Case Law[2022] ZAWCHC 201South Africa
Adams and Another v S (A135/2022; CC47/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 201 (17 October 2022)
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
>>
2022
>>
[2022] ZAWCHC 201
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Adams and Another v S (A135/2022; CC47/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 201 (17 October 2022)
Adams and Another v S (A135/2022; CC47/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 201 (17 October 2022)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAWCHC/Data/2022_201.html
sino date 17 October 2022
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE
DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)
CASE NO: A135/2022
CASE NO: CC47/2021
In the matter between
ELCARDO
ADAMS
FIRST APPELLANT
ALFONSO
CLOETE
SECOND APPELLANT
AND
THE
STATE
RESPONDENT
Date of Hearing:
12 September 2022
Date of Judgment:
17 October 2022 (to be delivered via email to the respective counsel)
JUDGMENT
THULARE
J
[1] This is an appeal
against the decision of a magistrate to refuse to grant the
appellants bail. The appellants were charged jointly
with twelve
others on a number of charges which includes contraventions of
section 9(1) of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act,
1998 (Act No.
108 of 1998) (POCA), premeditated murders, conspiracies to commit
murders, attempted murders, possession of unlicenced
firearms and
unlawful possession of ammunition.
[2] The issue is whether
the decision of the magistrate was wrong.
[3] The first appellant,
Adams, testified under oath and also submitted an affidavit which was
made for the bail application. His
testimony was that he had no
previous convictions, pending matters or outstanding warrants of
arrest. He was previously arrested
on separate occasions but the
charges were withdrawn. It was a total of 11 cases that had been
previously withdrawn against him.
He was 31 years of age, unmarried
but in a long term relationship for about 11 years and had two
children from that relationship
and two other children from previous
relationships. He lived at an address is Parow which residence
belonged to his partner’s
mother.
[4] He had matric and
operated a taxi business with two taxis and also ran a business of
buying and selling. He sold hampers, fish
and clothes and made about
R70 000-00 per month. He had a valid passport and was willing to
hand in his passport if granted
bail. He handed himself over the SAPS
and was taken into custody. He knew about three weeks before handing
himself over that he
was to be arrested and added to the case of V.
He had launched an earlier application for bail and was then informed
that there
were 24 charges against him and his co-accused. He had
later received an indictment consisting of 60 counts and that of
those he
faced 27 counts. The first three were POCA matters. He was
told that he was linked to four dockets. He heard that the State
accused
him of being the leader of the 28 Mobster Gang. He was not a
mobster, and not even a 28. He had no tattoos on his body relating
to
gangs. He met the investigating officer (the IO) for the first time
when the IO charged him. He was since his arrest familiar
with who
the investigating officer was. He had shown the IO tattoos on his
body and the IO took photos thereof.
[5] Counts 13 to 16
related to the killing of Hempies Brown (Brown). The State alleged
that T made a statement that he was with
him (Adams) and three other
men, to wit Ore, Spanners and the second appellant (Alfonso) in a
field near a church in Happy Valley
and that T said he (Adams) gave
an instruction that T must drive shooters to go and kill Brown. He
(Adams) had no knowledge about
what T said and that he personally did
not know Brown. He did not tell T to drive shooters to Brown to have
Brown shot. He denied
that after the shooting he met up with T, Thabo
and Alfonso, that Alfonso drove him to that meeting.
[6] Counts 22 to 25
related to the killing of Gilliano Williams. He denied that he met
with T and Spanners at Spanners’ house.
He denied that he had
explained, at that meeting that there was a man who needed to be shot
and killed. He denied that he had told
them to hurry up because
Williams was on a bus on his way to work. Counts 26 to 30 related to
the killing of Shavonne De Wet and
the injury to a three-year-old
child. He denied that he had called T to Takkies’ house. He
denied that he was with Spanners,
Mila, Skapie, Marlin and Ty and
that he had said, according to T, that Corne’ must be taken out
and that must happen at Corne’s
house.
[7] He denied that he had
explained the plan, which was that they must hit Corne’s house
from the front and that Spanners
must wait at the back and that as
Corne ran out, he told T where to drop the people in a car. He denied
the allegations also made
by another witness, U who said that U was
also at Takkies’ house on this day and that Zandre, Marlin,
Takkies, TY, Spanners,
Mila, Skapie and Maxie were also present and
that he (Adams) told those people that they must go to Corne’s
house and shoot
everyone they encountered there, whether inside or
outside the house.
[8] Counts 41 to 51
related to the shooting at Galaxy Night Club. He denied U’s
allegations that U drove with Spanners and
other men to Galaxy. They
stopped at Caltex Garage in Athlone and that he (Adams) was present.
He disputed U’s allegations
that he (Adams) told Marlin,
Nathan, Zandre and Ty to go into the club and shoot Corne and Hannes.
He disputed U’s allegations
that he (Adams) gave them each a
9-millimietre firearm and an amount of money. He disputed that he had
told U to go home. He asked
the court to accept the affidavit hereon
prepared as an exhibit.
[9] His cross-examination
illuminated a few aspects. It came to light that in one of the
withdrawn charges was a count of intimidation
and that Alfonso was
also a co-accused in that matter. The two had approached the
complainant in that matter and demanded that
the complainant should
pay in relation to the operation of a taxi and that they were
threatened with being shot if they did not
pay. It also emerged that
the IO had made contact with the complainant in that matter, and that
according to the complainant he
(Adams) had sent his girlfriend to
the complainant house, with other Mobster gang members, where the
complainant was pointed with
a firearm to sign a withdrawal statement
for the case. Because the complainant was scared, he chose to rather
have the matter withdrawn
than killed. He denied these allegations.
[10] It also came to
light that the IO could not locate the appellants as they could not
be found at their addresses. The IO called
their attorney to report
that his clients were running away and that the attorney must bring
them in. On the day that V appeared
in court, the attorney called him
(Adams) and informed him that the prosecutor and the IO gave 10 names
of persons that the State
wanted, to charge in that matter as well,
and his name was also mentioned. The attorney also indicated that he
was going to hand
him (Adams) over to the police.
[11] He denied a
conspiracy to kill accused 2 in the same matter, at the High Court
appearance on 5 November 2021 when they all
appeared. The State case
was that he (Adams) would have injected accused 2 with poison at the
High Court when he was next to him,
after he (Adams) realized that
the confession made by accused 2 was captured on video footage, and
corroborated the two section
204 witnesses. He denied the allegations
by U that even before any arrest was effected, he (Adams) had given
instructions that
two police officers, Colonel Brown and the IO
should be killed as both were targeting the Mobsters. He disputed
that Colonel Brown
would have been killed on his way from Blue Downs
Court if he did not overtake a truck on a specified date. He also
disputed that
the IO would have been killed in front of Kuilsriver
Police Station had it not been for a car blocking the section 204
witness’s
way on a particular day. The section 204 witness was
with Spanners and Marvin Davids.
[12] Cardo Enterprise,
the business with registration address 9 Luthu Crescent was in the
process of being deregistered as he owed
SARS money and a default
judgment had been obtained. He was in the process of paying SARS and
was delayed by the maternity leave
of the lady attending to the case
at SARS. The address was registered in his sister’s name but
the sister had given the property
to his mother and that is where he
resided since he was about seven years. He could not explain why her
partner deposed to an affidavit
wherein she said he did not live at
the address where he said he lived at, that it was her mother’s
property for which he
was paying rent. He could also not explain why
the IO was told that he did not live in Luthu Crescent but in
Goodwood. It also
transpired that the person the IO found at Luthu
and said Adams did not live there was his sister’s child. His
co-accused,
number 9 in the same matter, also lived there. He also
previously resided in Goodwood which is another property of his
partner’s
mother. He then moved to Paarl. He rented
accommodation and left when contracts expired in Strand, Somerset
West and Gordon’s
Bay.
[13] The police, led by
General Lincoln visited his house, with Carte Blanche, in Goodwood.
He was already staying in Parow at the
time. This was after the
police had visited his home, searched it and alleged that they found
rounds of ammunition in a jacket
pocket. It is after this ammunition
incident that he moved to Parow. He could not explain how the police
were able to trace only
one of his taxis and not the other on the
eNatis system. For the one that could not be traced under his name,
he had supplied [....]
as the licence disc number, but the one the
police could find was [....]. He could not explain the discrepancy,
except to note
that the registration happened when he was in custody.
The vehicle was also registered under Alfonso’s wife. His
explanation
was that their wives worked together, but the vehicle had
been under his name. Alfonso’s wife became worried that he
would
not be able to make payments on their rent -to -own agreement,
and made him sign some documents to transfer it back to her name.
He
did not know how it came about that his bank account and that of his
partner stood at R592 443-00 and R769 043-00
respectively.
[14] He denied the
allegations contained in the alleged confession of V in an Ekurhuleni
matter, where V stated that he and another
went on his (Adams)
instructions to go and kill the deceased. He denied knowledge of the
allegations made in the confession and
pointing out on video that V
and another, under his (Adams) instructions, had to kill Galliano
Williams, one of Hempies’
employees. He denied the allegations
made by V, corroborating the section 204 witnesses and another
witness who shot and injured
V in relation to the incident where De
Wet, the sister-in-law of Hempies was killed. He had no comment to
that a witness identified
V at an ID parade.
[14] He knew V who is
accused number 2 from seeing him around the area of Happy Valley some
years but did not know him personally.
He knew V by his nickname and
came to know his real name after arrest. He did not know where V
stayed. There were no issues between
him and V. He cannot understand
why V said what he said and implicated him. V implicated him as the
person who gave instructions.
He knew that V was on drugs as V used
to ask money from him, praying and craving for a smoke. He also knew
accused 3, known as
Ore, or about 10 years, and knew him through
friends. He knew Alfonso, who was accused number 4 and a co-appellant
since 2015 from
the taxi industry. He grew up with Jonathan Blaauw, a
co-accused known as Takkies. He knew accused number 6 Emile Cleo Vas
Rooi
from just seeing him. He knew Nathan Jonathan Erasmus, accused 7
as he also came from Happy Valley. He did not know accused 8, Tyrone
Engelbrecht but had seen him once or twice before but had never
spoken to him. He knew accused 9, Shelton Africa as he stayed in
his
(Adams) mother’s place since 2018 and as Enrico’s friend.
He knew Zandre Calvin, accused 10 like Sakpe and Emile,
from seeing
them in the area. He went to the same school as accused 11, Marlin
Andrew Benjamin. He lived backstreet to his (Adams)
mother’s
house. He knew accused 12, Rudolf Steenkamp and number 13 Thabiso
Mabuntlela from just seeing them in the area.
He knew accused 14,
Roland Faans through Enrico Otto, for about 5 years.
[15] He was not aware
that the property in Goodwood had been transferred from his partner’s
mother to his partner’s
name. He knew T as they lived in the
same area in Happy Valley. They lived in the same street, which was a
crescent and T lived
on the other part of the street. He grew up in
front of T since pre-primary, and knew T’s nickname. T used to
work for him
cutting or trimming trees and doing some paving, and
they also did long distance driving, and they used to drive together.
T ater
drove his taxis, but he dismissed T after receiving
complaints. T was using drugs and was not trustworthy. T was a
handyman so
he used T to do painting and other work under supervision
after dismissing him. He saw T now and then thereafter. They never
had
any issues, except that he could note a funny attitude whenever T
asked him for money and he did not give it. He disputed T’s
allegation that T knew him as a member of the Mobster gang. He agreed
with T that he let go of him as a taxi driver because Alfonso
was not
happy with T, although T continued to do long distance driving for
him now and then especially to the Eastern Cape.
[16] He disputed T’s
allegations that he (Adams) used to speak about himself, and referred
to himself as the Mobster boss.
He disputed throwing around money at
taverns, to show people who was the boss. He disputed T’s
allegations he (Adams) had
called T to a field and said that he was
tired of Hempies who always shot at them first and made trouble in
his area, and asked
Tl to be the driver to go and check if they could
not find Hempies, who was the leader of Firm, a 28 gang of Kleinvlei,
at Wendy
road. Hempies had businesses in Wendy road. He denied giving
T and his companions information about Hempies whereabouts and what
he was wearing on the day he was shot and before he was killed. He
denied that T and his companions came to him (Adams) after shooting
Hempies, and that Adams was in the company of Alfonso and Spanners.
He denied that he enquired if Hempies had died, and when it
was
confirmed, that he promised to sort them out the following day. He
denied asking T if he had received money from Spanners when
they met
after that day, and that he told T not to say anything about what had
happened.
[17] He denied calling T
to Spanners’ house and informing him that there was someone who
was to be killed as the person regularly
shot at Adams’s people
in Eerste River. He denied telling T to keep quiet about what had
happened after the person was traced
and killed while on his way to
work. The person was targeted when using the bus. He denied that the
instruction to kill the person
was from him. He denied enquiring from
T if he was paid for his role in the killing. He denied giving the
instruction to kill Corne,
Hempies’s son, and that that should
happen at Corne’s home. He denied T’s allegations that
the job was a flop
and since then he (Adams) did not want to speak to
T.
[18] He denied the
allegations by U that U knew him as the leader of the Mobsters gang.
U observed how Adams spoke to other members,
how he gave them
instructions. U was told by him (Adams) that he U only worked for
Adams and that if he had complaints he must
bring them to Adams’
attention only. He denied the rank structure which U gave with him
(Adams) as overall leader of the
Mobsters in Happy Valley, Kleinvlei,
Kraaifontein and Dennemeer. He linked with Ore of Bishop Lavis.
Spanners as second in command
and led in Happy Valley and also
ensured that all instructions of Adams were complied with. Mila was
third in command, reported
to Spanners and was the enforcer who
attended to problems. Mila used Takkies, Stan, Marlin Benjamin,
Zandre, Nathan Erasmus, Abongile,
Bongi and U. Mila was most of the
time present in execution of instructions.
[19] Roland was also a
Mobster who U knew who sold drugs for Adams in Dennemeer. U delivered
tik to the value of R15 000-00
per week to Roland, which he
received from Takkies. U would be present when Takkies received
instructions from Adams to deliver
tik to a Nigerian national. It
would be Adams who indicated where Takkies would meet the Nigerian.
Adams denied knowledge hereof.
U also knew that Shelton Africa, known
as Put, was responsible for the collection of money from the people
selling the drugs.
[21] Put stayed at Adam’s
mother’s house. U was sometimes present when Put collected the
money and deposited it into
Adams’ Absa account at Zevenwacht
Mall. At the time that U was present, it was amounts of between
R15 000-00 or R30 000-00.
Adams admitted that there times
when Shelton paid monies into his account but cannot say if U was
with him. He disputed U’s
allegations of his involvement in the
planning of the attack on Corne. He disputed U’s version that
after T was shot during
the attack on Corne, and was hospitalized, he
instructed U to go and check on T in hospital. He denied that U was
driving around
tik, money and guns for him. He denied U’s
allegations that on his instructions, U would transport firearms to
Shelton and
sometimes between Shelton and Wayne, an Apostle at a
church who lived at the church where the firearms were delivered. He
denied
U’s allegations that he was linked to Lekkers and Krake
of Kraaifontein, to whom U delivered drugs and firearms on his
instructions.
He denied U’s version that he was present the
evening and was the one who gave instructions for the shooting at
Galaxy, which
targeted Corne.
[22] He denied V’s
allegations that they met and had a relationship because they were
the 28 gang. He disputed V’s allegations
that he planned and
provided the guns for the shooting. He denied that he spoke to V
about the attack from Hempies Brown. He disputed
V’s version
that V knew from him that Brown’s people attacked his people
and that V was with him when he received a
call from one of Brown’s
people who said to him: “I told you I will shoot him dead”,
and that was after they
had learned that Junior, a Mobster gang
member, had been shot at a festival. He denied V’s version that
he was the one who
discovered that one of Brown’s people was
travelling by bus and planned to kill him, and instructed V to kill
the person.
He also denied V’s allegations of his involvement
with the shooting targeting Corne, including that V, Alfonso and
Spanners
kept observation of the house leading up to the planned
attack on his instructions. He denied involvement in the hijacking of
a
bakkie, its movement to Beaufort West and later to Lady Gray, the
fraudulent obtaining of its registration papers, the involvement
of a
traditional healer and its transportation to Lesotho.
[23] He disputed V’s
allegations that he had members of the SAPS helping the Mobsters with
information. V mentioned Van Schalkwyk
at Mfuleni, Geduld at Blue
Downs, who even used to transport drugs with the police truck to
prison, and a Captain at Beaufort West,
known as Baard. He denied
paying these SAPS members and providing them with cash if they did
not have money. He denied knowing
that Junior’s father was a
Mobster gang leader. He denied knowing that Elazine Razat, who
deposed to an affidavit in his
support, resided at an address which
is a Mobster drug dealing house. He denied knowing that the drug
dealing business of the Mobsters
from this address was suffering
because Hempies Brown sold better quality drugs and was a street
away, and this was the reason
the Mobsters killed him. He denied
threatening U’s mother and that it was that threat that caused
her to sign a petition
in his favour. He disputed that the petition
was not genuine.
[24] Alfonso Shaun Cloete
(Alfonso) is the second appellant. He deposed to an affidavit and
also testified under oath in his application.
His testimony was that
he had no previous convictions, no other pending matters and no
outstanding warrant of arrest against him.
He is married and had two
children. He was arrested at the home that he owned. He had lived at
the address for 31 years. He was
arrested after 12 early in the
morning. He was arrested in the roof of his house where he was
setting mouse traps at the time.
He had been a member of the SAPS and
was dismissed for bringing the SAPS into disrepute. He denied being a
member of a gang. He
had a tattoo which is his child’s name. He
understood the charges against him to be conspiracy to commit murder,
murder,
unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. He was also
aware that there were three POCA charges against him. He knew of one
docket against him, which had been provided to him.
[25] He heard that the
murder related to the death of Mr Hampshire Brown. He heard the
allegations that T made against him about
the meeting in the veld in
the vicinity of a church in Happy Valley. He disputed the allegations
and the conversation about the
killing of Brown. He disputed
allegations of him being the driver for Adams to meet T and Thabo. He
denied the allegations by U
that he scouted to trace the movements of
Corne.
[26] In cross-examination
he confirmed that he knew Adams from the taxi business since 2015.
They were in the same association.
They became friends since 2016
when they attended taxi functions and then socialized together. He
did not know V and only met him
in prison. He shared a prison cell
with V and they spoke. He heard that V made a confession which was
recorded on video. He had
no knowledge of the plan to inject V with
poison during an appearance at the High Court. He knew Preston Dolan
accused 3 and met
Dolan through Adams in 2017. The three of them had
photos together taken at parties. He used to drive Jonathan Blaauw’s
mother
to church on Sundays and that is how he came to know him. He
did not know accused 6, Emile Cleovis Rooi although he had seen him
before and met him in prison. He knew accused 7, Nathan Jonathan
Erasmus since 2016 as a taxi guard on the Mountain Rose route.
He met
accused 8, Tyrone Engelbrecht in prison and were in the same room in
prison. He knew Shelton Africa, accused 9, from 2017
as Shelton used
to hire his taxis and once socialized together. He did not know
accused 10, Zandre Calvin, accused 11, Marlin Benjamin
and accused
12, Rudolf Steenkamp. He met them in prison. He knew accused 14,
Rolan Faans who he used to see in Dennemeer and once
met him at a
club.
[27] He knew T who he met
in 2015 as a driver of Adams. T had a problem with him as T accused
him for losing his (T’s) job.
He denied T’s allegations
that he, Adams, Niger who was Nathaniel Moses and also owned taxis
and Ore who was Preston Dolan,
were Mobster bosses. He denied T’s
allegations against him meeting with others at a filed and planning
to attack Hempies.
He did not know who was Spanners and denied that
he conspired to kill Hempies and that he was present when Adams
wanted to know
after the shooting if Hempies was indeed dead. He
denied T’s allegations that Adams, in the presence of T, once
asked him
(Alfonso) for rounds of ammunition and he (Alfonso) said
that that would not be a problem.
[28] He did not know U
and never met him. He disputed U’ allegations that he was
always doing the scouting for Corne and that
on the day planned for
Corne’s shooting, he was tasked to check what cars Corne’s
people were driving and also their
movements. He disputed U’s
allegations that he was part of the conspiracy to kill Corne. He
disputed U’s allegations
that U was present with Adams and
others at Blaauw’s house when Adams called him (Alfonso), that
he arrived and Adams instructed
him to go and read Corne, which meant
monitoring his movements and surrounding circumstances, and that U
saw Adams giving him (Alfonso)
money although he did not know how
much it was. He disputed leaving and later calling Adams to report
that Corne was still home.
He disputed U’s allegations that he
later phoned Adams to report that Corne was driving a purple Chev
bakkie and was on his
way to Grabouw.
[29] He acknowledged that
the police came to his house to arrest him. According to him his wife
disputed the version of the police
that his wife told the police that
he was not home. The police said that they heard movements in the
roof and went to investigate.
He did not have his phone on him, but
still had his firearm on him when he arrived home that night. His
wife complained of mice
in the roof, so he went up the roof to put a
mouse trap and that is when the police arrived, at around 2 am. He
denied the version
of the police that he was hiding there. He denied
receiving a call from Shelton Africa, at the time of his arrest,
informing him
that the police were looking for them and that he
replied that they got him. Of the police who were there, he only knew
Captain
van Reenen.
[30] He was dismissed
from the police for bringing the police into disrepute after he was
arrested for the intimidation charges
where a victim from the taxi
association alleged that he was intimidated to withdraw charges. He
was a co-accused in that charge
where it was alleged that money was
sought from people in the industry and they were promised to be shot
and killed if they did
not pay. He denied that he bought a firearm
from Brown which was traced in Happy Valley following on the
information provided by
U.
[31] He made about
R40 000-00 per month from his taxi business and about R10 000-00
from his fishing business. The taxi
business was registered in his
wife’s names. He had two taxis, the one doing the Bellville and
Mountain Rose route and the
other the Eerste River and Tuscany Glen
route. Since his imprisonment he is unable to attend to the fishing
business. One of his
taxis was written off so only one is operating.
His imprisonment resulted in outstanding school fees. He denied being
a member
of a gang and participating in gang activity. He had no
knowledge that a witness in a previous intimidation case where he was
a
co-accused with Adams withdrew the case because the witness was
threatened by members of a gang. His wife prepared a petition and
went to people to sign it. He knew most of the people who signed the
petition, who are mainly neighbours and people who stayed
in the same
suburb.
[32] He is charged with
three counts related to POCA as well as conspiracy to commit murder,
murder, possession of an unlicensed
firearm and ammunition and these
allegations are related to the death of Hempies Brown. In the
indictment there were no other charges
against him. He was not aware
of the evidence against him by U until it was disclosed to him. He
denied the allegations of U who
implicated him in other charges other
than the ones already in the indictment.
[33] Bernard Wilson
(Wilson) is a sergeant in the SAPS with 18 years experience and
attached to the Anti-Gang Unit since its inception
in 2018. The unit
had groups to investigate gang groupings and he was mandated to look
into the Mobster gang. There had been a
previous project on the gang,
which was dealt with by Captain Joubert. Some of those pursued in the
previous project were deceased,
but Adams was on that list of those
listed in the previous project. Adams featured on the structure of
the Mobster gang. Most of
the witnesses were part of the gang members
who turned around and gave co-operation with the police. At the time
there were 9 of
such witnesses, commonly referred to as 204
witnesses. The charges in that previous project were 19 murder,
various attempted murder,
elicit drug dealings and gang activities.
The cases investigated in that project were not placed on the roll,
save for one which
was expedited, removed from the project and
successfully prosecuted with the accused therein being sentenced to
four life imprisonment.
[34] Adams was implicated
in 12 murder counts. He was implicated on various attempted murder
charges. There were also rape charges
but Adams was no implicated in
rape charges. There were also charges of robbery. 3 of the 204
witnesses were killed whilst the
first project was still running. The
Mobster gang came to know that the 3 made statements to the police.
The gang called them traitors
and scavengers. They were killed even
before the cases were enrolled. The other 204 witnesses went into
hiding. Adams was a facilitator
in the 12 murders. He was logging out
persons who should be killed and provided the firearms to those who
committed the actual
killing. Adams will still be charged with those
matters together with others who were not in this current matter. It
is other Mobster
gang members together with Adams who were involved.
At the time of the first project which was led by Joubert, the leader
of the
Mobster gang was Nathaniel Moses. He was killed and after that
Adams took over as the leader. Moses was called Nigger.
[35] Adams was part of
the management of the gang when Moses was the leader. He kept the
firearms for the gang, and assisted in
allocating the firearms out
when there was a hit to be done. Adams was in the circle of
discussions when the 12 murders were planned
during Moses’
leadership. It is only in one of the 12 where the allegations were
that Adams himself killed the deceased.
Even in the first project,
there were police officers who were implicated as having been used in
the commission of some of the
offences. He could not divulge the
details because they were not charged yet, but were working at
Kleinvlei and were on the payroll
of the Mobster gang.
[36] In one instance, it
was planned with a policeman to arrest a person who was lured to be
at a place where there would be drugs.
The plan was to get the person
into prison so that he could be killed. The policeman arrested the
person at the specified date
and place for drugs and the person was
taken to prison. The person could not be killed in prison because of
security challenges.
It was decided that the person should be bailed
out and killed after he was released on bail. Adams paid bail for the
person and
took the person to Damingo, a shebeen in Happy Valley,
where the person was killed. According to Wilson’s information,
the
person was killed on the instruction of the overall leader of the
28 in the Western Cape, George Thomas whose nickname was Geweld.
Nigger and by extension the Mobster gang was receiving instructions
from Geweld. The Mobster was a 28 gang.
[37] Alfonso was also
part of the management of the Mobster gang under Nigger. He was
assisted by Nigger to get into the taxi business
and was used by
Nigger whilst he was still in the SAPS. Alfonso was recruited into
the Mobster gang and the police monitored him
from 2011. Alfonso was
put under surveillance after sources informed the police that he was
involved in gang activities. Alfonso
was brought to the taxi business
by the Mobster gang. The management of the taxi industry were
threatened by the gang to accept
him, failing which they would be
killed. The taxi industry management feared for their lives and let
Alfonso join the taxi industry.
In that first project, there was also
a case where the Mobster gang went to the home of a prosecutor to
kill the prosecutor. The
prosecutor was not home but they threatened
the family.
[38] In respect of the
charges in the indictment, the AGU members attended a crime scene and
reported that information suggested
that the killing attended to was
related to a conflict between two gangs, the Horribles and the
Mobsters. Another killing, where
the victim was a woman, also had
relations to the conflict between the two gangs. The AGU and the DPP
agreed to expedite the two
matters both in respect of investigation
and prosecution so that the alleged persons involved could be
arrested. This is what led
to the departure from the first project
which was overall, to this path, which is the second project which
was case specific. There
was then focus on the two murders and cases
that related to them.
[39] A threat analysis
was done by Crime Intelligence and it amongst others identified Adams
as the leader of the Mobsters. Crime
Intelligence also provided other
cases in respect of the new project. Wilson was tasked with
infiltrating the gang and getting
information from some of the
Mobster gang members. He got people inside the gang who provided
information. This information included
the identification of Adams as
the leader and the late Marvin Davids also known as Spanners as the
second in command. The information
indicated the leadership structure
of the gang over areas. Marvin Davids ran day to day operations in
Happy Valley, in Dennemeer
it was Roland Faans who is also an accused
in this matter. Nathaniel Matthews was in charge of Kleinvlei,
assisted by Jerome Thomas
also known as Life. The reason that
Kleinvlei had two leaders was because Matthews was in and out of
prison and Thomas was always
outside and available. Craig Francis
known as Kraka led in Kraaifontein. Preston Dolan known as Ore led
Bishop Lavis and Dolan
was also adviser to Adams because of his
seniority in the 28 gang.
[40] Three people were
identified in respect of the murder that related to a woman, on the
project. These were V, T and U. The information
he received on the
crime scene was that one of the persons involved was wounded. Members
of the AGU visited hospitals and there
was an alert on a male person
admitted for gunshot wound. He got a report from Tygerberg hospital
about a gunshot wound patient
admitted. The name provided by the
patient was Donovan van Wyk. He checked the system at Kleinvlei
police station to see if such
person was ever arrested before. He
went to see the person at the hospital and also took a picture of the
person and send it to
people doing the ground work at Kleinvlei as
well as to Crime Intelligence. The person identified himself as
Donovan van Wyk from
Bishop Lavis. However, the report he got back
was that the person on the picture was known as V from Happy Valley.
[41] He went to confront
the patient about this information. It was in the presence of other
police officers and the patient asked
that they speak in private and
not in the presence of others. In private the patient confided that
he was V residing at Happy Valley.
He checked the security room and
established that V was brought in by two people who carried V as V
could not walk properly and
the two were identifiable on the hospital
camera footages. He took the photos from the cameras to V, and V
identified the two as
Dirkie and Mila. It was established that Mila
was Emile Rooi and Dirkie was U. V also mentioned a name who it was
established was
T. The investigation led to the link with the murder
of Hampshire Brown. This was another murder investigated at
Kleinvlei.
[42] T was arrested on a
different matter and he went to interview T at Goodwood prison where
he was detained. Tl indicated that
he wanted to co-operate with the
police and was prepared to tell the truth. T made allegations in
which he implicated himself and
others. He sought the guidance of his
seniors and the interview was taken over by Captain van Rheenen. The
matter was discussed
with the DPP and it was decided that T will be
used as a 204 witness. The contents of the statement that T made was
what was discussed
at length already in this bail application and put
to the appellants.
[43] Based on T’s
statement U was traced. When confronted with what T said, U made
statements wherein he implicated himself
in the planning and shooting
of Brown and also in taking V to hospital. Both T and U indicated
that the instructions came from
Adams. One day he went to Kuilsriver
and was inside a shop when U called him and warned him not to come
out as there were Mobster
gang members waiting for him to assassinate
him. The threat analysis done by Crime Intelligence on his life
confirmed that the
threat was real. Following on the information
provided by U, the police were able to stop and arrest Charlton
Afrika, an accused
in this matter, as the police followed the leads
of the details of the transportation of firearms, drugs and the money
flows. The
police confiscated the money and the vehicle. The amount
found was R8000-00. As part of further investigation, the vehicle was
installed with listening devices before it was handed back. The
information about the bugging of the vehicle was leaked. Adams knew
about it and ordered that the vehicle be sealed out and the Mobsters
must get rid of the vehicle.
[44] The police followed
up on U’s information on the activities of the Mobsters and
went to search a shack on the property
where there was also a house
on 12 June 2019 and found three 9mm firerams and an R5 rifle hidden
in a toolbox. The shack was used
by Michael Mandava from Zimbabwe.
One of the firearm was registered as a private firearm of a Constable
Brown who worked at Areloy
police. Constable Brown when confronted
said he had sold the firearm to Alfonso. Alfonso disputed Constable
Brown’s version.
[45] Following U’s
information, the police searched a second house and found another R5
rifle, two magazine and 2 rounds of
9mm ammunition. Adam Murphy was
arrested for that unlawful possession. Murphy told the police that he
was given the rifle and ammunition
by Spanners for safe keeping. When
he refused to take them he was threatened that his daughter would be
raped and killed as the
Mobsters knew where she went to school and
that he also would be killed. Murphy was told that where he lived was
the place of the
Mobsters and he (Murphy) was a Mobster. Murphy told
the police that he took the firearms because of fear for his own life
and that
of his daughter. Murphy’s intended plea bargain was
thwarted by the intervention of Adams.
[46] Following on U’s
information the police searched the shack occupied by Thabiso
Mavundlela, who is one of the accused
in this matter. The information
included that he kept firearms for the Mobsters. At the time of the
search there was nobody found
in the shack. An Oozie, which is also
an assault rifle was found together with a hand grenade and 66 rounds
ammunition, 61 of 9mmm
rounds, 38 special live rounds and 9 of 7.65mm
rounds and a police bullet proof. The bulletproof, traced by its
serial number,
was traced to belong to a police officer in Kleinvlei
and it was discovered that he had reported it stolen during a
housebreaking.
U had informed the police during the interview that
Adams had a contact in the army in one of South Africa’s other
provinces
and that he bought the firearms from that contact. The
assault rifles were bought from that army contact for R40 000-00
and
the handguns for R20 000-00.
[47] According to U
Colonel Brown was supposed to have been killed by him (U) and
Spanners. The details of the date, place and time
as well as the
vehicle that Colonel Brown was driving on the day of the aborted
killing, matched where the Colonel was, and the
vehicle he was
driving on that day. The reason that he and Colonel Brown had to be
killed was that they were too forward and were
on the Mobsters. These
attacks were planned before the arrests and the matters were placed
on the roll. The AGU and Crime Intelligence
reported its cases and
projects to the Provincial Commissioner and this happened in the
presence of station commanders and section
and sector commanders.
Everyone in that meeting then came to know which projects the
Specialised Units were investigating against
which gangs. The
Mobsters had police officers that they used to give information. Some
in the gangs were agents for Crime Intelligence,
the AGU and the
gangs. They would supply information to the gangs about the police
activities and also supply the police with information
about gang
activity.
[48] U gave information
about the Athlone matter which related to Hempies Brown’s son,
Corne’ and Corne’s uncle,
Hannes on the night of 5 to 6
October 2019. Hempies, Corne and Hannes were members of the Horribles
gang. The Horribles gang was
also part of the 28 gang. U indicated
the involvement of Adams, Alfonso and other members of the Mobsters
which included some of
the accused in the matter, in the planning of
that shooting and also that Alfonso scouted the area and the persons
before the shooting.
U also named who executed the shooting and what
role those present played. U also mentioned the specific involvement
of Adams and
Adams’ instructions to the Mobsters including
Adams’s distribution of the four firearms to those who went in
to shoot.
U’s testimony about who were instructed to go in and
shoot was supported by video footage which was obtained from the
club.
[50] The police
established with information that the Mobsters wanted Corne’
dead because he had taken over as leader of the
Horribles from his
father, secondly, because they wanted his drug trade area and
thirdly, because he came to know that the Mobsters
were behind the
killing of his father. Adams had given instructions for Corne’
to be killed. At one attempt on Corne’s
life in fulfilment of
this instruction, Corne had been arrested and the charges against him
withdrawn in court. However he was
not released from the cells as a
police officer working in Blue Downs held him back and said he cannot
go because he had to appear
on another charge. Meanwhile this police
officer called the Mobsters and told them about Corne’s
imminent release. Spanners
and others lay in wait for Corne on his
route from the court and there was an attempt to shoot him and a
shootout ensued. In that
shootout Corne’s driver shot back and
hit Emile Kleefis, who was part of the Mobsters who lay in wait for
Corne’. Emile
ran from the scene bleeding and the police got
blood samples which positively linked him to the blood followed after
the shooting
scene. Corne was eventually killed. This was after four
failed attempts in which Adams was provided with information around
Corne’s
movements, and planned for Corne’s attack.
[51] V was arrested on
another charge and when interviewed indicated his willingness to
co-operate with the police and made a confession
in relation to
different cases and a pointing out. The confession and the pointing
out were recorded in video. He confessed to
the killing of a person
on the instructions of Adams. Adams told him that the person had to
be killed as he killed a Mobster at
Kraaifontein. There was somebody
inside the house where the person to be killed was, who communicated
with Adams and gave him information
including in which room the
target was sleeping. V was with Juandre Calvert, one of the accused
in this matter when the killing
was executed. At that stage of
confession there was no evidence implicating V or anyone on this
murder. V indicated that he wanted
to come clean and tell of all the
murders he committed for the Mobsters. The statements obtained from
those who were in the house
confirmed the report of V as to what
happened.
[52] The allegations made
by T, U and V were covered in detail in the evidence of the
appellants and will not be repeated, suffice
to state that they were
confirmed by Wilson as the State case against the appellants and
other accused. In respect of the intimidation
charge and its
withdrawal, the evidence was that the Taxi Association leaders were
taken to Gordon’s Bay where they were
told to wait, by members
of the Mobster gang. Nathaniel Moses and Alfonso arrived at Gordon’s
Bay where they were kept. The
Association leaders were offered money
and told to accept the Mobster gang members as members of the taxi
business and Association.
The Association leaders declined the money
and acceptance into membership citing due process. The Association
leaders were pointed
with guns, given the money and instructed to
approve membership, which they did under that duress. After Moses was
killed, Alfonso
and Adams went to the Association and informed the
Association that Adams was taking over. Alfonso and Adams also
informed the
taxi association leaders that their taxis will also take
the then newly established Stellenbosch route. The Association was
also
offered money on the threat of death, to accept Adams. It was
after the threat by Adams and Alfonso that the Association leaders
reported to the police.
[53] The police
established that members of the Mobster gang were following the State
Advocate dealing with the matter and his security
detail, after an
adjournment of the matter whilst the matter was being dealt with in
the Magistrates Courts in Blue Downs. The
investigating officer was
also alerted by the State Advocate, after returning from the
Magistrates chambers where they were called
together with the
appellants’ representatives, that the magistrate advised the
parties of a call that was received by that
presiding officer from
someone who enquired if the appellant s would be granted bail.
[54] One did not need to
have a tattoo to be a member of a gang. In gang language, you only
needed to be
stambula.
This was a form of initiation,
induction and orientation for new members. It was determined by the
gang leader and was conducted
by a person with the authority to make
a new entrant a gang member. It included what you should know, what
steps you had to follow
and what entailed being a member of a gang.
It is a form of schooling. There were business people who were
involved in gangs and
who did not have tattoos.
[55] The Mobster gang
dealt with drugs, firearms, hijackings and theft of firearms. The
leader was Adams. Beneath him was Preston
Dolan in charge of Bishop
Lavis, Marvin Davids in charge of Happy Valley and Craig Fredericks
in charge of Kraaifontein. Happy
Valley had two sub-components,
Dennemeer where Roland Faans was in charge and Kleinvlei where
Nathaniel Matthews and Jerome Thomas
known as Live were in charge.
The next layer were storage places which the gang called channels. It
was Adam Murphy and Mike Madaba.
These were people who kept the
firearms. Graham Bruns kept the drugs. The next level were the
drivers and these were Leroy Appolis,
Alfonso, U, Thabiso Mavundlela,
T and Shelton Africa. The next layer was the enforcer, who was Emile
Cleovas. He kept the discipline
among gang members. The last layer
was the shooters or hitmen. These were Marlin Benjamin, Nathan
Erasmus, V, Emile Cleovis, Tyrone
Engelbrecht and Zandre Valvid.
[56] Where the gang was
operating there were always writings on the walls, houses and on the
street. For the Mobsters there was
the number 28 and the letters MOB.
Preston Dolan was very high ranking in the 28 prison gang. He was an
advisor to Adams. Jonathan
Blaauw was responsible for Tik. Rudolf
Steenkamp and Nathan Erasmus were responsible for stealing cars which
were used for the
hit and other transport needs of the gang. Alfonso
was mainly used for scouting. As a known police official it was not
easy for
people to suspect him. Alfonso and his vehicle were also
used to transport drugs. Alfonso’s wife had five vehicles
registered
under her name. Three were her vehicles and the other two
belonged to Alfonso’s relatives who could not register the
vehicles
in their names as they worked for government and could not
run taxi businesses.
[57] The petition in
favour of the appellants were signed by people in the mobster
stronghold. It is also a known strategy used
by gangsters to buy food
parcels for the community members and also pay their electricity
bills in areas where the gang members
are residing. This is done to
portray gang members as good people to the community. When the gang
members are arrested, they then
go to those communities to get
petitions in their support for release.
[58] Christian Daniel
Dirk van Reenen is a Captain with 26 years experience in the SAPS and
a detective in the AGU in the Western
Cape. He led a different group
to that of Wilson who was under the command of Colonel Brown. They
shared information with the group
led by Brown. He was involved in
the arrest after J50 were issued for both appellants. His group
arrested Adams and he was present
at the arrest of Alfonso. There
were about 10 J50 warrants for the Mobster gang members. On 21
February 2020 after 2 in the morning
Alfonso was arrested by Sergeant
Langsberg. The police arrived at Alfonso’s home and knocked at
the door. Alfonso’s
wife opened the door. She was asked where
was Alfonso and she said that he was not home.
[59] The asked permission
to search the house as they had a J50 warrant. She gave the
permission to search and Alfonso was found
hiding in the ceiling of
his residence. There were a number of police on the scene and during
the search at some stage Langsberg
said they found Alfonso. Langsberg
reported that there was noise from the ceiling and they asked a
member to check inside the ceiling
from a trapdoor that was in front
of the door of the main bedroom and Alfonso was found. Alfonso had
with him his legally .38 special
revolver, which Alfonso handed
himself to Langsberg. When van Reenen came to where they discovered
Alfonso, the trapdoor was already
opened and Alfonso was already
coming out through it. He asked Alfonso what Alfonso was doing with
the firearm in the ceiling.
Alfonso said that he had a mice problem
and was hunting for mice.
[60] The police were
still in the kitchen with Alfonso when Alfonso received a call from
Charlton Afrika. It was a short discussion.
Afrika asked Alfonso if
he knew why the police were looking for them. Alfonso said they had
me and Afrika dropped the call. Van
Reenen had been to Afrika’s
place to arrest him but did not find Afrika, before they came to
Alfonso. He then went to Goodwood
to Adams’ residence to
execute the warrant. The other police were already there. They did
not find Adams. He heard Adams
girlfriend tell Wilson that Adams did
not stay there anymore.
[61] Around 7 in the
morning he observed a missed call from Adams’ attorney of
record. He knew it was Adams attorney and called
back. He informed
the attorney that the police had J50 warrants for his client. The
attorney enquired who else and he told the
attorney the names of
those not yet arrested. There were arrangements over the weekend and
the attorney relayed to the police that
after consultation with his
client Adams and the others will hand themselves over to the police
on Sunday the 23
rd
at 6am. Just after 7 am on the 23
rd
Adams and three others handed themselves over to the police.
[62] He was introduced to
an informer during the investigation by Wilson into the project and
on the basis of the information supplied
by the informer he was part
of the team that went to search premises identified as where firearms
were kept by the Mobster gang.
Firearms and ammunition, including a
grenade and a police bulletproof were found in only two of such
premises during a search operation
where a number of premises were
searched. The firearms recovered were not registered in the names of
any of the accused, including
the appellants. Only one firearm was
traced to a policeman who alleged that he sold that Norinco pistol to
Alfonso for R2000-00.
The policeman, Constable Brown, had indicated
to the police that he had a drinking and gambling problem and had
money problems.
Alfonso denied knowledge of the firearm of buying it
from the police man. The police received information from the public,
through
informers. Van Reenen did not want the informers identified,
as he was recruiting informers and would not like even prospective
informers to know that there was a risk of their identification being
made public as they would not avail themselves to help the
police.
[63] Section 65(4) of the
Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No. 51 of 1977) (the CPA) provided:
“
Appeal
to superior court with regard to bail
65(4) The court or judge hearing the
appeal shall not set aside the decision against which the appeal is
brought, unless such court
or judge is satisfied that the decision
was wrong, in which event the court or judge shall give the decision
which in its or his
opinion the lower court should have given.”
Section 60(11)(a) of the
CPA provided:
“
Bail
application of accused in court
60(11) Notwithstanding any provision
of this Act, where an accused is charged with an offence referred to
–
(a)
In Schedule 6, the court shall order that the
accused be detained in custody until he or she is dealt with in
accordance with the
law, unless the accused, having been given a
reasonable opportunity to do so, adduces evidence which satisfies the
court that exceptional
circumstances exist which in the interests of
justice permit his or her release.”
[64] The evidence against
the appellants include witnesses as envisaged in section 204 of the
CPA. Three witnesses, to wit, T, U
and V, who implicate Adams as the
leader of the Mobster gang and Alfonso as a member thereof, and as
persons involved in organized
criminal activity, are themselves
self-confessed gangsters who have involved themselves in violent
premeditated crimes and at least
one of them, T, used drugs.
Investigation and prosecution of serious and violent crime, including
by organized gangs, is a legitimate
State interest. The evidence of
witnesses as envisaged in section 204 is necessary for the
administration of justice and the maintenance
of law and order.
[65]
Against this background, the simple answer to the appellants’
criticism of the use of section 204 witnesses in their
matter is
this: Yes, the laws of the Republic of South Africa (RSA) allows for
a witness, to use the appellants’ terminology,
“to take
the proverbial 30 pieces of silver from the RSA which hold the keys
to their cells where they would serve a term
of life in prison”
should they not deliver answers frankly and honestly on the questions
put to them by the prosecutor, which
answers may incriminate such
witness with regard to the offences specified by the prosecutor. The
suggestion by the appellants
and advanced by their Counsel, to wit,
that the pieces of silver is from the police or the prosecutors is a
deliberate misstatement
and poor characterisation of our law. This is
so because it is the trial court, and not the police or the
prosecution, which in
terms of section 204 forms an opinion as to
whether the answers given by such person were given frankly and
honestly, and subject
to the very provisions of section 204, decide
on whether such witness is discharged from prosecution of the
offences specified
by the prosecutor. Such witness is not discharged
for giving evidence that is favourable to the State [
S
v Mokoena
2003 (1)
SACR 74
(T) or only when the witness implicates the accused. Neither
is it required by the section that the answers must be to the
satisfaction
of the court [
S
v Naude & Another
1976
(1) SA 798
(RA).
[66] In
Commentary on
the
Criminal Procedure Act,
Du Toit et al, Service 60, 2018 at
page 23-50F it was said:
“
The
effect of the section is that persons criminally associated with the
accused are compellable witnesses, and that such witnesses
are
deprived of the privilege set out in
section 203
”
Section 203
refers to the
privilege where a witness is excused from answering incriminating
questions or the privilege against self-incrimination.
Section 204
encourages persons to provide self-incriminating evidence in courts
of justice, and provides them a protection.
[67] Viewed against the
background of the serious allegations against the appellants, the
fact that the appellants handed themselves
over to the police in the
presence of their legal representatives, or their cumulative personal
circumstances including that they
had no previous convictions, had
families and had fixed places of residence, paled into
insignificance. This is moreso because
for three days the appellants
were sought by the police and could not be found at their known
places of residence. Moreover, Adams’s
wife told the police
that he no longer lived at the address which according to his
evidence was his permanent residence. This was
when the police sought
him. Alfonso’s wives told the police that he was not home, when
he was in fact inside the house and
was in the roof hidden by the
ceiling, with a revolver on him.
[68] The appellants are
alleged to have run a criminal enterprise, a gangster called Mobster
gang in Happy Valley, Kleinvlei, Bishop
Lavis, Dennemeer and
Kraaifontein. It involved the transportation and selling of
prohibited drugs. It included killing opponents
in the gang world and
in the prohibited drug trade. The gang was assisted by some members
of the police and forced business, in
particular the taxi business to
admit its members into the routes at gun point. The gang had
protection and assistance from corrupt
members of the police. The
corrupt police protection and assistance included transportation of
its drugs from court to prison,
the betrayal of rival gangs and their
exposure to death and leaking of information from police planned
activities, strategies and
tactics to deal with gangs. These
allegations, including the involvement of members of the army in
selling arms and ammunition
to the gang, which arms are used in the
killings, rape and robbery of other people to advance the aims,
objectives and the hegemony
of the 28 gang in general and the Mobster
gang in particular, surely created a sense of shock and outrage to
the law-abiding members
of the South African society, especially in
the Western cape. The petition by those who seem to be inside the
cocoon of criminal
enterprise or benefit from it, is simply a frill
which adds no substantive value to the fabric of our society.
[69] There is evidence
implicating the appellants in intimidating the taxi industry to admit
them into the business, with the chairperson
and secretary of the
taxi association pointed with firearms by members of the appellants’
gang, and admitted contrary to
the association’s due processes.
There is evidence implicating the appellants previously in
intimidating witnesses who had
made cases against them, and forcing
the witnesses to sign withdrawal statements or risk being killed.
There is evidence implicating
the appellants in conspiracies to kill,
and at least three persons in this project were killed, which project
is within a greater
project where the appellants are also implicated.
[70] The evidence
suggests not only a capture of some lower ranking officers in the
SAPS. The evidence suggests that the senior
management of the SAPS in
the province has been penetrated to the extent that the 28 gang has
access to the table where the Provincial
Commissioner of the SAPS in
the Western Cape sits with his senior managers and lead them in the
study of crime, develop crime prevention
strategies and decide on
tactics and approach to the safety and security of inhabitants of the
Western cape. This includes penetration
of and access to the sanctity
of the reports by specialized units like the Anti-Gang Unit and Crime
Intelligence, to the Provincial
Commissioner. The evidence further
shows that the 28 gang and the Mobsters in particular are breathing
heavily on the necks of
public prosecutors who guide the
investigation of organized crime and institute criminal proceedings
against its members. Such
prosecutors are under a constant and
permanent threat to their lives and that of their close families. The
evidence also shows
that the Mobsters have now moved gear upwards and
are interfering with the decorum of the courts and the independence
of judicial
officers, and testing the judicial oath of office,
especially the word “without fear”.
[71] In my view, the
release of the appellants on bail will undermine the sense of peace
and jeopardise security among members of
the public. Their release
will also undermine and jeopardise the public confidence in the
criminal justice system. I am unable
to find, as regards the crime,
the personal circumstances of the appellant, the interests of the
community and the interest of
justice, anything that is cogent to
establish the requisite exceptional circumstances. In my value
judgment, the appellants failed
to adduce evidence which satisfied
the court that exceptional circumstances existed which in the
interests of justice permitted
their release. I am not satisfied that
the magistrate was wrong to refuse to grant the appellants bail.
[72] For these reasons I
make the following order:
The bail appeal is
dismissed.
DM
THULARE
JUDGE
OF THE HIGH COURT
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Adams v Manuel and Others (9401/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 4 (3 February 2022)
[2022] ZAWCHC 4High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
Adams and Others v Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy and Others (1306/22) [2022] ZAWCHC 24 (1 March 2022)
[2022] ZAWCHC 24High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
R.O.K v Adams and Others (3600/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 320 (18 October 2024)
[2024] ZAWCHC 320High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)98% similar
Adam and Another v Moosa (A20/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 117 (19 April 2024)
[2024] ZAWCHC 117High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)98% similar
Adendorff N.O v Savrez Trading (Pty) Ltd and Another (Reasons) (2025/080510) [2025] ZAWCHC 286 (9 July 2025)
[2025] ZAWCHC 286High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)98% similar