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 CO URT OF SOUT H AF RI CA
GAUT ENG DI VISIO N, PRETORI A
CASE NO : CC10/2025
DAT E: 03 -08-2026




In t he matt er between
THE STATE
and
MOHOLO VOILE TENTSI Accused


J U D G M E N T

MAT L APE NG , AJ: [ 1] Mr Mohol o Voile Tent si [ spelt ] is a
49 -ye ar -ol d So ut h Af rican mal e. He is c har ge d wit h t h e
f ollow ing of f enses : [ 1] C ont rave nt ion of sect io n 3 rea d wit h
sect ions 1, 56 (1) , 57, 58, 59, 60, and 61 of Act 32 of 2007 ,
also re ad w it h sect io ns 92 ( 2), 94, 256, an d 2 61 of t he
Crimi nal Pr oce dur e Act 51 of 1 9 77, an d sect i ons 5 1 (1) of
Act 105 of 199 7. [ 2] I t is also cont rave nt ion of sect io n 3

DELETE WHI CHEVER I S NOT APPLICABLE
(1) REPO RTABLE : YES / NO
(2) OF I NTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES : YES / NO
(3) REVISED

......................................... ...........
SIGNATURE
DATE: .............................

read wit h s ect ion 1 , 56 ( 1), 57 , 58 , 59 , 6 0 a nd 61 of Act 32
of 200 7 al so re ad wit h s ect ion 92 (2), 94 , 25 6 a nd 26 1 of t he
Cr imi nal Pro ced ure Act 51 of 197 7 an d sect io n 51 (1) of Act
105 of 19 97 , r ap e. [ 3] I s also of cont r ave nt io n sect ion 3 ,
read wit h sect io n 1, 56 (1) , 57, 58, 59, 60, an d 61 of 32 of
200 7 also rea d wit h sect ion 92 ( 2), 94 , 256 and 26 1 of t he
Crimi nal Pro ced ure Act 51 of 19 9 7 an d sect io n 51 (1) of Act
105 of 19 97 .
Co unt 1: Rape, i n t hat on or about t he period Jun e
202 4 , at or near Sebo ke ng in t he dist rict of Emf uleni , t he
accus ed it unlawf ull y and int ent io nal ly commit an act of
sexu al p en et rat ion wit h M[ . . . ] K[. .. ] T [. . .], a 13 -year -ol d
f emale wit ho ut her cons ent .
Co unt 2: I n t hat upo n or a bo ut t he peri od 202 3 t o
F ebru ary 202 4 , at or near Seb oke ng in t he dist rict of
Emf ule ni , t he accus ed di d unl awf u lly an d int ent i on ally
commit an act of sexual penet rat io n wit h N[ . . .] N[ . .. ], a 15 -
year -ol d f emal e w it h out her co nse nt .
Co unt 3: I n t hat o n he r a bo ut Jun e 2 02 4 at Se bok en g
in t he dist rict of Emf uleni , t he accuse d did unla wf ully an d
int ent io nall y com mit an act of sexu al p en et rat ion wit h B[ . . . ]
P[ . .. ], a 10 -year -ol d f emal e wit h out her co nse nt .
[ 2] H e is represe nt ed by Adv Sim pso n f rom Leg al Aid
Sout h Af rica. He ple ad ed n ot guilt y t o all t he charg es
pref erre d ag ain st him. Adv Simps on i nf orm ed t he Co urt t hat

t he accuse d ’s plea of not guilt y is in accordanc e wit h her
inst ruct ions, an d t hat t he accu s ed’s pl ea ex pla nat io n in
t erms of sect ion 115 of t he Crimin al Proce dur e Act 51 of
197 7, herei n af t er t he CPA, is t hat of a bare denial. He
den ies h avin g co mmit t ed t he of f ens es pref erre d a gai nst him
and p ut t he St at e t o t he proof t hereof . Accused conf irme d
wh at was sai d by Adv Simp son o n his b eh alf .
[ 3] T he court explaine d t he comp et ent verdict s t o t he
accus ed. I t also a ppris ed him of t he provi sio ns of sect io n
51 (1) of t he Crimin al La w Am en dm ent Act , 105 of 1977, t hat
t he prescri be d sent e nce is lif e impris on me nt , if convict ed of
t he of f enses lev elle d a gai nst him. Unl ess he c an sat isf y t he
Co urt t hat t here are subst a nt ial a nd co mp ellin g
circumst a nces, ent it lin g t he Court t o impos e a lesser
sent e nce.
[ 4] T he St at e applie d t hat t he proce edi ngs b e hel d in
camer a in t erms of sect ion 153 (3) of t he CPA, regardin g
here t o t he f act t hat t he accuse d is allege d t o have
commit t e d of f enses of a sexu al n at ure. Adv Rac ho f or t he
St at e also ap pli ed t h at t he vict ims s ho uld t est if y wit h t h e
assist anc e of an int er me diary a nd by m ea ns of a close d
circuit t elevisi on p ursu ant t o sect io n 15 8 (2) , an d 1 70 (A) of
t he CPA. Adv Simp so n f or t he def en ce did n ot opp ose t he
app licat io ns by t h e St at e. T he C ourt ord ere d t hat t he
proce ed ing s be h eld in c amer a, and t h at t he vict ims shoul d

give t heir evi de nce t hrou gh t he assist a nce of an
int erme diary i n t erms of sect ion 17 0 (A) of t he CPA.
[ 5] May I int erpose t o st at e t hat I am not going t o
dea l wit h t he evid enc e of t he st at e wit n esses i n t he or der
t hey test if ied f or I do not t hi nk t hat such an appro ach w ill
be a lo gical o ne.
[ 6] K[. . .] T [. .. ] t est if ied . H er birt h cert if icat e w as
han de d in as EXHI BI T A. She was born on 21 June 2 011. I t
is t his wit n ess t est imo ny t hat s he k no ws t he accus ed , t hat
t he lat t er is havin g a Salo n op pos it e her p arent a l hom e
sit uat ed at Z one 11 Se bok en g a nd t h at t he acc use d lik es t o
be in t h e co mpa ny of chi ldre n. I t is K[. . .] ' s eviden ce t hat
one d ay t he accuse d aske d t hem t o accomp any hi m t o his
plac e. I t is K[. .. ] ' s evidenc e f urt her t h at she w as wit h M[ . . . ]
and B[ . . . ] when t hey went t o t he accused pl ace of abod e
sit uat ed at Ka na na, an d t hat she di d not kn ow t he a ccus ed ’s
plac e bef or e t his part icu lar d ay. She t est if ied f urt her t hat
upo n t he ir arrival at t he accused pl ace , t he lat t er sent M[. .. ]
and B[ . . .] t o go and f et ch wat er a dist ance f rom t he
accus ed' s reside nt ial plac e, and t hat af t er t hey had lef t ,
accus ed h ad se xu al int erco urse wit h her wit ho ut her
cons ent , and t hat it occurred in t he accuse d' s bedro om. I t
is t his wit n ess evi de nce f urt h er t hat w he n M[ . . . ] and B[ . .. ]
ret urne d, accuse d sent K[ . .. ] and M[ . . .] t o go and f et ch
wat er an d he re mai ne d wit h B[ . . .]. I t is K[. .. ] ’s evidenc e

t hat she doe s not k no w w hat h ap pe ne d t o B[ . . .]. K[. .. ]
t est if ied f urt her t hat whe n she arri ved wit h M[ . . . ], accused
said t his wit ness must no w g o wit h B[ . . .] and she re mai ne d
beh in d wit h M[ . . .]. T hey di d as r equ est e d. T he wit n ess
we nt t o f et ch wat er wit h B[ .. .] . T hey ret urned t o t he
accus ed ’s ho use a nd t he a ccus ed t ook t he m ho me.
[ 6] K[ .. . ]' s evidenc e is f urt her t h at som e d ays af t er
t his incid ent , she was passi ng t h e acc use d ’s ho me i n t he
comp any of B[ . .. ] and ot her peo ple. T he accuse d calle d
t hem and sai d t hey must accomp any hi m to go and f et c h
spin ach at Z on e 11 pl ot s. T hey went wit h hi m. T hey did not
get spinac h. Accuse d said t hey must go wit h him t o
Kwa gg ast roo m t rain st at ion, whic h was n o mor e in use,
wh ere he doe s his t raini ng or ex ercises. T he t rain st at ion in
que st ion is d epict e d in a p hot o a lbu m w hich was ha n de d in
as an exh ibit a nd m arke d EX HI BI T B. It is K[ .. .] ’s evidenc e
t hat whilst t hey wer e t here, accus ed sa id t hey sh oul d go t o
t he t op of t he st at ion. T hat whilst at t he t op of t he st at ion,
accus ed u ndr esse d her , he al so lo wer ed h is t rouser. He
t hen insert e d his pen is int o her vagin a f rom behi nd an d
ma d e back a nd f ort h mov eme nt s. O nce he was f inis hed h e
t old her to k ee p qu iet , and t h ere af t er t hey lef t f or hom e. He
gav e ea ch of t hem a R 20 not e. T hat is M[ . . . ], K[ .. .] and
B[ . .. ].
[ 7] K[ . .. ] t est if ied f urt her t hat on anot her d ay , she w as

passi ng t he acc use d ’s ho me. Accuse d ha d sexu al
int erco urse wit h her . I t is t his wit ness versio n t hat on t his
part icul ar day sh e do es not rem em ber in w hos e com pa ny
she w as . E vid enc e of t his wit nes s on t his i ncid ent is
sket chy. I am not going t o det ai n myse lf much o n it .
[ 8] I t is it K[. .. ] ’s evidence t hat t he accused use d t o
sen d one bo y by t he name of B[ . .. ] t o come and cal l her,
and t h at t he f ormer a dvise d h er t o report t he inc id ent s. She
t est if ied t hat she ult imat ely rep ort ed t o Mp ho , and t he lat t er
report e d t o Pasek a[ ?] . It is K[ .. . ]’s evidenc e t hat on t he
f irst occasion w he n , she w as w it h M[ . . .] and B[ . .. ] at t he
accus ed ’s pl ace, t hey c ook ed an d at e ch ips. Sh e t est if ied
f urt her t hat she d id t ell B[ . . . ] t hat accus ed h ad s exu al
int erco urse wit h her. She was asked duri ng cross -
exam in at ion by A dv Simps on f or t he def en c e why she w ent
wit h t he acc use d t o go an d look f or sp in ach. Her re ply w as
t hat she did not t hink t hat t he accuse d wo ul d rap e her
aga in. I t was put t o K[ . . .] by advoc at e Sim ps on t hat
accus ed ’s versi on is t hat B[ . . . ] is her boyf rie nd a nd t hat
accus ed onc e sa w t he m ha vin g sex ual i nt erco urse. Sh e
disp ut ed t his.
[ 10] B[ .. .] P[ .. .] also t est if ied t hroug h t he as sist anc e
of an int erme diar y . She was bor n on 12 April 2 01 4. It is
her ev ide nc e t hat she w as at t he accus ed ’s p lac e of ab od e
sit uat ed at Kana na, t hat she was in t he comp any of K[ . .. ]

and M[ . . . ], and t hat whilst t here t he accus ed cal le d K[ . .. ]
int o t he be dro om. She doe s not kno w w hat h ap pen ed i nsid e
t he bedr oom. She t est if ied f urt her t hat some t ime
t hereaf t er K[ . . .] came out and sai d to her t hat t he accuse d
was c alli ng h er . S he w ent int o t h e b ed ro om. T he acc use d
undr esse d her. He also undr esse d and put his penis in her
vagi na. Sh e was on a b ed at t he t ime wh en t h e acc use d
pen et rat ed h er vagin a. It is her evidenc e t hat she was
f eelin g pa ins w he n t he acc use d ins ert ed h is pe nis in her
vagi na. I t is her t est imony f urt her t hat t her eaf t er t he
accus e d pour ed t h em a C oke and t h ey l ef t f or t heir
respect iv e ho mes. Sh e t est if ied f urt her t hat t hey h ad g on e
t o f et ch a swimmin g po ol at t he accus ed pl ace of a bod e.
[ 11] C[ . .. ] M[. .. ] also test if ied . I t is her evidenc e t hat
B[ . .. ] P[ . .. ] is her gran dd au ght er a nd t h at she w as st ayin g
wit h h er at Lak esi de si nce J an uary 2 02 4. Miss M[ . . . ]
t est if ied t hat on 20 O ct ober 20 24, B[ . . .]' s mot her calle d her
and af t er t he t eleph oni c discus sio n. She call ed B[ . . . ] int o
t he be dro om an d w hilst insi de t h e b edr oom s he ask ed B[ . . . ]
if t he accuse d rape d her , t o which B[ . .. ] nodde d wit h her
hea d an d st art ed cryin g. T hat conclude d her evi de nce.
[ 12] M[ .. . ] M[ .. .] also t est if ied t hroug h t he as sist anc e
of an int ermedi ary. I t is her evidence t hat she used t o cut
her ha ir at t he accuse d' s Salo n. She t est if ied ab out t he
incid ent t hat occurr ed at Kw ag gast ro om t rain st at io n. I t is

evid enc e t hat she w as wit h B ohl ale a nd K[ . . . ], as well as t he
accus ed. T hat t he accus ed we nt t o an up per p art of t he
st at ion wit h K[ . . .]. T he wit ness rem ai ne d on t he st airs wit h
Bohl ale . I t is M[ .. .] ' s t est imony t hat she sa w t he acc use d
undr ess K[ . . . ] and ha d sexu al int erc ours e wit h h er.
T here af t er, he gave t hem R2 0 each. F rom t here, t hey
proce ed ed h om e. I t is M[. . .] ’s t est imony t hat somet im e
t hereaf t er, accus ed sa id t hey s ho uld go an d f et ch a
swim min g po ol at t his resident i al plac e at Kana na , t hat she
was wit h K[ . . .] and B[ .. .] , as well as Karab o. W hilst t here,
t he accuse d sent Karab o t o go and buy a Cok e . T he
accu s ed req uest e d K[ . .. ] and B[ . .. ] t o ent er int o t he
bat hro om. T he w it ness r ema in ed i n t he kit ch en. I t is t his
wit ness e vid enc e t hat whil e she was in t he sit t ing ro om, t he
bedr oo m d oor w as a jar a nd he s aw t h e acc use d h av in g
sexu al int erc ours e wit h K[ . . .] and B[ . . . ]. It is t his wit ness
evid enc e t hat t hereaf t er accuse d gav e each of t hem R20
and he also po ure d t he m C oke. T hey t he n t ook t h e
swim min g po ol an d ret urn ed t o Z on e 11. Adv Simps on f or
t he def en c e ask ed t he wit nes s why do es she say t hat
accus ed a nd K[ . . . ] had sexual i nt erco urse . S he re pli ed t hat
she sa w t hem hav e sexu al int erco urse. It was put t o t he
wit ness t hat Pas eka inf lu enc ed t he m t o lay f alse charg es
aga inst t he accus ed. She rep lie d in t he ne gat ive. I n
respo nse t o a quest i on by t he Co urt this wit ness replie d

t hat she is doing Grad e 11 an d t hat t hey are t aught about
sexu al int erco urse at sch ool.
[ 14] B[. .. ] N[ . .. ] also t est if ied. He was also assist e d
by an int erm ed iary. B[ . .. ]' s evidence is t hat one F rid ay in
O ct ober, Pasek a aske d hi m to acco mpa ny hi m t o go a nd b uy
a bun ny chow , and t hat on t heir way, Pasek a aske d him if
he d oes silly t hi ngs wit h K[ . . .]. He deni ed it and s aid t hat
t he perso n who d oes silly t hing s wit h B[ . .. ] is t he accused.
T his wit n ess t he n rel at ed t o Pa sek a an i nci dent t hat
occurre d at Kwag ga st room t rain st at ion w he n he w as wit h
K[ . .. ] and M[ . .. ], and t he accused . B[ .. .] corrobor at ed t he
evid enc e of K[. . .] and M[ . . .] in all mat erial respect . B[. .. ]
t est if ied f urt her t hat t he f oll owin g day af t er t he incident at
Kwa gg ast roo m t rain st at ion, t he accused call ed him an d
requ est ed hi m t o call K[. .. ] becaus e he want e d t o do silly
t hings wit h h er. T he wit ness co mm unic at ed t h e me ssa ge t o
K[ . .. ] and t he lat t er said t hat t he accu se d is mad.
[ 15] Paseka Mal ok a, here in af t er Paseka als o
t est if ied. His evide nce is bri ef ly t o t he ef f ect f ollowi ng. He
resid es at Z one 11 at Seb oke ng . He kn ow s t he accus ed f or
abo ut 26 years. He is in go od t imes wit h t he ac cus ed. T he
accus ed is oper at ing a Salo n whic h is sit uat ed at his
pare nt al h om e. Pasek a is h avin g a car was h in t h e yard.
O ne M ph o is a s ho pke ep er, in t he sa me prem ises. I t is
Pasek a' s evid enc e t hat one d ay he sa w chi ldre n pl ayin g in

his yard a nd a s t hey wer e pl ayin g he s aw B[ . . . ] at t empt ing
t o kiss K[ . .. ], but t hat t he lat t er was ref usi ng t o be kiss ed.
Not lon g t her eaf t er, he met B[ . . .] at a corner. He was on his
way t o t he sho p. Pas eka req uest e d B[ . .. ] t o accompa ny
him. O n t heir way he aske d B[ . .. ] if he is doing s illy things
wit h K[ . . .] t o which B[ . . .] replied t hat he is not , but t hat t he
perso n wh o is doing silly t hin gs wit h K[ . .. ] is t he accused.
He t hen rel at ed t he inci de nt t hat occurred bet we en t he
accus ed a nd K[ . . .] at Kwag gast ro om . It is Paseka' s
evid enc e t hat he t hen appr oac he d t he parent s of t he vict ims
af t er t his report he got f rom B[ . .. ].
[ 16] Mpho Ra biri , herei naf t er Mp ho als o gav e
evid enc e. Her v ersio n is t h at s he is a sh opk ee per. T he
sho p is sit uat ed in Paseka ' s premis es. I t is Mp ho ' s
t est imony t hat in O ct ober 20 24 K[ . . . ] came t o t he shop in
t he com pa ny of t w o ot h er chil dre n, K[ . . .] inf ormed h er t hat
t he accu sed i s doi ng si lly t hin gs wit h t hem. W h en sh e
inq uire d wh at she me ant by silly t hi ngs, she st art e d crying.
I t is Mpho’s evid enc e t hat not lon g af t er K[ . .. ] had lef t ,
Pasek a arrived a nd she rel at ed t o him what K[ . .. ] had just
said t o her. Paseka also t old her w hat B[ . .. ] had bee n
sayin g t o hi m ab out a n inci de nt t hat occurr ed at
Kwa gg ast roo m t rain st at ion .
[ 17] Morena M al af a ne al so g ave evi de nce. His
evid enc e is brief ly t hat on t he day t he accused w as

appr eh en de d a nd a ssa ult ed by me mb ers of t he c omm un it y ,
the childr en m ent io ne d t hat N[ . . .] was also ra pe d by t he
accus ed. T he wit ness and Wa nlef u we nt t o N[. .. ] ’s place.
T hey ret urn ed wit h h er a nd t hey aske d N[ . . . ] if t he childre n
are t ellin g t he t rut h and N[ . . . ] t hen st art ed crying. T hat
concl ud ed M oren a Mal af an e' s t est imony. N[ . . .] N[ .. .] also
gav e evid enc e t hro ug h t he assist a nce of an int er me d iary.
She wa s born on 24 Ja nu ary 200 9. She t est if ied t hat she
re sid ed Se bok en g an d t hat she kno ws t he acc use d. T he
lat t er owns a salo n at Z one 11 a nd sh e usu ally cut her hair
at t he salon. It is her evidenc e t hat t he accuse d rape d her
t wice. T hat on t he f irst inst ance wh en sh e w as at t he sal on,
accus ed cl ose d t he s alo n d oor, undr esse d h er. He als o
undr esse d. He t he n p ut his pe nis in her va gi na. I t is her
t est imony t hat she was ble ed in g and t hat af t er t he rape
orde al, accus ed sai d t o her t hat she mus t not report t o
any bod y and t hat if she can disclos e t his, he is going t o t ell
t he peo ple t hat he is having a love relat io nshi p wit h her.
She t est if ied f urt her t hat she t hen proce ed ed ho me an d
locke d h erself in t h e b edro om. T hat she did not re port t he
incid ent bec aus e she was af rai d t hat t he f at her is going t o
give h er a hidi ng.
[ 19] I t is N[ .. .] ' s version t hat som et ime t h ereaf t er sh e
was pa ssin g t he accuse d ’s Salo n, t he lat t er called her
insid e t he Sal on he u ndr esse d t he wit n ess, t he accuse d

also u n dress ed , put his penis in her priv at e pa rt and mad e
up an d do wn mov em ent s. I t is her version t hat she was
also b le edi ng o n t his oc casi on. Sh e t est if ied f urt her t hat
t he accuse d repe at ed t he w or ds t hat she must not report
t he inci de nt and if sh e ca n t ell a nyb ody, h e is go in g t o say
t hat t hey are havi ng an i nt imat e r elat io nsh ip, a nd as a
result , she did not report t he incide nt and she als o did not
cons ent t o t he int er cours e on b ot h t hese in st anc es .
[ 20] I t i s her evid enc e t hat t h e acc use d o nce aske d
her t o accom pa ny her t o his home b eca use his chi ldre n
wa nt ed t o se e h er. It is her t est imony t h at she di d
acco mpa ny t he acc use d t o his place of ab od e, and w he n
t hey arrive d, t he accus ed i nf orme d his wif e t hat N[ . . .]' s
pare nt s are i nvol ve d in a n ac cid ent a nd t hat sh e sh ou ld b e
acco mmo dat e d f or t he night . T his wit ness do es not
reme mb er t he dat es of t he inci dent s.
[ 21] It is N[ .. .]' s evidence f urt her t hat one day whilst
at home Pas eka an d W ond er arrived lo okin g f or her f at her,
wh o was n ot home at t he t ime . T hey t ook her alo ng an d
wh en t hey reac he d a cert ain plac e t hey asked t he wit n ess if
she wa s also rap ed by t he accus ed. She repli ed in t he
af f irmat ive. T he police arrive d and t he accus ed w as
arrest ed.
[ 22] Samkelisi we Mm bid i [ spelt ] also t est if ied. S he
is a prof ess ion al n urse at Kop an on g T hut huz ela He alt hc are

Ce nt re . She has been a nurs e since 201 0. I t is her
evid enc e t hat she w as on d ut y on 20 O ct ob er 24 a nd t hat
she exam in ed M[ . . . ] K[ .. .] T[ .. .] and t hat sh e co mpl et ed a
medi cal f orm J88 w hic h was han de d in as an exhibit and
marke d EX HI BI T D. I int erpose t o st at e t hat K[ . . . ] and M[ . .. ]
will b e us ed i nt erch an ge abl y. I t is Ms Mmbidi ' s t est imo ny
t hat her co nclu sio n af t er exa min in g K[ . . .], injuries n ot ed o n
gyn aec olo gical exa min at io n, are cl ef t s whic h are old t e ars
at t hree a nd 10 o' clock, w hich are c ons ist ent w it h g enit ali a
pen et rat ion. T hat conclu de d her evi de nce.
[ 23] Ge zina Joha nn a Lat e ga n. Herei naf t er Lat eg an,
also gav e evi de nce, s he is a re gist ere d n urse at Ko pan on g
He alt hca r e Ce nt re. I t is her t est imony t hat she was on dut y
on 20 O ct ob er 202 4, and t hat on t his part icular da y she
exam in ed N[ . . . ] N[. . .] , t he vict im in cou nt 2. She com plet e d
form J88, w hich was h an de d in b y a co nse nt and m arke d
EXHI BI T E . She not iced a cl ef t which is c onsist e nt wit h
prior pe net rat io n, and t hat co nclu de d her t est imo ny.
[ 24] Lat egan als o exami ne d B[ . .. ] P[. .. ] , t he vict im in
cou nt 3 . I t is her evide nce t hat o n ex ami nat io n t her e w ere
no in juri es, but t he a bse nce of injuri es d oes not excl ud e
pen et rat ion b eyo nd t he l abi a maj ora .
[ 25] Paska Kh oza also t est if ie d h e is a
serge ant in t h e Sout h Af rica n po lice s ervices. I t is his
evid enc e t hat h e rec eive d a r ep ort , as a resu lt of whic h h e

proce ed ed t o a p lac e at Z one 11 wher e h e f oun d t he
accus ed an d he place d him un der arrest and t hereaf t er he
t ook him f or med ical t reat m ent bec aus e he w as inj ure d.
[ 26] T he St at e case w as t he n clos ed. T he acc use d
t est if ied and ca lle d his lif e part ner as a w it ness. He
t est if ied t hat he kn ows t h e t hree vi ct ims i n t his cas e. He
also kn ow s B[ . . .], Paseka, an d Mp ho . He d eni es t he
alle gat io ns a gai nst hi m. I t is his evid en ce t h at Pasek a
inf lue nce d t he vict ims t o lay f alse ch arge s ag ainst him.
Miriam T hul o also t est if ied . S he has childr en wit h t he
accus ed. H er evid en ce di d n ot t ake t he d ef en ce ca se a ny
f urt her.
[ 27] Eugene N deb el e was call ed in a t rial -wit hi n -a-
t rial t o det ermin e if Miriam T hulo h ad i nd ee d mad e a
st at ement t o t he p olic e an d t hat he si gn ed it t o conf irm t hat
it was corr ect ly recor de d b ec aus e t he St at e w ant ed t o use it
t o cross -exam ine t he w it ness. He t est if ied t hat indee d
Miriam T hu lo m ade a st at eme nt in Sesot h o lan gu ag e an d
t hat she re duc ed it t o writ i ng i n En glis h. T hereaf t er h e rea d
it back t o her a nd t he l at t er was sat isf ie d t hat it was
correct ly record ed. She t hen appe nd ed her sig nat ure o n it .
Af t er t he St at e case in t rial - wit hin - a-t rial w as clos ed, t he
def en ce clos ed it s case wit ho ut callin g a wit ness. T he
Co urt ruled t hat t he st at ement was prop erly obt ain ed an d
read b ack t o t he wit n ess an d t hat t hereaf t er she app en de d a

sign at ure, t o conf irm t he correct ness of t he cont e nt s, and
t hat t he st at e was ent it led t o cross -ex ami ne t he wit ness.
[ 29] Adv Racho t h ereaf t er ap pli ed f or convi ct ion of
t he accus ed as ch arg ed.
[ 30] Adv Simpson a pp lie d f or t he dischar ge of t he
accus ed, on t he groun ds princip ally t hat t he St at e did not
succe ed t o prov e it s case bey on d a reas on abl e do ubt
aga inst t he accus ed.
T he C ourt must n ow eval uat e t h e evid en ce t o
det ermi ne if t he guilt of t he accuse d has bee n prove d
bey ond a reas on abl e do ubt . T he onus of proof in a criminal
case is di sch arge d by t h e St at e if t he evid enc e est a blish es
t he gu ilt of t he ac cus ed bey ond a re aso na ble do ubt . T he
t est was art icul at ed i n t he cas e of S v Van der M eyd en 1 99 9
(1) SAC R 44 7 (W ) at 449, wher e it was st at ed :
“T he prop er t est is t hat t he accused is
bou nd t o be convict ed If t he eviden ce
est ablis hes his g uilt beyo nd a reas on ab le
dou bt , and t he l ogic al cor oll ary is t hat he
must be acquit t ed if it is reasona bly
possi ble t hat he mi ght be i nn oce nt . ”
See als o S v Nt sele 199 8(2) SAC R 17 8(SC A) . I t has been
poi nt ed out in many jud gm ent s of t he Supreme C ourt of
App eal an d ot her high co urt s that t he t est is whet her t here
is a reason abl e possi bilit y t hat t he accused' s evid enc e may

be t rue, and if t hat is t he case, he shoul d be giv en t he
ben ef it of t he doubt an d be ac quit t ed.
[ 32] T he f ollowin g are c omm on c aus e: T hat t he
accus ed a nd t h e t hree vict im s , t o wit K[ . .. ], N[ .. .] and B[ . . .],
kno w each ot her we ll. T hat t he ac cused has a salo n at
Z one 11 , Se bok eng , a nd t hat t he vict ims als o resi des at
Z one 11. T hat t he vict ims used t o cut t heir hairs at t he
accus ed' s sal on. T hat t he acc use d a nd t he st at e wit n esses ,
t o wit B[ . . .], Mp ho a nd P asek a k no w e ach ot her well. T hat
t he accus ed ’s salo n is sit uat ed at Pasek a' s reside nt ial
plac e. T hat t he accused ’s resid ent ial pl ace is sit uat e d at
Kan an a whic h is f ar f rom wher e t he salon is sit uat ed. T hat
t he accus ed , at on e st ag e , own ed a port a ble i nf lat abl e
swim min g po ol.
[ 33] Point s in disp ut e : Accuse d de nie s hav in g ha d
sexu al int erco urse w it h t he t hree vict ims in t his mat t er.
[ 34] T he court is deali ng wit h evid enc e of childr en.
K[ . .. ] was 13 years of age wh en t he incide nt occurred ,
N[ . . .], 15 , and B[ . .. ] was 10 years of age. Accordin g t o
N[ . . .], she was alon e wit h t he accus ed wh en t he t wo
incid ent s occ urred i nsid e t he accu sed' s sal on. She is a
singl e wit ness. T he court must approa ch her evid enc e wit h
circums pect io n .
[ 35] I n t erms of sect ion 208 of t he Cr imin al
Proce dur e Act , it is compet ent f or a court t o convict o n t he

evid enc e of a singl e wit n ess, how ever, t he evid enc e must
be cle ar an d sat isf act ory in all mat eri al resp ect . See Rex v
Moko en a 19 32 O P D 79 at 8 0 a nd R ex v Moko en a 19 56 (3)
SA 81 (AA) at 85 .
[ 36] I n t he case of S v Saul 1 981 (3) SA 1 72 (A) , at
180 (e) t o (g) , it was held t hat :
“T here is no rule of t humb or f ormul a t o
app ly wh en it comes t o consid erat io n of
t he sing le w it ness. T he t rial jud ge will
wei gh t he e vid enc e, will co nsid er it s
mer it s and d em erit s, and havi ng d one so ,
will deci de w het h er it is t rust wort hy and
wh et her, desp it e t he f act t hat t here are
short com in gs or d ef ect s, or
cont rad ict ions in t he t est imony, he is
sat isf ied t hat t he t rut h has been t old.
T he caut ion ary rule ref erred t o by De
Villiers JP in 1932 may be a gui de t o a
right decisio n, but it does not mean t hat
t he ap pea l must succe ed if any crit icism,
ho wev er slen der , o f t he wit ness es'
evid enc e were we ll f ound ed . I t has been
said mor e t han onc e t hat t he exercise of
caut io n must not be al lo we d t o displa ce
t he exercis e of comm on se nse. ”

[ 37] I n t he case of W oji v Sant am I nsura nce Com pa ny
(Lt d) 198 1 (1) SA , 1 020 (A), a t pa ge 1 02 8, t he Su prem e
Co urt of Appeal st at ed t h at t o ensure t hat t he evi de nce of a
child c an be rel ie d up on, a c ourt must b e sat isf ie d t hat t he
evid enc e is t rust wort h y. T he court not e d f act ors w hic h must
be t ake n i nt o acc ou nt in or der t o d et ermi ne if t he evid enc e
is t rust wort hy, and it was h eld as f oll ows. :
“T rust wort hi ness d ep en ds on f act ors su ch
as t he child' s po wer of observ at ion, his
po wer of recollect io n, and his pow er of
narrat io n on t he specif ic mat t er t o be
t est if ied. I n each inst ance, t he capacit y
of t he part icular child has t o be
invest ig at ed. His ca pacit y of obs ervat i on
will de pe nd o n wh et her he a pp ears
int elli gent e no ug h t o obs erve . W h et her
he has t he capac it y of recollect io n will
dep en d ag ai n on w het h er he h as
suf f icient years of di scret io n t o rem em ber
wh at occurs. W hil e t he ca pac it y t o
und erst an d t he quest io n put , and t o
f rame and ex press int elli ge nt answers ,
there are f act ors as we ll whi ch t he co urt
will t ake i nt o acc ou nt in asse ssin g t he
child t rust w ort hin ess i n t he wit ness box.

Do es he a pp ear t o be h on est ? I s t here a
consci ous ness of t he d ut y t o spe ak t he
t rut h? T hen also, t he nat ure of t he
evid enc e given by t he child may be of a
simpl e kind a nd ma y relat e t o a subject
mat t er clearly wit hin t he f ield of it s
und erst an din g an d int erest , and t he
circumst a nces ma y be such as pract ic ally
t o exclud e t he risk arisi ng f rom
sug gest ibi lit y. At t he same t ime, t he
dan ger of beli evin g a ch ild wh ere
evid enc e st ands alo ne m ust not be
und errat e d. ”
See als o Ph og ole v S 37 0/202 3, Z ASCA 54, ju dgm ent
deliv ere d on 9 M ay 20 25.
[ 38] W it h regard t o t he comp lai na nt ' s age, t he
Supr eme Court of Appe al hel d as f ollo ws in t he case of I CM
v S, 2022 (Z ASCA ) 1 08:
“T he co urt , consid erin g t he evid enc e of a
child , must be sat isf ied t hat t he child is
credi ble, and a relia ble wit n ess. T he
credi bilit y abil it y relat es t o ho nest y a nd
relia bilit y t o t he child' s cognit iv e abilit y
or brain d ev elo pme nt . T he cognit ive
abilit y is asses se d havi ng re gard t o

f act ors such as abilit y t o e nco de , ret ain,
ret rieve, and reco unt inf ormat io n, or an
eve nt , t he int imidat i ng a nd be wil deri ng
at mosp her e und er whic h t he child
t est if ied, and b e ev alu at ed i n t he lig ht of
t he t ot alit y of t he evidenc e. ”
[ 39] I n t he case of S v Kub eka 1 98 2 (1) SA 53 4
(W LD ), i t was hel d t hat t he evid enc e ou ght not t o be lo oke d
at piece me al an d in isol at ion. All of it should b e an alyse d
and w eig he d t oget h er in det e rmi nin g wh et her t he st at e has
prove d it s case bey on d a reas on abl e do ubt .
[ 40] I t has been sai d , in a numb er of cases , t hat t he
prop er ap pro ach in a crimin al cas e is t o consi der t he t ot alit y
of t he evid enc e. T hat is t o say, t o exami ne t he n at ure of
t he st at e case, t he nat ur e of t he def en ce cas e , inclu din g t he
def en ce wit ness es, and t hen ask ones elf , at t he end of all
of t his , whet h er t he g uilt of t he a ccus ed has b ee n
est ablis he d bey on d a reas on abl e do ubt .
[ 41] K[ .. .] ’s evidenc e is t hat at t he accu sed' s hous e
she was wit h M[ . . .] and B[ . .. ] and t hat she does not
reme mb er t he ot hers and t hat wh ilst t here t he accuse d
calle d her int o t he bedro om a nd ha d sexua l int ercours e wit h
her ag ain st her will.
[ 42] T he Court ob serve d t hat K[ . . .], t he vict im in
cou nt 1, is an int elligent you ng girl, int ellig ent eno ug h t o

obs erve and ha s t he capacit y of recollect ion. I am saying
so be cau se, in re spo ns e t o a q uest io n, w hat sh e obs erve d
in t he accus ed be dro om, she rep lie d t hat amon gst ot hers
t here wer e Coc a -Co la can s. T he accused, whi lst in t he
wit ness st a nd, co nf irme d t his p ort ion of K[ . . .]’s evidence , he
t est if ied t hat he c ollect s t ins a nd met als f or re cyclin g
purp oses an d t hat h e g et s mo ney f or t his, a nd t h at t here
were t ins of C oca - Col a in his be droo m . K[ .. . ] could not
hav e see n t hese Coc a -C ola t ins in t he accus ed b edr oo m if
she was n ever i nsi de t his b edr oo m. I t is corroborat ed by
t he evi de nce of M[ . . . ] as t o what ha pp en ed in t h e acc use d
bedr oo m. K[ .. . ]’s t est imony does not st and a lo ne. I t is
corrob orat e d by t he evid enc e of M[ . .. ] as t o what happe ne d
in t he accus ed’s b edro om. I t is also conf irm ed by m edic al
evid enc e.
[ 43] A s regar ds co unt 1, t he evi de nce of K[ . . .], M[. .. ]
and B[ . . . ] is suff icient ly corrobor at ive of each ot her, as t o
wh at hap pe ne d b et we en t h e acc use d a nd K[ . . . ], as well as
wh at hap pen ed b et w ee n t he accus ed a nd B[ . . . ].
[ 44] K[ . .. ]’s t est imony is t hat t he accused
also p en et rat ed her sex ua lly f rom t he b ack at
Kwa gg ast roo m t rain st at ion, wh ich is in act ive. Th is port ion
of evide nce is corro bor at ed by B[ . . . ] and M[ . . .]. T hese
wit ness es are als o in agre eme nt t hat af t er t he accused ha d
sexu al int erc ours e wit h K[ . . . ], he gave t he m R 20 e ach.

T hey t hen pr oce ed ed ho me. Paseka ’s evi de nces is t hat
wh en B[ . . . ] relat ed t he i ncid ent t hat occurr ed at
Kwa gg ast roo m st at ion, he ask ed B[ . . .] if he saw t he
accus ed b ut t ocks an d B[ . . .] replied i n t he af f irmat ive an d
also sai d t hat he als o saw t he ac cus ed ’s pe nis .
[ 45] I t was argu ed by A dv Sim pso n f or t he d ef enc e
th at t he eviden ce of K[ . .. ], M[. .. ] and B[ . .. ] as t o what
exact ly ha pp en ed at t he t rain st at ion is not in harm ony,
whic h is in dic at ive of t he f act t hat t heir versi on i s a
f abricat io n. F or example it was argued t hat K[ .. .] t est if ied
t hat t he accu se d ha d inst ruct e d M[ . . . ] and B[ . . .] t o remain
on t he gro un d f loor of t he st at io n, but t hat B[ . . . ] t est if ied
t hat he w as o n t he l ef t hand st airs of t he brid ge k ee pin g
guar d wh en M[ . . .] t est if ied t hat t hey were on , she and B[ . .. ]
were o n t he rig ht han d side o f t he st airs.
[ 46] I t has been sai d , in a numb er of cases , t hat not
every error or cont rad ict ion af f ect s a wit ness credibil it y.
T he court must decide if t he deviat io n is mat erial or
perip her al. Cont radict io ns are not view ed in isol at io n, but
as part of t he ent ire bo dy of t he evid enc e pr ese nt ed . Se e S
v Mkohle 6 39/ 8 8 Z ASCA 98 , jud gm ent deliv ere d on
7 Sept e mb er 19 89. T he ult im at e g oal is t o d eci de if t he
st at e has proven t he gu ilt of t he accuse d beyo nd a
reaso na ble d ou bt , despit e t he sh ort comi ngs in t h e evid enc e.
[ 47] T he abov e co nt radict io ns com pla ine d of are

insig nif ica nt and are t o be expect e d f rom an hon est but
imperf ect rec olle ct ion, obs ervat i on a nd rec onst ruct i on of t he
evid enc e. T hey act ually mil it at e ag ainst a co nspir acy
bet w ee n K[ . .. ], M[. .. ] and B[ . .. ]. T he evidenc e of M[ .. .] ,
B[ . .. ] and K[ . . .] is age appr opri at e and co nsist e nt on core
f act s. Accused lure d t hem wit h a swimmi ng po ol t o his
plac e of residenc e, and war ne d t hem not t o t ell anyon e. He
gav e t hem mo ne y. Discrepa nci es in t he evi de nce as t o t he
exact dat es ar e ex pect e d f rom chil dren and do n ot dest roy
t heir credi bilit y.
[ 49] B[ .. .] report t o Pase ka is admissib le as a f irst
report an d supp ort consist enc y. B[. .. ] has no reaso n t o
implic at e t he acc use d.
[ 50] I f ind Pas eka t o b e a n eut ral wit ness. H e is not
relat ed t o t he vict ims. He only came t o know ab out t hese
incid ent s w hen h e ask ed B[ . . . ] if t he lat t er is doing silly
t hings wit h K[ . . . ], and it is w ort h me nt ion ing t h at K[ . . .] is t he
one w ho rep ort ed th e inci de nt t o Mpho, t he shopke ep er.
T here is t her ef ore a bso lut ely no ev ide nc e t hat Pasek a
con nive d, coach ed, or inf luenc ed t hes e childre n. I also f ind
Mph o t o be a neut ral w it ness. She is not relat ed t o K[ . .. ]
and B[ . . . ]. Mp ho t est if ied t hat K[ . .. ] inf ormed her t hat t he
accus ed is doi ng silly t hin gs t o her and wh en sh e aske d her
wh at she me ant ab out silly t hings sh e st art ed cryin g.
[ 51] N[ . .. ]’s evide nce is t hat sh e w as rap ed by t he

accus ed t wic e at his sal oo n o n dif f erent occas io ns. Sh e
doe s not recall t he dat es, but it was in 2023 an d 202 4, and
on on e occasi on t he accu sed m et her on her way an d
inf orme d her t hat sh e must acco mp any h im t o his resi de nt ial
plac e, an d sh e di d acc om pa ny t he accu sed t o his plac e of
abo de.
[ 52] T he eviden ce of N[ . .. ] is t hat on t he t wo
inst anc es t hat t he accused ha d int erco urse wit h her , he was
pen et rat ing h er f rom be hin d.
[ 53] K[. .. ]’s t est imony is t hat at t he t rain st at ion,
accus ed pe net rat e d her f rom behi nd an d t his version is also
conf irme d by B[ . . . ] and M[ . . .].
[ 54] Anot her imp ort ant asp ect is t hat af t er t he
int erco urse w it h K[ . . .] at t he t rain st at ion, an d af t er t he
incid ent s at t he acc use d resi de nt ial p lac e, t he acc use d
gav e t hese chil dre n eac h R2 0. T hese aspect s d emo nst rat e
t hat t he accuse d was u sin g t he sam e mod us o pera ndi .
[ 55] Adv Simpson p lac ed mu ch em ph asis o n t he f act
t hat N[ . .. ] did not report t hat she was rape d in 20 23 but in
202 4 she ag ain go es t o t he accused ’s salon w here sh e was
rape d f or t he s eco nd t im e. Sh e arg ue s t h at t his co nf irms
t hat Pasek a inf lu enc ed th e chil dre n. I disagre e. O ne
incid ent is all eg ed t o h ave occurr ed i n 20 23 an d w as not
report e d in 202 3. T he of f ense of ra pe h as n o pr escript io n
perio d. Sect ion 59 of t he Sexual O ff enses Act is specif ic

t hat no inf ere nce c an b e dra wn f rom t he d el ay bet w ee n t he
commi ssio n and t he report in g of t he rape. T heref ore, t he
del ay in report ing t he rap e coul d not be decisive in t he
adj udic at ion of N[ . . . ]’s t est imony.
[ 57] Applyin g t he principl e in S au l, W oji and Pho gol e
supra , I f ind t hat N[ .. .] , K[. .. ] , B[. .. ] , M[ .. . ], B[ .. .] ’s e videnc e
is relia ble , t rust w ort hy, an d sat isf act ory i n all mat eri al
respect . Despit e t heir age, t hey were a ble t o answ er all
que st ions f ra nkly a nd ho nest ly. T hey are ad ama nt t hat t he
accus ed is t h e o ne wh o rap ed K[ . . . ], N[. .. ] and B[ . . .]. T he
evid enc e is support e d by medic al evid enc e, and t he
accus ed k ne w e ach ot her well bef or e t his inc id ent . T here is
no sug gest i on t hat t hey were at log ger he ads. I see no
reaso n why t hey can f alsely incri min at e t he accuse d to t he
commi ssio n of t he of f enses.
[ 58] T he accus ed ’s evid en ce is not imb ue d wit h t he
desir ed cl arit y of precis ion. I t is riddl ed wit h
impro ba bilit ies, inc onsist e nci es, discrep anci es, and is
dev oid of all cred enc e.
[ 59] T he accused is insin uat in g t hat t he t hree
vict ims, t hat is K[ .. .] , N[. .. ], B[ .. .] , and t he ot h er wit n esses ,
t o wit , B[. . .] , M[ .. .] , Mpho , w ere inf lu enc ed by P asek a t o lay
f alse char ges a gai nst him. T here is no f orce in t his
argu me nt beca use t o do so, all t he t hre e vict ims B[ . .. ] and
Mph o wo ul d hav e had t o co nspir e wit h Pas eka a bo ut what

t hey w oul d say i n co urt . T he vict ims and M ph o a nd B[ …]
gav e a det aile d and con sist ent acco unt . I f ind it diff icult t o
f at hom t hat Paseka man ag ed t o coach t hree sep arat e
childr en, inc lu din g B[ . . . ] and Mp h o, t o giv e suc h d et aile d
and c onsist e nt acco unt s , t he det ail a nd co nsist en cy in t he
evid enc e of t hese wit n ess dispr oves t his co nt ent io n
[ 60] W hen t h e t rial st art ed, t he acc use d t hrou gh his
Leg al repre sent at iv e vehe me nt ly deni ed havi ng giv en t he
childr en a ny m on ey, but w he n he was i n t he wit ness st a nd,
he ch an ged t h e t une. He a dmit t ed h avin g giv en t he chi ldre n
mon ey f or recycling pur pos es. T his is a mat erial
cont rad ict ion.
[ 61] According t o t he accu sed, his h ous e is sit uat ed at
Kan an a, whic h is 10 kil omet res f rom Z o ne 11, Seb oke ng ,
wh ere N[ . . .], t he vict im in count 2, is st aying. N[ .. .] knows
t he ot her v ict ims in t hi s mat t er, t hat is B[ . . .], K[ .. . ], as well
as M[ . .. ] and B[ . .. ]. She also kno ws Pa s ek a and M pho . All
of t hem are res idi ng at . Z one 11. I t is inconcei vab le t hat
N[ . . .] would opt t o walk a dist a nce of 1 0 kilo met res w it h t he
accus ed t o go and put up at t he lat t er place of abod e, and
did n ot t hink of asking f or acc omm od at ion at any of t hese
wit ness es.
[ 62] Anot her asp ect t hat raises ey ebr ows is t hat
accord in g t o N[ . . . ], accused li ed t o his wif e , h e t ol d t he
lat t er t hat N[ . .. ] should b e acco mm od at ed f or t he ni ght

bec aus e her pare nt s were invol ved in an acci de nt . It is
aga in i n co nceiv abl e t hat t he accus ed deci de d t o lie t o his
part ner a bo ut t his issue, he agai n lied t o his wif e, he t old
t he wif e t hat N[ .. .] ' s name is Mase g o. T he quest io n t hat
f orcef ully co me t o t he f ore is why did he li e ab out N[ . . . ]’s
nam e. W hy did he f urnish t he w if e wit h t his child' s f alse
nam e? W hy di d he cal l her Mas e g o?
[ 63] T here are some co nt radict io ns t hat I ha ve
ment io ne d earli er in t he st at e case, but t hey are not
mat eria l an d it is wort hy t o not e t hat wher e t wo or m ore
wit ness es are invol ve d, like in t he present case,
cont rad ict ions ar e inevit a bl e. T he age of t he vict ims, t he
t ime t hat have l aps ed b ef ore t he y cam e t o t est if y, must be
t aken int o co nsid erat io n.
[ 64] T he Court had t h e op port u nit y t o see t he vict ims
and t he wit ness es , t hey mad e a go od im pressi on t o t he
Co urt , t hey answ ere d all q uest io ns f rankly an d ho nest ly ,
they ap pear ed t o be h on est and rel ia ble.
[ 65] T here is no in dic at ion of any m ot ive t he st at e
wit ness es may h ave had t o f alsely i mplic at e t he acc use d.
[ 66] T he st at e wit n esses del iver ed an im pecc abl e
perf orm anc e in t he wit ness st an d. I have no rea son t o
plac e any q uest io n mark in t he ir evid enc e.
[ 67] T he cumul at ive ef f ect of all t he f act s f ormed a
net w ork so c oh erent i n it s t ext ure t hat t he accus ed c oul d

not break t hro ug h it . I f ind t hat t he accus ed rap ed K[ . . . ]
t wice, N[ . . .] t wice an d B[ . . .] once.
[ 68] It is my consid ered vi ew t hat af t er havin g
ana lyse d a nd wei gh ed all t h e evi de nce pres ent e d, t hat t he
st at e have succe ede d t o prove it s case beyond a
reaso na b le d ou bt .
You m ay st an d up. I n t he res ult , I prono unc e t he
f ollow ing v erdict :
Co unt 1: Rap e, guilt y as char ge d.
Co unt 2: Rape, gui lt y as charg ed .
Co unt 3: Rap e, guilt y as char ge d .
ACC US ED F O U ND G UI LT Y O N ALL C HA RG ES

…… …… …… …… … …. .
MAT L APE NG , AJ
JU DG E O F T HE HI G H CO URT
DAT E : 03/ 08 /20 26

TRANSCRIBER’S CERTIFICATE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that so far as it is audible to
me, the aforegoing is a true and correct transcript of the
proceedings recorded by means of a digital recorder in the matter
between:
STATE // MOHOLO VOILE TENTSI

CASE NUMBER : CC10/2025
RECORDED AT : PRETORIA
DATE HELD : 03 -08-2026
NUMBER OF PAGES : 28










DATE COMPLETED 02-09-2026

TRANSCRIBER
SUZIE IDAS


PROBLEMS EXPERIENCED WIT H RECORDING

• Audio typed verbatim. Grammar has not been corrected.
• Names not spelled into the record have been typed phonetically and
marked with a [?].
• At some point the audio skipped a few beats and played back very
slowly. Same was marked …[indistinct - audio distorted]

inle>:so
36 Alkantranl Roa d, Lynnwood Manor , Block B
Pretoria
Gauteng I 0 081
ii +27 12 426 7377 I W +27 83 500 6612
B : andre.davids1@inlexso.co.za I Websrte: www.in lexso.co.za