New twist in Nkomazana theft case
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Friday November 17, 2017 17:49
The state has charged Nkomazana alongside 12 others in 11 different counts. The 12 are attorney Letlhogonolo Makgane, Billy Molefe, Motlalepula Molefe, attorney Bhekimpilo Moyo, Tebogo Edwin Koketso, Ketshepile Sharon Lempehu, Jerico Murima, Othusitse Seoke, Daniel Gasefiwe, Keothupilwe Aobakwe, Levy Mosweu and Pula Joseph.
Lawyers representing six of the accused persons: Makgane, Billy Molefe, Motlalepula Molefe, Moyo, Koketso and Gasefiwe yesterday told regional magistrate, Mokwadi Chris Gabanagae that they want their client’s trials to be separated in order to expedite the case trial. Lyndon Mothusi who represents Gasefiwe also applied for withdrawal of charges against his client.
Attorney Yul Shara Moncho, who argued on behalf Makgane and Billy Molefe, said his clients’ charges should be separated from the other charges.
They are jointly charged for allegedly swindling Nkomazana’s former boss Solomon Tlhapane’s company money amounting to P3.5 million.
He said his clients were only involved in count one and as such it would be prejudicial to subject them to a prolonged trial of other counts, which they had nothing to do with.
“We don’t have the investigating officer’s statement. We don’t know what else would be added to the charge sheet or the nature of counts to be introduced at this stage. It would prejudicial to my clients,” argued Moncho.
Other lawyers associated with Moncho’s submissions said this would expedite the proceedings.
“My client is only charged in count five and to that end I associate myself with attorney Moncho’s submissions,” said attorney Bhekimpilo Sibanda, who represents Moyo.
Sibanda further indicated that it was irregular in the first place for the prosecution to join the charges because they were sequential and did not lead to one another.
He said joining them contravened Section 130 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, which provides that persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction must be joined for trial.
Attorney Mothusi said the indictment against his client should be quashed because no evidence so far linked him to the count he is charged with. He said the statements provided by the prosecution thus far did not mention his client.
However, state prosecutor Relentse Mosarwane said it was confusing if every defence counsel wanted his client to have a separate trial. He said the transactions were tied, as such the accused should be charged together. He also said it would be prejudicial for Nkomazana who is involved in all the counts but one.
“The first accused person relates to all the counts but one. Would that be justice if for him the trials were separated? This would also be costly, not just on the State and witnesses, but on the accused as well,” Mosarwane argued.
He said the prosecution was intending to break the case into two trials by separating counts of offences against persons from those against the public or State.
He said that was the extent to which the State would bend.
All the 12 accused persons in the matter are on bail except Nkomazana. They have been ordered to appear in court on March 2, 2018 for ruling on application of separation of trials.