Verraadklagte laat vaar

DIE BURGER, ARTIKEL DEUR MAYGENE DE WEE

KAAPSTAD – Betogende studente in die Kaap moet van vandag ‘n afstand van minstens 100m tussen hulle en nasionale sleutelpunte, soos die parliament, handhaaf indien hulle daar wil byeenkom.

Regter Mape Dolamo het die beslissing gister in die Wes-Kaapse Hooggeregshof gemaak nadat ‘n dringende aansoek Woensdag voor hom gebring is.

Studente en hul ouers het Woesndagaand na betogings by die parliament ‘n aansoek gebring om te verhoed dat die polisie buitensporige mag teen die betogers gebruik.

Talle studente is Woensdag in hegtenis geneem toe sommige betogers deurgedring het na die parlementêre kompleks en ander vasgetrek is toe die polisie hulle verdryf het.

Die Valke het gister ontken dat hulle ses mans – Kevin French, ‘n pa van twee, Markus Trengrove, Kgotsi Chikane, Chumani Maxwele, Nathan Taylor en Lindsay Maasdorp – van hoogverraad wou aankla.

Die Burger is erger in besit van dokumente – ‘n kennisgewing van regte – wat wys dat French en Maasdorp om 23:20 en 23:12 deur onder andere ‘n sers. De Leeuw van die Valke ingelig is dat hulle van betreding, ‘n aanklag wat met die Wet op die Regulering van Byeenkomste verband hou, en van hoogverraad aangekla gaan word.

Bruce Hendricks, French en Trengrove se prokureur, het ook gister gesê die polisie wou aanvanklik die ses van hoogverraad aankla. Die aanklag is later laat vaar.

Die ses het gistermiddag in die Kaapstad-landdroshof verskyn saam met 23 ander studente wat ook tydens Woensdag se protesoptog na die parliament in hegtenis geneem is.

Dolamo het in sy uitspraak gesê die polisie het onderneem om nie buitensporige mag te gebruik om studente te verdryf wanneer hulle betoog nie.

Die aansoek is Woensdagaand kort na 22:00 tot gister laat oorstaan.

Dolamo het die partye beveel om in gesprek met mekaar te tree in ‘n poging om ‘n ooreenkoms te bereik.

Die studente van die Universiteit van Kaapstad en Kaapse Skiereiland Universiteit vir Tegnologie moet volgens die ooreenkoms toestemming vir enige protesoptrede kry.

Die staat het gevra dat die hof die ses verbied om vir die duur van die verhoor enige protesoptogte by te woon.

Die landdros het die versoek egter van die hand gewys en gesê sy sien geen rede hoekom hulle anders behandel moet word as die 23 ander studente wat sonder enige voorwaardes vrygelaat is nie.

Maasdorp is gister kort na 15:00 weer deur die polisie in hegtenis geneem.

Die saak is tot 23 Februarie vir verdere ondersoek uitgestel.

Vigilante killers face non-jail sentences

CAPE ARGUS, ARTICLE BY NATASHA PRINCE

MEETINGS need to be facilitated between the relatives of a man kidnapped and murdered by social activist Angy Peter and her three co-accused, before court proceedings continue. Peter, her husband Isaac Mbadu and co-accused Azola Dayimani and Christopher Dina appeared in the Western Cape High Court yesterday. Their matter was postponed for futher discussions to be facilitated by a judicial programme in which the four have been participating. The group, who were found guilty of murder after a vigilante killing of Rowan du Preez nearly three years ago, are currently involved in the early stages of a restorative justice programme ahead of their sentencing. Yesterday, the court heard that the couple has yet to arrange a meeting with Du Preez’s relatives. Peter, who is a prominent member of the Social Justice Coalition (SJC), and her co-accused were convicted in October. Du Preez, who was found necklaced in Mfuleni in October 2012 and died in hospital later, was alleged to have stolen a TV belonging to Peter. Judge Robert Henney found the murder was premeditated and that the four had acted in common purpose. Since the judgement, a process of restorative justice was set in motion where “victims and perpetrators” discuss the issues to reach a resolution. If successful, the four could en up with non-custodial sentences. Yesterday, while the State said there were complications in setting up the meeting between Peter, Mbadu and du Preez’s relatives, the defence argued that there was “no difficulty” and that the process was “taking a little longer than anticipated”. The matter is set to continue today.

Kill op Carmen ergste vir Cop

DIE SON, ARTIKEL DEUR TANYA MENGES

“Ek het geen twyfel dat hy my gaan vermoor nie.” Dit is wat Carmen Jacobs (29) kort voor die moord op haar aan lt.kol. Carol van Wyk gesê het. Sy het van haar man, Ivan (32), gepraat. Van Wyk het gister in die Kaapse hooggeregshof getuig oor die beserings wat sy op 13 Desember 2013 aan Carmen se hele lyf gesien het. Haar erg vernielde lyk is op 25 Februarie 2014 by haar en Jacobs se huis in Sheraton Park, Steenberg, gevind. Hy het haar na bewering van hul ander huis in Woodlands, Mitchells Plain, ontvoer na talle aanrandings voor hul vier kinders. Van Wyk het foto’s van Carmen se beserings laat neem, maar dit is eers gister aan die staat en die verdediging beskikbaar gestel. AO Kevin Bussack, die ondersoekbeampte, het dit nooit by die dossier ingesluit nie en Van Wyk het getuig sy het dit eers gisteroggend agtergekom. Jacobs se lawyer, adv. Helmut Scholzel, het beswaar gemaak en gesê hy het tyd nodig om met sy kliënt te konsulteer oor die foto’s. Die foto’s wys gruwelike beserings aan omtrent elke deel van haar liggaam. “Daar was krapmerke aan haar arms, snymerke aan haar boude en agterbene en haar oë was blou geslaan. Sy het ‘n frokkie aangehad. Al die beserings was dus duidelik,” het Van Wyk getuig. Die foto’s kon nie ingehandig word nie oor die verdediging eers daaroor wil donsulteer. Volgens Van Wyk sal die saak haar altyd bybly: “In my loopbaan van 25 jaar is dit een van die sake wat ek nooit sal vergeet nie. Die toestand waarin sy was en die emosielose uitdrukking in haar oë sal my altyd bybly.” Van Wyk het getuig dat Carmen aan haar gesê het dat Jacobs haar van die begin van hul huwelik van sewe jaar emosioneel afgekraag het, maar eers na drie jaar fisiek begin aanrand het. “In die laaste jaar voor haar dood het die aanrandings erger geraak en sy het besef haar lewe is in gevaar. Dit toe sy besluit het om ‘n klag van aanranding teen hom te maak.”

Criminal justice sytem at fault, Peter’s defence tells court

ARTICLE BY JOHNNIE ISAAC / GROUNDUP WWW.GROUNDUP.ORG.ZA

Peter, a former Social Justice Coalition activist, her husband Isaac Mbadu, Azola Dayimani and Christopher Dina, have all been convicted of the murder of du Preez in 2012.

Presenting his closing arguments in the sentencing hearing in the High Court, advocate William King said the police failed du Preez for not opposing bail when he was charged with housebreaking and theft of Peter’s television as well as separate charges of defeating the ends of justice and of robbery.

Judge Robert Henney added that the magistrate who granted du Preez bail had also failed because he was facing three serious charges and should only have been released under exceptional circumstances.

King said Peter and Mbadu had not wanted to charge du Preez for their stolen television. They had wanted the police to act against the police officer who had bought the television, Andile Tshicila.

The two activists had gone out of their way to try to rehabilitate du Preez, he said. King also said that by the age of 22 du Preez had five serious charges against him including a conviction for rape while he was still a teenager, but rehabilitation efforts had never worked. Even his family had failed to rehabilitate him, he said. Peter and Mbadu had dissuaded the community from taking the law into their own hands when du Preez was assaulted by the community.

King said Peter and Mbadu had also been let down by the police on numerous occasions. He said police had failed to act on Tshicila despite having evidence that he had bought the stolen TV from du Preez.

He described Peter and Mbadu as people who came from a background of disappointments and anger and said if they murdered du Preez it was because of their anger after being let down by the authorities.

Peter’s neighbour, Nolubabalo Zongola, who is currently looking after the couple’s four children, told the court that she is battling to cope with them because of time constraints.

Zongola said her working hours as a security guard gave her very little time to give the children the love they were familiar with from their parents.

Peter, a former Social Justice Coalition activist, her husband Isaac Mbadu, Azola Dayimani and Christopher Dina, have all been convicted of the murder of du Preez in 2012.

Presenting his closing arguments in the sentencing hearing in the High Court, advocate William King said the police failed du Preez for not opposing bail when he was charged with housebreaking and theft of Peter’s television as well as seperate charges of defeating the ends of justice and of robbery.

Judge Robert Henney added that the magistrate who granted du Preez bail had also failed because he was facing three serious charges and should only have been released under exceptional circumstances.

King said Peter and Mbadu had not wanted to charge du Preez for their stolen television, Andile Tschicila.

The two activists had gone out of their way to try to rehabilitate du Preez, he said. King also said that by the age of 22 du Preez had five serious charges against him including a conviction for rape while he was still a teenager, but rehabilitation efforts had never worked. Even his family had failed to rehabilitate him, he said. Peter and Mbadu had dissuaded the community from taking the law into their own hands when du Preez was assaulted by the community.

King said Peter and Mbadu had also been let down by the police on numerous occasions. He said police had failed to act on Tshicila despite having evidence that he had bought the stolen TV from du Preez.

He described Peter and Mbadu as people who came from a background of disappointments and anger and said if they murdered du Preez it was because of their anger after being let down by the authorities.

Peter’s neighbour, Nolubabalo Zongola, who is currently looking after the couple’s four children, told the court that she is battling to cope with them because of time constraints.

Zongola said her working hours as a security guard gave her very little time to give the children the love they were familiar with from their parents.

Dagmoeder vry, want saak ‘was vol foute’

ARTIKEL DEUR JANA BREYTENBACH HTTP://WWW.DIEBURGER.COM/

KAAPSTAD – ‘n Dagmoeder van Somerset-Wes se “nagmerrie” van die afgelope sewe jaar is verby nadat die Wes-Kaapse hooggeregshof haar op alle aanklagte vrygespreek het. Monica Helm (67) van Somerset-Wes is daarvan aangekla dat sy susmiddels aan kinders gegee het was sy in haar dagsorgsentrum, Kinderland, versorg het. Die aantygings het aan die lig gekom toe haar assistent, Angelina Carolus, party ouers ingelig het dat sy sekere middels vir die kinders injaag om hulle te laat slaap. Landdros Marilyn Cannon van die Somerset-Wes-streekhof het Helm in 2011 skuldig bevind op agt aanklagte van aanranding met die opset om ernstig te beseer en vyf jaar effektiewe gevangenisstraf opgelê. Keith Gess van Mathewson Gess Inc Prokureurs, wat Helm verteenwoordig het, het ‘n aansoek ingedien om teen die skuldigbevinding en vonnis te appelleer, maar Cannon het dit van die hand gewys. Gess het dit op petisie na die hooggeregshof geneem, waar dit toegestaan is. Regter Patric Gamble en waarnemende regter Boet Smit het die appelsaak aangehoor en uitspraak is Woensdag gelewer. In hul uitspraak het die regters die staat se hoofgetuie, Carolus, se getuienis beskryf as “deurtrek met onwaarskynlikhede”. Dit het tydens die verhoor aan die lig gekom dat Carolus kwaad was vir Helm omdat Helm haar aangespreek het oor onder meer beweerde diefstal, dat sy medisyne op die Helm se apteekrekening gekoop het en dat sy self van die kinders aangerand het. Gamble het gesê Carolus het van die beweerde medikasie wat Helm glo aan die kinders gegee het aan die polisie verskaf. “Dit is opvallend dat daar min, of geen, verband tussen die medikasie en die monsters van die kinders se bloed en urine is nie.” Gamble het gesê die landdros het gefouteer om so sterk op Carolus se getuienis staat te maak en haar as ‘n 204 getuie (‘n tipe staatsgetuie) te aanvaar. Verder is die polisie se getuienis beskryf as “geensins duidelik en onomwonde” nie. “‘n Mens sou moes vra of die medikasie wat die dag aan die kinders gegee is werklik aan hulle gegee is en of Carolus dit opgemaak het, met die wete dat die polisie die huis sou deursoek, en of dit ‘n onsuiwer poging was om Helm te betrek by ‘n klomp ernstige oortredings,” het Gamble gesê. Hy het bygevoeg die saak was ‘n duidelike aanval op Helm en dat die staat se saak van die begin “fundamentele foute” gehad het. Die regters het die skuldigbevinding en vonnis tersyde gestel.

Bankier wou glo sy vrou laat vermoor

DIE BURGER

Verslaggewer – Maygene de Wee (Kaapstad)

‘Huurmoord beplan oor hope gend en egskeiding’

‘n Bankier, hope geld, ‘n hangende egskeiding en ‘n huurmoord. Dit is enkele van die bestanddele in ‘n drama wat hom tans in die Bellville-landdroshof afspeel. Midde-in die drama is mnr. Johan Calitz (64), ‘n voormalige senior navorser by die Ontwikkelingsbank van Suider-Afrika. Calitz, van Pretoria-Noord, is op 13 Mei op die Kaapstadse Internasionale Lughawe in hegtenis geneem. Dit het gekom nadat hy glo ‘n sluipmoordenaar wou huur om sy vrou van langer as 36 jaar, me. Sarah Calitz, te vermoor. Volgens hofstukke is Calitz en sy vrou glo al geruime tyd van mekaar vervreem en is hulle aan die skei. Sy woon op Stilbaai. Calitz het op 16 Mei in die Bellville-landdroshof verskyn op ‘n aanklag van sameswering om moord te pleeg. Borgtog is toe geweier. Die dag daarna is borgtog van R5000 in ‘n dringende aansoek in die Kaapse hooggeregshof toegestaan. Van die borgtogvoorwaardes is dat hy glad nie met sy vrou of kinders (wat reeds uit die huis is) mag kontak maak nie. Hy mag ook nie na Stilbaai reis of sy huis in Pretoria behalwe vir werk, kerk of mediese redes verlaat nie. Volgens ‘n beëdigde verklaring wat by die hooggeregshof ingedien is om sy borgtogaansoek te steun, is die huis waarin hy in Pretoria woon sowat R1 miljoen werd. Die huis waarin sy vrou op Stilbaai woon is sowat R6 miljoen werd. Die huis se inhoud word op sowat R1,5 miljoen geraam. Hy verskyn weer op 13 Julie in die hof.

Dewani-style plot alleged

SUNDAY TIMES

Reporter – Shanaaz Eggington

BUT LEADING POPULATION ANALYST DENIES TRYING TO HIRE A HIT MAN

A man has been nabbed for allegedly trying to hire a hit man at Cape Town International Airport to murder his estranged wife. Johan Calitz, 64, has been charged with conspiracy to murder after he was arrested in a sting oepration. The case bears a chilling resemblance to that of honeymoon murder accused Shrien Dewani, who is alleged to have hired a taxi driver at the same airport in November last year to have his bride, Anni, murdered. Calitz, from Pretoria, was until recently a senior demographics analyst at the Development Bank of South Africa. He carried out population studies for the Presidency and researched the impact of HIV/Aids. Calits was arrested at the airport after allegedly handling cash to an undercover officer posing as a contract killer. His wife, Sarah, 60, lived in the couple’s R6-million family home in Stilbaai in the Southern Cape. The couple have been married for 36 years. Western Cape police spokesman Warrant Officer November Filander said police pounced on May 13 after receiving information that Calitz wanted to hire a hit man. “An early-morning meeting was arranged between the suspect and an undercover policeman at the airport. Members of air border control arrested the suspect on a charge of conspiracy to commit murder,” he said. He refused to say how sting operation came about. But the Sunday Times established that he allegedly wanted his wife tortured with a stun gun before she was killed. Police pounced after being tipped-off about the alleged plot. Calitz, speaking from his Pretoria home, dismissed the police allegations. “There has been a big misunderstanding,” he said. “I am innocent. The police handled the case very badly. I’m going to be claiming lots of money from them.” He referred further questions to his Cape Town attorney, Joshua Greef, who confirmed that his client had been charged. “I cannot say much, as the case is still under investigation and we don’t have access to the docket at this stage,” he said. UK paper The Mirror splashed news of the arrest of Calitz this week, pointing out the parallels with the Dewani case. Calitz appeared in the Bellville Magistrate’s Court on May 16 after spending the weekend behind bars. He was granted bail of R5000, but police rearrested him almost immediately after obtaining another arrest warrant. Said Greef: “It was then decided to bring an urgent application to the Cape High Court, as bail is a right of any person who qualifies for it.” Calitz was released on bail again on condition that he stayed away from Stilbaai and did not make contact with his wife. Filander confirmed that Sarah Calitz had recently filed for divorce. “These documents were delivered to Calitz the week before the arrest,” he said. Sarah Calitz said this week she wanted “nothing to do with the matter” and referred queries to her legal representatives. They did not respond to requests for comment on Friday. According to Calitz’s affidavit, presented to the High Court in support of his bail application, the house in Stilbaai is registered in his wife’s name, but belongs to him. He said the contents of the home, including furniture, were worth at least R1.5million and he owned two Mercedes-Benz vehicles. He intends pleading not guilty to charges against him, which he described as “frivolous”. Calitz has done work for the Human Sciences Research Council, the Department of Social Development and various political parties, including the ANC and ACDP. The case was postponed to July 13. Dewani’s extradition hearing resumes on July 18 in London.

Alleged Dixie Boys acquitted of girl’s murder

Cape Times

Reporter: Karen Breytenbach

TWO alleged gang members from Eerste River have been acquitted by a Western Cape High Court Judge of murdering a teenage girl who accused one of them of raping her. Judge Elizabeth Baartman found that the State had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that alleged Dixie Boys gang boss Garron “Slams” Potts and his friend Dhevenity “Debill” Mitchell were involved in the April, 2005, murder of Es-Louis Linnert. Both men were out on bail. She was allegedly raped by Potts at the age of 14, and shot deat at 16 before she could testify against him. As argued by attorney Ben Mathewson, for Mitchell, and Johann Engelbrecht SC, for Potts, the judge found that the State relied on two unreliable witnesses whose testimony remained uncorroborated. Evelyn Linnert’s identification of Mitchell as the man who shot her in the neck and shot dead her niece as they walked across a field had to be treated with caution, as she was the only eyewitness. She only got a look at the shooter for three seconds as she tried to push him away, and visibility was not good, because it was dark. She said it had been a full-moon evening, but the defence showed it would have been a sickle moon according to the moon calendar. She also got the time wrong and no-one corroborated her identification. The court therefore could not rely on her identification. The court also rejected the testimony of Jeswaine Williams, a man who claimed to have been in Potts’s inner circle. He claimed to have over-heard Potts saying he wanted Linnert killed because he did not want to spend more money in trying to squash the rape complaint. Judge Baartman found that Williams was a heavy tik user at the time, although he claimed to have quit since spending three years in witness protection. He contradicted himself often, and his testimony about an alleged conspiracy between Potts and his friends to have Linnert killed was “insufficient and extremely poor”. The court could not rely on his evidence. Although the State had many other witnesses who might have been able to corroborate Williams, they were not called. Linnert had also accused three other men of rape, so it was not possible to say that Potts was the only person with a motive to kill her. Other evidence presented also did not offer any proof beyond resonable doubt of the men’s guilt. The public gallery filled up as the judgment came to an end, with Calvyn Marinus and some of his co-accused in an organised crime trial next door taking up some seats. Mitchell and Potts had wide-eyed expressions as Baartman acquitted them and greanted Williams, who was a Section 204 witness, immunity from prosecution for incriminating himself of drug dealing during his testimony. Mitchell and Potts were greeted outside by a group of friends, who joined them and Mathewson at a coffee shop.