. This is this is how Yeah, this is how this is melodic.
He might speak his home language.
Sometimes he can speak.
Maybe the accused person when is with his friends he speak Zulu.
You're just speculating now, right?
>> You don't know.
number I don't know whe this is South Africa we speak any language that you like to speak at the time when you want to use that language the court can just bear with me my lord.
I see it is 8 minutes to 4. I have undertaken to my client and I will confirm with him prior to finishing my cross examination.
>> I can give you a few moments if you want. Thank you my lord.
If I may approach Did you get your sandwich?
Thank you my lord. My client has asked me to just also deal with one aspect which has been partially dealt with by advocate.
So I'm going to try and deal with that very briefly.
So in your first statement that you made after the incident that night, you indicated you didn't know what time it was that the incident happened. You didn't have your phone with you. You're not allowed to have your phone with you while you're on duty.
remember my cell phone.
>> And what else? Cell phones and what?
>> You're not allowed to have a cell phone with you while you're working.
>> You did not have your cell phone with you.
And you said that the only way that you can know the time is by having your phone which you didn't have with you. So you didn't know what time the incident happened.
>> Yeah.
After the incident.
>> I want you to listen to me.
Yes. After that incident, I ran to fetch my handset or my cell phone because now I was supposed to give a report and I wanted to write an exact time.
It's approximately 2135 then somewhere there.
>> Yes, I I've mentioned the time I said it was 213035 then around 2145 >> 2235 >> 2235 years and around 2245 that's where the shooting ensued. Hey then.
Yes. And I said that I don't want to involve myself in telling you the time because I might incriminate myself because I know you that you know you will capitalize on time and color.
Somebody will engage you on color and then and it will be at night and will ask you then how was the color of the clothes that person was wearing.
>> Okay. So, so it's your evidence that immediately after the incident, you went and got your phone and you knew exactly what time the people arrived, what time the shooting incident happened because you went and checked your phone for that very reason.
It's it's minutes then anything can happen.
>> He said it's an estimation. I thought >> it it was an estimation, you know, from the from the place where I was where the incident took place to go to the office is only a minute.
>> No, it's not it's not a minute.
>> It's not a minute. Okay.
Crime scene.
>> Yes.
Okay. Okay. From the scene to go to the office, I must go now.
I must go there and then before I can enter I must knock first. I must wait for someone to come and open for me.
>> Then I will use some steps as the steps and descend you don't count those. You are only concentrating on the scene minutes or time.
>> Are you quite done now, sir?
>> Yeah, I'm done.
>> Thank you. I'm done.
>> In your first statement, we've established that you made your statement 2:30 in the morning hours after the incident happened.
A6A exhibit B30.
>> What time did the officer arrive? the officer that obtained my statement.
>> So, how many times do you want me to ask you not to ask me questions?
>> Just give the answer >> because you see the the challenge is neither the court nor Mr. have it within their own personal knowledge what time the officer came.
>> So, it's a question that you're asking just wasting valuable time.
Right.
>> Say that I I I narrate the statement at the time the police officers police officer arrive. So the point is when the incident was still fresh in your memory, that same night in the early hours of the morning to be more exact, you made a statement in which you said that you did not know what time this incident occurred and you gave this explanation that you didn't have your phone at the time and then you could remember properly.
Subsequently, you were influenced by a lot of things. you got a lot more information and we know now that you worked for a company connected to Mr. Sivani for Mr. So you must have got a lot of information about what time the incident happened. But that night you said you didn't know what time it happened and that was the truth.
There's nothing like that.
My lord, it is now 4:00. My client has raised his hand again and he's continuously raising his hand. There's clearly some further aspects that I need to deal with. May I suggest we're not going to finish with this witness. In any event, my colleagues still have to cross-examin cross-examine the witness. May I suggest that it's an opportune time to adjourn until tomorrow morning?
>> Good. Miss Lu.
>> Good.
May I ask for the report indulgence to have that map that was handed up. Can I have that so that I can scan it? And >> shall I give you the bad news?
It never never made its way here at all.
>> Oh, so it's not before your work.
>> It's still sitting there. Mr. P, you want to hand it to the stage?
>> Ask if the court will receive it now as >> exhibit exhibit >> D. D.
>> C is Oh, sorry. That is C. That is Yeah, just let me have that exhibit.
>> Google map and D is then the statement A6.
>> Can I have that exhibit, please? The one with the with the orange dot and the green dot.
>> Um, sorry, Miss Lur, you wanted to make a copy of that document, right?
Please.
>> So, I think what we'll do, let me just mark it >> and then I'll just give it to you. Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> Then you can hand it up to the court tomorrow.
>> I just want to make sure. So, exhibit D is then the last statement that was um dealt with is AC.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> Oops. Just give me this for C.
Jesus.
Uh you can give that to the council.
Yeah.
The accused may rise. Thank you.
We have run out of sitting court hours today which necessitates the matter to be postponed. Therefore, by agreement between the parties, your matter then is postponed. back to the High Court of South Africa Division Johannesburg sitting here at the High Court 4F to Thursday the 23rd day of July 2026 at 09 hours 30 or soon thereafters the matter shall be heard. Accused number one 2 and three gentlemen you are in custody you shall remain in custody until tomorrow.
Accuse number four and five. Ladies, you both are on bail. Your bail is also extended according to the same conditions as previously.
The state witness, Mr. Bethwell Zamo Baba, you are warned to please return to this court tomorrow, Thursday, the 23rd day of July, 2026 at 09 hours 30 and to remain in attendance until you are excused. Failure for you to return and or to remain in attendance may result in the state applying for a warrant for your arrest. Good. You understand? Thank you so much. The court then having no further order of business is going to then take the agenda for the day.
Council, see you tomorrow.
>> Uh all right, Mr. Duru, here's your pointer.
>> Thank you very much.
probably yummy.
Related Videos
54:37
Law
Session 5: Law, Genomic Medicine & Health Equity Conference/Webcast -- Dr. Consuelo Wilkins
UMNconsortium
234 views•2019-01-02
24:55
Law
Consider This: ICJ Climate Ruling — Holding Nations to Account
astroawani
307 views•2025-08-11
14:10
Law
The Third Gender I Legal Recognition of Intersex Community
KBCChannel1News
259 views•2023-07-09
3:52
Law
What Are Proceedings In Court? - CountyOffice.org
CountyOfficeLaw
129 views•2025-03-06
46:58
Law
Understanding the EU Electronic Evidence Package | Interview with Cristos Velasco | EP 7
DejanKosutic
816 views•2025-04-22
10:13
Law
8 Violations in ONE Day? Judge West Gives Ultimate Wake-Up Call
LawAndLogicTV
263 views•2026-04-26
2:22
Law
United States v. Navajo Nation Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained
QuimbeeDotCom
589 views•2023-09-21
27:07
Law
Young Professionals: CPR Part 36 Offers with Harry Dyson
kingschambers4859
902 views•2024-04-30
Trending
13:25
Business
Playstation NO DISC/NO BUY Fight Is Over...
DavidJaffeGames
4K views•2026-07-23
16:52
Anthropology
Americans Confused in Australia for 17 Minutes Straight
IWrocker
17K views•2026-07-23
7:38
Blockchain & Crypto
Bitcoin Social Interest: Dozens of us Left
benjaminjcowen
12K views•2026-07-23
11:32
Business
Tesla Profits Plunge & SpaceX Stock Continues Fall
TheJohnJohnstonLounge
6K views•2026-07-23