Just a warning for Jaguar driver

2013-01-18 14:21

Johannesburg - The Jaguar XF driver who crashed into a house in Lyttelton this week has been given a written warning, Pretoria police said on Friday.

The man received the warning document on Wednesday, informing him about a malicious damage to property charge, the investigations into the incident, and his rights, Warrant Officer Annabelle Middelton said.

He was not taken into custody and no court date had been set for his appearance.

"[This] is not a schedule one offence, so there is no reason for him to be taken into custody. Remember there are certain crimes that you don't arrest a person [for]; you just give them the warning while investigations are continuing," said Middelton.

Once the investigations had been completed a court date might be set.

"And he is not running away from us [police]."

The Star on Tuesday reported that the driver, believed to be a government employee working in intelligence, fled the scene - leaving the car behind and a government employee ID tag with the name of LN Makamu.

An empty whisky bottle and several beer bottles were found in the car.

The car was apparently driven for about 12km with one tyre shredded to the rim.

State security ministry spokesperson Brian Dube said he was not aware of the incident or of anyone in the department driving a Jaguar, according to The Star. Police would not disclose the man's identity.

A resident of the house, Zee Pieterse, said the impact of the crash was so severe that it pushed two cars parked in front of the house into the garage wall.

  • gestoffle.vaneerdenvark - 2013-01-18 14:34

    Oh forgot about that right, if you an ANC government employee, you are exonerated for any crime.

      derek.francois.3 - 2013-01-18 14:36

      comrade dear comrade you have nothing to worry about Zuma will take care of it for you.....................

      Notrax123 - 2013-01-18 14:46

      Crime what crime, the cANCer don't do crime or time.

      travis.vermaak - 2013-01-18 14:59

      Fleeing a scene of a crime implies guilt. What reason would a driver of a legitimate accident have to flee an accident scene? First off, you wouldn't be able to claim insurance on your half million rand vehicle. Every incident involving an ANC member is shrouded in lies and deceit. It looks like someone was paid off, probably with our tax money as usual.

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 15:13

      @Travis.vermaak - you may be right. He was guilty of many things, maybe even drinking under the influence, he reappeared after sobering up. The "crime" cannot be proven any longer. I am by no means saying he did the right thing, he just outsmarted lady justice - after all he works for the intelligence. As for the insurance and car, ????? Something stinks there.

      travis.vermaak - 2013-01-18 15:35

      @nosiphom.mazibuko True, but that is despicable behavior, and very devious of a government official. He should set an example to the public, not try cover up his crimes. Well I hope the deceitful cadre must at least pay for for all repairs of the house, and the more than likely government owned vehicle....Surely insurance would not cover the claim????

      TheUnknown16 - 2013-01-18 18:42

      Too true! If you have power, you will be left untouched.

      thutothegreat - 2013-01-18 21:05

      Maybe he was under cover

      fussed.anderson - 2013-01-19 13:36

      government employee working in intelligence, fled the scene - leaving the car behind and a government employee ID tag with the name of LN Makamu. NOW THIS OUR INTELLIGENT,INTELLIGENCE AGENCY. Boy we are realy Foo$#ked

  • hugenote1980 - 2013-01-18 14:34

    What about fleeing from the scene of accident, not reporting an accident, alleged drunken driving?

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 14:47

      Fleeing the scene of an accident is not a crime, it is a traffic violation, you don't get arrested for it. As the police say ""And he is not running away from us [police]." - He only ran away whilst he was boozed up and reappeared after sleeping the booze away - you can't charge him for drinking and driving that will not stick. ShelleyV- the man may have broken the law, but there is no proof. The only thing we all know is that he crashed somebody's gate - not really a crime for which one gets arrested he must just pay up, and ran away from the scene of an accident - and since no-one was hurt or injured he walks - even thought we suspect strongly he was soused - there is not much we can do, sorry guys!

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 14:59

      Thanks for the thumbs down guys. I also hate the facts like you, but that's just the way it is. - 2013-01-18 15:00

      I agree, and if he's driving a Jaguar XF, he's obviously very senior, not just any ordinary government employee. He should be named, have his licence taken away and fired from his job, as well as appearing in court as soon as possible.He's much more dangerous on the road than a farmer who drives whilst resting his elbow on the car door.

      israel.maseko.5 - 2013-01-18 15:04

      Drunken driving charge will not appyly because he was not tested. There is no case here unless he agrees to settle the damages.

      chris.steytler.1 - 2013-01-18 15:13

      nosiphom.mazibuko - im not familiar with the law but your analysis sounds correct. the problem is that the driver is a government employee, so immediately people will assume he received a freebie.

      andrew.cockerell.5 - 2013-01-18 15:13

      @ nosiphom.mazibuko the reason he fled the scene is because he was PISSED. Guilty as charged. I bet he would have run away if he killed chop !!

      rontheogre - 2013-01-18 15:22

      Nisophom, Section 89 of the National Road Traffic Act of 1996 stipulates that it is a crime to leave the scene of an accident except you are removed to a hospital or leaving with the permission of an attending SAPS Officer after leaving your details. The fine for this crime is up to R180 000 or nine years in jail.

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 16:12

      Ronald - fleeing the scene of an accident is not even there in the law, not even in the AARTO regulations - no-one thought it possible !!!

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 16:47

      Cockerell, you have such a flawed reasoning capacity. You cannot convince a court that someone who fled a crime scene is guilty of drunk driving. You need results of a breathalyzer test. Nosipho fleeing from a crime scene is a common law crime which is known as "defeating the ends of justice."

      rontheogre - 2013-01-18 23:57

      Nisophom, read at

  • fishycraig - 2013-01-18 14:35

    And another driver gets a R300 fine for having his elbow sticking out. Justice is truly blind...

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 14:48

      There you are right,m justice is blind - if you play your cards well.

      Notrax123 - 2013-01-18 15:04

      Color blind?

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 16:51

      "In September 2009, Motata was convicted of drunk driving and fined R20 000 after he crashed his Jaguar into the property wall of Hurlingham, Johannesburg, resident Richard Baird in 2007." Source: True indeed, justice was colour blind even for Justice Nkola Motata.

      kortbroek.duplessis - 2013-01-19 04:17

      Or get arrested for doing 160km/h in a Kia on a freeway. This guy destroyed property while drunk, fleed the seen of an accident. It was just pure fluke he didn't seriously injure or kill someone, and he get's a warning?

  • Andrew McMurray - 2013-01-18 14:37

    Working in intelligence? Wow, that was really intelligent-driving a car on a flat tyre, crashing it and then fleeing the scene of an accident. G*d help our intelligence service. Smacks of another political cover up.

      reg.pitcher - 2013-01-18 14:47

      Also leaving ID behind.Very intelligent

      rontheogre - 2013-01-18 15:24

      We should claim his salary back for misrepresenting himself as an Intelligence Agent.

  • gabrielgman.geral - 2013-01-18 14:39

    I need to go work for government! Getting off with a warning for this, just imagine what I could get away with! Oh wait! I wouldn't make the BEE quota! DANG!

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 14:50

      Getting off with a warning for "this" what is "this" - Crashing someone's wall? Running away to sleep his booze off?? He just outsmarted the system and showed us the middle finger and there is nothing anyone can do. The fact that he might have emptied the whisky into hi tummy is mere speculation as things are!

      travis.vermaak - 2013-01-18 15:17

      What the police are saying is: If you are drunk driving and have an accident, all you need to do is run away until you are sober to avoid being prosecuted.

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 15:59

      yes Travis - I have heard that some people abandon their cars when they see a road block to avoid being caught. It happens.

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 16:53

      Nice to see how Nosipho's arguments can be challenged only with thumbsdown. Brains are still on holidays I guess

  • Andrew McMurray - 2013-01-18 14:41

    At least the empty bottles were still in the car. Thanks for not throwing them onto the road, as you guys normally do!

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 15:15

      Whose "you guys"?

      Andrew McMurray - 2013-01-18 15:20

      Err......drunk people! Wind your neck in.

      rontheogre - 2013-01-18 15:30

      Chill, he was talking of drunk drivers. If Andrew WAS referring to race, that changes things of course.

  • ttrevenen - 2013-01-18 14:46

    Incredible... the only charge that he is facing is malicious damage to property! What about the fact that he fled the scene of an accident, was "allegedly" under the influence of alcohol (but because he fled the scene they can't prove if he was or wasn't), dangerous driving? So what Judge Motata should have done was to have driven on and then abandonded his vehicle when he drove into the wall under the influence in his Jag... Then he'd still employed etc, etc. Again this proves that the law's in this country only apply to 95% of the population, whilst the 5% of politico's are above the law.

  • flysouth - 2013-01-18 14:49

    The day has to come when these pieces of excrement will be swept away - I do hope to be able to help!

      msophiasharp - 2013-01-18 15:10

      Are you stocking up on the BLEACH and JEYES FLUID, if not, call me LOL!!!

  • Notrax123 - 2013-01-18 14:53

    R700,000 vehicle..... surely someone in a senoir post.

  • linda.duits - 2013-01-18 14:58

    I hope the home owner sue the pants off him for damaging her property.

      nosiphom.mazibuko - 2013-01-18 15:17

      Agreed - he must pay for the only "crime" that can stick!

  • auric.goldfinger.3720 - 2013-01-18 15:05

    I am finding this difficult to the week, they fine a guy R300 for having his elbow jutting out of his window..and now they let this guy off with a warning while they investigate...phew man, I guess there is no end.

  • herbert.smith.9655 - 2013-01-18 15:05

    Oops another poor-judgement action : never checked if he can read !!!!

  • mikesenhall - 2013-01-18 15:06

    He made an intelligent decision He He He

  • msophiasharp - 2013-01-18 15:07

    Working on INTELLIGENCE with an IQ lower than a slug LOL!!!!

      rontheogre - 2013-01-18 15:32

      The name of the department and post is not necessarily a job description or qualification in this case!

  • carol.vanniekerk.3 - 2013-01-18 15:09

    South African Government Officials remind me of the Pigs in the book Animal Farm...

      semakaleng.thulare - 2013-01-18 15:22

      Carol, not all of them...

      Andrew McMurray - 2013-01-18 15:26

      Pigs are much more intelligent......

  • ruben.maistry - 2013-01-18 15:11

    He did run away from the scene.An intelligence officer? This guy certainly knows someone for him to be protected. Maybe he has uncovered something on his protector. Thats the anc for you.

  • christi.pierre - 2013-01-18 15:12

    Ag guys if you work for the goverment you are 100% protected doesn't matter what your crime is. I want to go work for Zuma's goverment so i could get rich quick and retire.

  • ray.ryno - 2013-01-18 15:14

    This is ridiculous. now let any other citizen be driving allegately drunk and cause an accident, they'll be cuffed and thrown in the slammers.... getting off because it was" malicious" driving and a WRITTEN WARNING JUST DOESNT CUT IT. And people want to know why there is so much corruption... honestly he should be prosecuted like any other who ha in this country

  • semakaleng.thulare - 2013-01-18 15:15

    How exactly did it happen? Its clear that this guy was drunk when the accident happen and people could have lost their lives so this is a clear attempted murder. Tell me how can such crimes go unpunished?

  • rob.bayliss.94 - 2013-01-18 15:19

    There must be an oxymoron here, is that word three letters too long? Intelligence worker runs away but leaves his id document!

      emilyjane.elson - 2013-01-18 17:49

      Bright spark him! Was too drunk to think about taking it with.. Idiot!

  • BOb van Dyk - 2013-01-18 15:25

    Since when is fleeing the scene of an accident not a crime?

  • fourhundredkg.bobbejaan - 2013-01-18 15:29

    "An empty whisky bottle and several beer bottles were found in the car." I wonder if there were also some chicken bones? That would also help to identify him.

      emilyjane.elson - 2013-01-18 17:48

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!

  • Michael Hawthorne - 2013-01-18 15:52

    Now tell me this is not racial. Was it a boer who drove a bakkie through a shack and fled the scene he would have been jailed immediately. I'm so tired of this day in and out. - 2013-01-18 16:36

      Michael,you're a RACIST. Finish en klaar.

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 17:47

      Michael is a sangoma

      byron.pienaar - 2013-01-18 21:42

      A Boer never leaves his bakkie!

  • gillian.sanderson - 2013-01-18 15:56

    I cannot believe this! He drove for 12km with a shredded tyre, jumps out and flees the scene leaving empty booze bottles behind and all he gets is a warning!! PATHETIC!!!!!

  • williamjoseph.roberts - 2013-01-18 16:00

    The poor taxpayer will have to foot the bill once again.

  • haydn.gawronsky - 2013-01-18 16:01

    Come on people. I'm the first to state what a corrupt bunch our government is but read the story, he hasnt been let off. he still has to go to court, same would apply to anyone else.

  • njabulo.njbl - 2013-01-18 16:19

    That's it I'm not buying a jaguar they're not good when drunk. First judge motata now this guy.

  • Pete7930 - 2013-01-18 16:23

    see what happens to fancy cars operated by cavemen!

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 16:54

      Jealousy makes warped minded racists really nasty

  • rob.tubbs.39 - 2013-01-18 16:38

    If it was me or you and driving a Toyota - what then????? Corruption rears it's ugly head yet again...

  • dan.ancketill - 2013-01-18 16:48

    First it was judge Motala a senior member of the judiciary and now an intelligent government employee or was that intellegence government employee? Both aspiring role models for all in SA.Slight problem here? Both driving Jags, smashed on whisky, apparently sober?, and both tried to leave accident scene one made it other to paraletic! Nice way to start weekend. Drive safe people.

  • - 2013-01-18 16:53

    @nosipho.mazibuko: thanks for your comments. This guy is not yet been tried in court

  • Andrew McMurray - 2013-01-18 16:59

    Hey guys.....just heard that as an Intelligence official, he was trying to work undercover......under cover of the houses garage he crashed into. lol : )

  • john.parkerwood.9 - 2013-01-18 17:35

    Something nobody seems to have noticed. He conveniently seems to have been charged with a crime that he will never be convicted of. They will never be able to prove malicious intent in his actions, as it was an 'accident'. Although not as impressive, they would have a better chance of conviction if they had chosen more accurate charges, like reckless and/or negligent driving, leaving the scene of an accident, or whatever charges the facts lend themelves to. An MI2P chare is simply an 'eye-blind'.

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 17:56

      "Malicious intent" implies that he intentionally drove into the property concerned. How would you suggest they could prove such. Why would anyone intentionally drive their Jaguar into someone else's property? The article also says he was informed of "investigations." That to me means they can still add more charges such as negligent/reckless driving, and defeating the ends of justice (by fleeing from the scene of the accident).

      john.parkerwood.9 - 2013-01-18 18:13

      Thanks for the comment, Themba. That's exactly my point. In this case, they would never be able to prove malicious intent, as obviously, he never intended to drive into the wall. Therefore he didn't have any malicious intent. It is therefore an inapropriate charge in this specific case. It is more suited to cases of vandalism or cases where the facts support such a charge. Eg. You punch someone's window...if however you are in a fight, you punch somebody and he then falls against a window, you did not have malicious intent to break the window. That is the difference. Just saying dude. Of course, you are absolutely right that additional charges can be added later.

      themba.khumalo.520 - 2013-01-18 22:14

      John and Themba.......... Enjoyed the discussion and how I wish more of us would use this forum as rationally the way you guys did. Have a great weekend both!!

  • emilyjane.elson - 2013-01-18 17:47

    Surely because he fled the scene, there were bottles of alcohol EVERYWHERE and he'd been driving with a shredded tyre cause he'd hit something, he SHOULD be locked up?? HELLO??? Love the special treatment some people get! What a sad state of af(fair)s...

      themba.thwala.775 - 2013-01-18 18:22

      "[This] is not a schedule one offence, so there is no reason for him to be taken into custody. Remember there are certain crimes that you don't arrest a person [for]; you just give them the warning while investigations are continuing," said Middelton.

      daaivark.varkvet - 2013-01-18 18:33

      Police may only make an arrest if the offence is committed in their presence (which is not what happened here) unless it was a schedule one offence (Murder, Rape, Robbery etc...), which it was not. Anything else is an unlawful arrest and opens the police up to civil claims. Also, an arrest must be made as a last resort the purpose being to secure attendance in court. If there are alternatives i.e. the person has a fixed job and address then lesser means such as summons is issued. Arrest is not a way of giving out punishment before the case is heard, unless you live in a banana republic (oh wait.....maybe you were right after all.....)

  • daaivark.varkvet - 2013-01-18 18:01

    This means that he was warned that he is suspected of a crime and given the opportunity to make a statement or not. He is read his rights as part of this. " You have the right to remain silent..." etc. The stateement he signs is known in police circles as a Warning Statement. Other statements are then taken and the docket is handed to a prosecutor who weighs up whether or not to prosecute based on the likelihood of a conviction and how much supporting evidence there is. Really poor reporting from News24 and poor information given by the police. It gives the impression he was let off with a warning and nothing further will come of it which is not so. 95% of cases are investigated this way and in more than 50% of cases ends up in court (at least that's how it was 30 years ago)

  • ld.vanvuuren - 2013-01-18 18:40

    Whomever wrote this piece obviously did not read the context. The warning is that it (the incident) is being investigated. Seems reporting is getting as bad as what they are reporting about. Don't get paranoid - be objective. Hopefully this twit will get his drubbing - but don't preempt the outcome!

  • zongamele.keli - 2013-01-18 18:49

    ok y y y this is the freedom we were all talking about in the 70's ,ohhhh ndiyakhumbula ngoku no Letta Mbuli wayithso kwenye ye albums or CD's zakhe.

  • abdul.cassiem.9 - 2013-01-18 18:59

    I think all government officials must be given a donkey cart on a 2year lease.

  • peter.t.viljoen - 2013-01-18 21:34

    So then why do we get attested for fines????

  • cemslie - 2013-01-18 22:29

    And how does a government employee afford a R650000 car when the avergae taxpayer earns just shy of R10000 and month...........seriously i think im doing the wrong job, anc where do i apply???

  • Trevor Moller - 2013-01-18 22:31

    Obiviously the employee doesnt have much intelligence considering he works for intelligence

  • Bra - 2013-01-19 02:23

    May b he was on a spy mission.Like James Bond, lol.. May b he was tailing some hostile terrorists who wanted to bomb the union buildings. Let's wait for the story to come out before we jump into conclusions.

  • - 2013-01-19 09:15

    Stop jumping to wrong conclusions. Warning doesn't mean what you're thinking of. This guy is still going to answer for charges once investigations are completed. People are warned for such cases. That will be unfair to detain him. Bad reporting from News24. Get the facts right.

  • gordon.malcolm.98 - 2013-01-19 14:13

    From my daily experience on the road he probably drove better when he was drunk than if he was sober. If he was sober he would never have managed the 12kms on three wheels and 20 pedestrians would be dead.

  • cathy.vanvollenstee - 2013-01-19 17:02

    Another driver gets fined R300.00 for his elbow protruding from the vehicle? I must be missing something here! This driver fled the scene of the accident and that is a traffic offence! Open alcohol bottles in the car, another traffic offence! But it's ok because he is a government employee?

  • eduard.l.goldschagg - 2013-01-19 20:38

    Why did he run away? Was he full of alcohol? Does he have pals in influential positions? I think all this stinks! This needs to be investigated further.

  • pages:
  • 1