AS IT HAPPENED: Swanepoel avoids answering defence counsel in Panayiotou trial

2017-05-02 09:35

During an ongoing cross examination in the Panayiotou trial, investigating officer Captain Kanna Swanepoel continually avoids directly answering questions asked by Christopher Panayiotou's defence counsel as contradicting statements are being brought up.

The accused in the Panayiotou case

Jump to

Last Updated at 11:21
02 May 15:35

MS: You have dealt with the details of why the last four calls between Siyoni and Panayiotou were not recorded because he was away from the recording device in Shirly Street?

KS: That is correct

MS: I don't have any further issues to discuss with him

[KS is excused]

MS asks to clarify a few issues including the bail application

DC says there is a box of documentation that was submitted

TP: Can I ask what those two statements are that he wants to hand in, we have no problem in providing them

TP: Apparently it has to do with the bail application, we have no objection to that

MS: In that case may we stand down till tomorrow?

TP: I need to know if I am allowed to consult with Chanelle Coutts, Wilna van der Berg and Donovan Vosloo

DC: I haven't changed my mind

TP: I just wanted to get clarity on that

DC: Court is adjourned

02 May 15:29

MS: [Asks if he can begin his re-examination tomorrow]

DC: Why?

MS: I don't want to leave anything out, but I can begin now

MS: There was, at one stage, put to you that there was blood on the floor at Infinity, was any investigation done to determine if there was blood there?

KS: No

MS: There is mention on a 081 number that called Siyoni on the 29th of April

MS: Did you obtain a detailed call billing on that phone?

KS: That is correct

MS: I want to refer you to CR

MS: Is this the detailed billing of this phone number? I know it is very small

KS: It is correct

02 May 15:27

[Court is back in session]

KS: [Refers to his diary, points out that on the day of the section 204 witness statement]

[KS points out that Siyoni was already booked out at 1pm]

KS: Van der Spuy informed me that he was going to furnish me with a statement

KS: Mr Van der Spuy was not present when I took down the statement

KS: He told me he was going to make a statement and that I could proceed with taking it down, but that this would not be an official statement until the statement had been discussed in detail with his client

KS: I then took the statement down, as worded by Mr Siyoni

KS: After I took it down, Mr van der Spuy came back to Organised Crime and he dealt with the statement, with Siyoni

KS: The front page of the statement, the 19:00, is an indication of when Van der Spuy consulted with Siyoni

TP: Aside from saying that 90% of what he just said is hearsay, I have nothing further

02 May 15:24
Family chat with defence during break. (Derrick Spies, News24)

02 May 15:16

TP: I am finished with my cross examination your honour, but I believe Mr Swanepoel wants to refer to something else

MS: He wants to refer to something in his diary, but I am battling to put my hands on it right now. Can I ask for a short adjournment?

DC: Court is adjourned

02 May 15:15

KS: Ngeza arrived with Trompie and then left again with Trompie

TP: Our information is both Trompie and Siyoni don't know anything about Trompie being approached to commit the murder.

KS: I can only say what Siyoni told me

TP: What I am saying is that these two people were looking at each other in front of you and denied involvement

KS: I can't say that is the case, but I do recall him denying his involvement

TP: Lendell, Touch and Llama were approached

TP: But you never traced any of them?

KS: No

TP: Touch was Siyoni's neighbour and you couldn't trace him?

KS: We did speak to someone

02 May 15:10

TP: She alleges that you asked her if she used dagga and she said she had eaten a dagga cookie once

KS: I don't recall

TP: Most important, to me, she says that she was asked if she was aware of Chris and Siyoni selling cocaine from Infinity

KS: My answer remains the same

TP: That it is possible but you can't recall?

KS: That is correct

TP: And then you asked her about a man named Lendell?

KS: It is possible

TP: Do you know of a man named Trompie?

KS: I have heard of him

TP: In the section 204 statement, Siyoni approached a certain Trompie to conduct the murder?

KS: That is correct

TP: And you took Mr Trompie to Siyoni to be identified?

KS: I can't say that we took him to be pointed out

02 May 15:06

TP: I want to put it on record, this is information we got from a family member of her's. I don't want it said in the newspapers that I consulted with her

KS: I am not going to deny it, but I don't recall it

TP: You and Koen asked her a bunch of questions, and if I read you the questions it will refresh your memory

TP: Apparently you was asked if she was pregnant

KS: No

TP: Apparently you asked her if she ever used cocaine and she said no

KS: I don't remember anything like that

TP: And you asked her if Christopher had used cocaine and she said no

KS: I didn't have any evidence that they were using cocaine, so I wouldn't have asked her that

TP: It would be a lot easier if you just said yes or no

02 May 15:03

TP: You have to discuss it, write it down and read it back to him

KS: That is correct

TP: So it is definitely something you could do in half an hour?

KS: I don't think so

TP: How long does it take to drive from organised crime to Kabega Park?

TP: It is on record it's about 15 minutes

KS: About 10 to 15

TP: If we look at the front page of the statement, it was started at 7pm in the evening

KS: [Asks to see the original]

KS: What I am trying to determine is when he consulted with Van der Spuy

TP: The same day, the 3rd of May, is it correct that you and Koen called Chanelle Coutts?

TP: You called her and told her to come down from the flat and she must not tell her mother that you had a meeting with her

KS: I can't remember, if it is on record somewhere it is possible

02 May 15:00

TP: So the bruise on his ankle, although you say not visible, it was sustained during arrest?

KS: that is what is written there

TP: Why didn't you ask him what happened to him during arrest?

KS: Let us assume there was an assault for a minute, this section 204, I saw this as an exercise completely seperate from that arrest

KS: That is why Advocate Van der Spuy was there to advise him on the making of a section 204 statement

TP: But you don't know what he said?

KS: Yes, but it was in related to the section 204

TP: But you didn't hear it?

KS: That is correct, as I was not allowed with him

KS: But Advocate Van der Spuy was sent to our offices to explain section 204 to him

TP: Siyoni testified in this court, I don't think we will ever see Van Der Spuy, but he said he was in big shit, that was all

KS: I wouldn't know, I was not there

TP: How long did it take?

KS: A few hours

02 May 14:54

TP: Next, statement 3 May 2015, 6 days after his arrest:

TP: Have you made a statement of this nature before, if so, where; and he says no  

TP: Or did you mean in terms of section 204?

KS: It states clearly of this nature

TP: Here it asks, do you have any bruises or injuries and it notes, bruises on his ankles, wrist and red left eye

KS: I looked very hard, but there was no bruises, just a scratch

TP: Why then did you then write it down?

KS: He insisted it be written down

TP: If you couldn't see it, you should have written no visible injuries

TP: The only thing you could confirm is the red left eye

TP: How were the injuries obtained, and he says during arrest

KS: That is correct


02 May 14:50

TP: Did any of you explain the details of taking a 204 statement to Siyoni before you took it?

KS: Definitely Van der Spuy would have explained it to him in detail

TP: Did you hear Van der Spuy explain it to him that evening

KS: I was not present with that consultation

TP: So you did not hear the explanation of the section 204?

KS: No

TP: Siyoni disputed that he was warned, and now the only person who can testify that he was is Mr Van der Spuy

KS: At the time of the consultation, that is correct

02 May 14:47

TP: In the bail application, neither I or Mr Panayiotou had access to the docket, you could say what you wanted

TP: You said you had a motive and evidence

TP: I am going to say that you were defeating the ends of justice

KS: I disagree

TP: This is the statement of Chanelle Coutts on the 29th of April

TP: It has come to our attention, when she signed it, there were only two pages, now there are three

TP: Is that the case?

KS: That would never have happened

KS: And even if it did, the third page has nothing to do with her, it refers to me, indicating that I took the statement

TP: But she is supposed to sign every page

KS: Her statement ends on page 2

KS: If you look at any of the statements taken

KS: If you look at any statement that is incorporated into the docket, the person will never signed after I have commissioned

TP: I will have to talk to her to confirm that, but I am not allowed to

02 May 14:43

[TP continues to ask KS about evidence led in the bail application, specifically relating to Coutts and Kapp. He points out that he questioned whether Coutts and Kapp would testify about Panayiotou battling with his finances as a motive]

KS: [Says they would be testifying about more]

TP: I asked if those affidavits had been taken and Mr Stander stands up and says he has these affidavits

TP: Did he have them?

KS: No

TP: So you saying this is totally false?

TP: Let me help you, it is not in any of the affidavits that the applicant [Chris] was battling financially

TP: Let us move on

02 May 14:35

TP: [Reads from the bail transcript] The state will lead evidence that he was not in a position to get divorced

TP: Did you have any evidence at that stage that supported that statement, that was made under oath?

KS: That was not under oath

TP: Thank you

TP: Here Mr Stander says the applicant's wife was spending too much money and he felt he was being forced to buy a house against his will                

KS: Without Siyoni  

TP: Without Siyoni

TP: So the state's case was that she was a woman of expensive taste, but testimony here has been the exact opposite

TP: There is nothing under oath

KS: No

02 May 14:30

TP: Those two points we can deal with quickly

TP: Let us start with Tiervlei

TP: If you believe that he is telling the truth, the state can call him, can't you?

KS: Yes

TP: Let's see if you call him

TP: In respect of the finance, you know he was given a loan of R2.5m?

TP: Do you think the bank would give him a loan where he has to pay 25k a month if he was bankrupt?

DC: Is this necessary?

TP: He raised it my lord, but let's move on

02 May 14:28

KS: I was asked to look at Tiervlei's statement

KS: According to Tiervlei, Panayiotou's words were that something must vanish because he was in trouble

KS: Again, there was no reference to Jayde

KS: There were two issues that have been hanging in the air

KS: There was the issue of the last four calls between Siyoni and Panayiotou not being recorded

KS: Looking at the cell records, it shows that Siyoni was already on route to meet Panayiotou, and the recording device was not with, which is why these calls were not recorded

KS: Then the last point, the financial position of Mr Panayiotou

KS: Someone testified here that he had applied for a loan at Capitec Bank and it was turned down

KS: His wife then had to apply for the loan

KS: Over and above that, Jayde had to borrow R250k from her father to cover bond registration costs

02 May 14:23

TP: The reference to the R40k, that Siyoni sent to Vumazonke, there is absolutely nothing there that suggests they are speaking about murder

KS: Not in the message, but Siyoni did tell us what the message pertained to

TP: With your permission I want to move on

KS: Sorry

TP: Now he wants to say something else

02 May 14:22

KS: On 1 April 2015, Siyoni says the following:

KS: That R40k can be paid

KS: Siyoni said he would add R30k

KS: That is how we got to the R70k

KS: Then on the 5th of April, sent message to Vumazonke

KS: That is where he says he should come to PE to Infinity

KS: That is the so called failed attempt, when the deceased don't come to Infinity

KS: So Mr Price is correct in saying that there is no Facebook messages between these two [Siyoni and Panayiotou] that bares on the murder

KS: But in light of that statement, we hoped that we would have found, in as far as Facebook messages

MS: Perhaps it should be clarified that this is in relation to BC

TP: It appears that he wants to say something else

DC: But can we deal with the Facebook first

02 May 14:19

[Court is back in session]

Swanepoel is reminded he is under oath

TP: Mr Swanepoel has a note with him and he has a chance to look at the documents so perhaps let us have him continue and then we can continue

KS: I have reviewed the Facebook messages between Siyoni and Panayiotou

KS: Mr Price is correct that there is nothing directly related to the murder in those messages

KS: There is a second handset belonging to Siyoni

KS: This phone was wiped

KS: There is a message, between Siyoni and Vumazonke

02 May 12:59

TP: But that is what you and Stander placed before the court over and over again

TP: I am going to prove it to you

TP: Did you, up to this stage, bring up why it happened?

KS: No

TP: Lets start at line 15: Mr Stander says "The state has a motive, and will prove the motive..."

TP: Did you ever have a motive with regard to the financial position of the applicant?

KS: He is technically bankrupt

TP: That is total nonsense

TP: Wilna van der Berg is your witness, the CA of the accused?


TP: Did she ever say the accused is bankrupt?

KS: She never used that term

TP: In fact, she said in her statement that his applicant's value was R3.3m

KS: That is correct

TP: Did you have anything that said the motive was related to finances?

KS: Not under oath

TP: It is now 1pm

[TP asks for adjournment]

DC: Court is adjourned for lunch

KS is given opportunity to look at the various documentation he has asked to review

02 May 12:53

TP: These accusations against you today, we also made in the bail application

KS: I can't recall, but if Price states, it as a fact

TP: We told you specifically that we found it strange that you did not consult with the person who called Tiervlei and up until 2 mins ago you never indicated that he never wanted to give you the name

KS: The reality is, in theory there is a witness in jail

KS: Firstly, this name was not given to me and in reality it will never be given to me because it is his friend who is still in prison

KS: We can debate this, no matter what direction we go, that name will not be given

TP: You took a negative statement from Tiervlei, because you never, once, wanted to take a positive statement for Panayiotou

KS: That is not true

TP: Is it your testimony now that, during the first bail application, the motive for Jayde's murder was known to you and that you had it in sworn affidavits in the docket?

TP: Do you have it in any sworn afidavit, excluding Siyoni, that CP wanted to get rid of Jayde because she was too expensive?

KS: No I do not have

02 May 12:50

KS: I think Panayiotou made the offer and when he saw that he was not suitable, he realised he made a mistake and made the call

KS: And it would have been clever for the news coming from the defence

KS: That is just my opinion

TP: Lets test it, is there not a very important witness that could tell you want happened, that you did not even approach?

KS: I dont know if Tiervlei wanted to give me the name of the man in prison, he didn't want to give it

TP: Did you ask him for the name?

KS: I did, he didn't want to give it

TP: That's news

KS: You can think to yourself

02 May 12:49

TP: Do you agree that you would not have known about it if Mr Griebenow had not contacted you?

KS: Yes

TP: You must be clear. A friend of his called him from prison saying that Chris wanted to see him. That is different from what you are saying?

KS: That is correct

TP: And you followed it up?

KS Yes

TP: And you took an affidavit from him?

KS: Yes

TP: Where he alleges Chris offered him money. Or that there was talk of money, R40k?

KS: I speak under correction, but that sounds correct

TP: Why would Chris tell his attorney that Tiervlei was there, if his intention was to bribe?

KS: Am I being asked for my opinion?

TP: Sure, you have given many in this court already

02 May 12:46

TP: You did. What does it mean that the applicant in fact sent people to his house?

KS: That is what I am saying, that people related to

TP: It is clear that you can't speak English

TP: Let us move on to Tiervlei

TP: Is it not correct that Mr Griebenow called you to say that Tiervlei was with Chris?

KS: That is correct

TP: And you took a statement where you say that Panayiotou, in fact, asked him to come?

KS: That is correct

TP: But is it not the case that a friend of his in jail asked him to come?

KS: I will have to look at his statement

TP: We will have to add that to the pile of documents you want to look at

02 May 12:43

TP: Then you have lied again in your statement in the bail application

TP: I am going to refer you to your own sworn affidavit, lines 9 to 12

TP: Subsequent to these calls, the applicant [that is Mr Panayiotou] enquiring where Mr Siyoni can be found

KS: That is what Mr Siyoni told me

TP: No, no, no. I asked you, twice, whether that is the case, and you said no

KS: Siyoni said to me, people were sent to his house, but he could not prove

TP: The applicant in fact sent ...that is what you said, you can jump around as much as you want

TP: You say there, and I will read...

[TP reads from the statement]

TP: Nowhere do you state that Chris was the person who sent the people

KS: I never said Chris sent people

02 May 12:41

TP: So it was people who were known to Panayiotou's or Vumazonke's?

KS: Yes, people related to them in some way

TP: Do you have any specific information from Siyoni about who these people could be?

KS: No

TP: Do you have any information about who sent these people to Babalwa's house?

KS: No

KS: But I believed he was in danger

TP: The question is simple

TP: Did any name that came out to say that this person sent these people to Babalwa's house?

KS: No

TP: Are you sure?

KS: Siyoni said it was people from Panayiotou and Vumazonke, I can't take it further than that

TP: So you can't take it further that it was a specific person who sent them there to look for Siyoni?

KS: That is correct

02 May 12:34

KS: It is indeed so, but this court was shown that it gives signal every 8 seconds

TP: We will see, when we go back to that information

TP: I want to go back to when you decided to detain Siyoni

TP: The statement you made is the third statement you made from middle June

TP: Calls up statement BF2, pages 5 to 8

TP: "On a number of occasions, people related to accused 1 and accused 2, thats Panayiotou and Vumazonke, visited his girlfriend

TP: Is that an accurate statement

KS: That is how Siyoni told me

TP: Did Siyoni say in any way that they were family?

KS: This was already addressed. Perception was cleared up, It was not Panayiotou's father

02 May 12:33

KS: She had a wound to her finger. There was also blood in the boot.

TP: You say that you have all this information in affidavits, where are those affidavits?

KS: The post mortum is an exhibit

KS: The tracker, up to now, has not been shown to be faulty

TP: Give us a chance

KS: And she was kidnapped. She would not have walked to the bushes where she was shot

TP: I will continue, where do you have it under oath, factually. It is your inferences

KS: The car's tracker shows clearly what happened

TP: I am not going to argue with you about the tracker

TP: The tracker doesn't show that the car stopped outside the gate of Stellen Glen

02 May 12:30

TP: Let us go on

KS: When you look at the Facebook messages, you can go through the statements too

TP: In general, when you look at pg 117

TP: What happened outside the gate of Stellen Glen on the 21st of April? How she was grabbed outside the gate, pushed into the car and everything else that happened, where did you get that information?

KS: I dont think Mr Price wants me to answer that question

TP: Did you write it down, under oath

KS: If you go to the conversation between Panayiotou and Siyoni, it will come out there

TP: Are you saying that the deceased was placed in the boot comes from that conversation?

TP: [Reads] Deceased was assaulted with blunt force to the head. Kidnapped from where she lived, Accused 3 placed in the boot of the vehicle.

TP: Where did you get this information.

KS: In the post mortum there is mention of the wound to her head

KS: She was kidnapped from outside of the house

TP: And that she was in the boot

02 May 12:24

TP: Line 17, agreed to pay R70k to have killed and R40k to shooter

TP: Where did you get this, your case is R80k, not R70k

KS: Siyoni said it went from R70k to R80k

KS: I don't think R80k was paid

TP: We not talking about payment. In the statement in Fort Beaufort, he refers to R80k, which he allegedly received from Panayiotou in February

TP: And at that stage, the information was that R80k was supposed to be paid and R50k was to go to Siyoni

KS: He never took that R80k

02 May 12:21

Court is back in session

Accused have been brought back. Swanepoel is back in the dock

TP: I am not going to go through your entire statement, as I would rather argue in court

TP: On page 114, again, there are a number of issues that you didn't have

TP: [Reads] "Applicant was under pressure, spending too much money"

TP: Did that come from Siyoni?

KS: That is correct

TP: Not Kapp or Couts?

KS: that is correct

02 May 12:07

TP: When she testified in this court...

[TP calls up statement by Kapp]

TP: Let us look at this statement

TP: What you say here is that Chanelle often raised her frustrations with the applicant, and you say that Kapp said that?

TP: Show me in Kapps affidavit, where she mentions this

KS: [Reads] "Chanelle was clearly upset about the wedding"

TP: That is not what I am looking for. Show me where she says that Chanelle raised her voice

KS: It is not here word for word, but it is my interpretation

TP: Your interpretation has no baring here

KS: I beg to differ

MS: [Asks for a short adjournment]

DC: Court is adjourned

02 May 12:04

TP: "The mistress often raised her voice and expressed her frustrations"

TP: Where did you get that?

TP: Kapp?

KS: That is correct

TP: But you didn't have a sworn affidavit from Kapp?

KS: No, but I want to give the reason for that

TP: I am not interested in the reasons

TP: You did not have a sworn affidavit

KS: That is correct, but there were circumstances

KS: But what I can say is what was said in that statement and what is before this court does not differ

TP: That is also not true

02 May 12:03

KS: But, the real reason for the refusal of bail, and the facts of the case, were contained in statements

TP: Did you lie to Beeton, where you said, you had all this under oath, and you didn't?

TP: Let me not say lie, let me say misled

KS: No. That is not correct, what I had heard from Eksteen, was not under oath, and that had nothing to do with the strength of the case and why bail was refused

TP: So what you are saying is that, as long as it has no direct bearing, you can mislead the court?

KS: I never misled the court. Until today I still have all that evidence at hand

KS: But before Mr Price says I am not answering his question, Eksteen's comments were not under oath at that stage

TP: I am going to show that what you are saying is also not correct

02 May 12:01

TP: You say that his mistress was often upset, where do you get that?

KS: From Kapp

TP: But you did not have a statement from her either?

TP: You could not tell magistrate Beeton that you have affidavits to back up these statements if it is not the case?

KS: It was important that this information was brought before the court

TP: I am going to bring you back to your own words: "Each of these comments are backed by sworn statements"

KS: That is correct

TP: Captain, Ms Beeton is sitting there and reading your statement. She must decide how strong is the case against Mr Panayiotou

KS: That is true

TP: And testimony under oath is very reliable, but something said in passing has no value

KS: Mr Price is right

TP: Thank you

02 May 11:58

TP: I want to move on to deal with certain pages from the bail application

TP: We can make all the pages available and place them on record at some stage, but this deals with specific pages

TP: [Asks that the pages be placed on record as exhibit CU]

DC: [Asks if this is relating to the first or second bail application]

TP: First bail application

Griebenow consults with clerk in relation to the documentation being placed on record

TP: [Refers to documents] Is it correct that you submitted a statement B1 in the first bail application?

TP: On page 112, starting at line 5 you confirm that each allegation I refer to is supported by affidavits, and does not relate to any confession?

KS: That is correct

TP: You say that Panayiotou was involved in a sexual relationship with a female from the OK Grocer for the past 3 years?

KS: That is correct

TP: [Reads how Swanepoel states that the affair had come to the attention of the father of the accused and how the father had said he would disinherit him if he did not end the relationship]

KS: I have already told the court where I got that information, from Eksteen

TP: But you have no statement from Eksteen at that stage, so you are lying to the court when you say the info is backed by sworn affidavits?

02 May 11:52

TP: [Calls up exhibit B2]

TP: It is exhibit B2

TP: This is the cell register from Kabega Park, relating to when Siyoni was locked up

TP: You will see there, under Siyoni, someone drew a stripe through the 28th and wrote 27th.

KS: That is correct

TP: The way it reads here is he was arrested on the 27th at 9pm, which is incorrect

TP: The way you placed it in your statement is because you did not want to write something that contradicts the cell register

KS: I never consulted the cell register when I drafted my statement

KS: The general impression was he had been arrested at Infinity, until such time as Mayi clarified he was not arrested there, he was only collected there and arrested later

02 May 11:50

TP: Did you have any Facebook message which specifically set out the planning of the murder?

KS: From Mr Panayiotou, no

TP: Well let me read what you said, because this is what is bothering me

TP: "He deleted information that directly pertained to the planning of the murder". That is a blatant lie, up to today, you don't have that

TP: What messages between Panayiotou to Siyoni that pertains directly to the panning of the murder?

KS: If I can go directly to the Facebook messages of Siyoni

TP: Oh you want to look at it?

TP: Can we proceed, I am almost finished with this witness, then he can look at them.

TP: You say Siyoni was arrested in Kwanobuhle, but you say in your statement that Siyoni was arrested at the Infinity Cocktail Bar

KS: That is what Siyoni said, it was only after consulting with Mayi that it was determined that he was arrested in Kwanobuhle

TP: By the time you made this statement, you had already consulted with Mayi?

KS: It is techincally correct, he was taken into custody at the bar, and arrested later

TP: I am not going to argue with you, but it is a blatant lie which was placed in front of a judge of this high court

02 May 11:45

TP: And those messages, do they say anything about how the murder was planned and how it was to occur?

KS: I would need to refer to the messages. I know there were messages for example between Siyoni and Babalwa

TP: Dont divert. I am aware of it, but you say that Panayiotou deleted conversations between him and Siyoni. Do you know what was there?

KS: Not word for word

TP: Can you tell us anything that was there?

KS: I call tell you there were conversation between Siyoni and Panayiotou

KS: There were also conversations between him and Coutts and Kapp

TP: Please stick to what I am asking you

KS: Other than what I have seen in Siyoni, I had information

TP: Stop jumping around

02 May 11:43

TP: So how do you know he deleted his own messages?

TP: This is the first time I have heard about it

KS: There were no messages on Panayiotous phone that correlated with messages on Siyoni's Facebook

TP: What did these messages relate to?

KS: I believe it had to do with the deceased's licence plate

TP: You must stop with inferences, do you know for a fact, what was said in those messages?

KS: All I can say is that there were messages on Siyoni's Facebook

TP: Which came from Panayiotou?

KS: Yes

02 May 11:41

TP: This statement, in response to an application by Mr Panayiotou's application to see the docket, do you confirm that this is your statement?                     

KS: I will have to read it to confirm it is mine

TP: Can you recall that you made such a statement?

KS: I did

TP: You will accept that, a police officer, making a statement that is commissioned and is being placed before a judge, then it must not contain lies?

KS: That is correct

TP: And if it is stated as a fact, it must be a fact?

KS: That is correct

TP: I will take you to a paragraph, and I marked it. Since then Mr Panayiotou has deleted certain messages between him and other parties, including Siyoni

KS: That is correct

TP: And did you know what was there?

KS: Siyoni's messages were still there

TP: And these are the messages already before the court?

KS: I am not sure

TP: But he could not delete Siyoni's messages?

KS: That is correct

02 May 11:31

TP: And did Siyoni know that you had Ngeza's permission?

KS: He would not have signed if he was not okay with it

TP: Again, you are not answering the question

TP: Siyoni says you placed the statement in front of him and told him to sign

DC: Was that not in relation to the other statement

TP: I will have to check

TP: Let us continue

02 May 11:27

[Court is back in session]

Swanepoel is reminded he is under oath

Swanepoel says before the cross examination continues, he would like to bring it to the courts attention:

KS: The date of Mr siyonis release was witheld from me for some or other reason

KS: I went to check the occurence book

KS: He was indeed released on the 4th of October

KS: Mr Ngeza was aware Siyoni was being released on that day

KS: In fact Mr Ngeza told me that Siyoni didn't want to go home, and asked me to drop him in Kwanobuhle

KS: Ngeza even gave me a cell number that I could contact Siyoni on

KS: What I am trying to say is Mgeza was quite aware of what was happening that day

TP: I am not going to argue with you on this. What you have said means absolutely nothing

TP: Let me make this completely clear. Did you have Ngeza's permission to take the statement?

KS: I did

02 May 11:01

KS: Mr Ngeza's emails clearly says he is not going to be a state witness

TP: I have already said I will not ask you questions again, I move on

TP: Did Ngeza give you permission?

KS: I took the statement for indemnity, that's it

KS: I would have invited him to be present. I was given the impression arrangements had been made with him

TP: You are again not answering

TP: I understand that it is 11am. May we take the morning adjournment

DC: Court is adjourned

02 May 10:59

TP: Who gave you permission to take this statement?

KS: Well, seeing as I don't have the date of his release, I must assume that this was the day he was released. This statement has nothing to do with the case

TP: You are again mistaken

KS: This was taken to protect the police

TP: An indemnity statement

KS: That is correct

TP: But you have not answered my question, you took this statement without Ngezas permission

TP: After three emails saying not to consult with Siyoni

KS: Consultation is in connection with the case.

TP: You are not telling the truth. Not even 4 days before you took the statement

TP: Ngeza says to you

KS: Ngeza never said it to this witness, he has already said he didn't have access to these emails

02 May 10:54

KS: I said I was never there, and I don't have any knowledge of Mr Stander doing it, and if he had, and I don't think that he would have because he is not that type of person, he would have done so without my knowledge

TP: My Afrikaans is obviously better than your English, because you said that, after the 30th of September, you never consulted with Siyon without Ngeza being present

TP: You are mistaken Mr Swanepoel

TP: Calls up new exhibit, labelled CS

TP: This statement was taken down by you

TP: What is the date?

KS: 4 October 2016

TP: Well, unless my diary is incorrect, that is after the 30th of September

KS: I believe that is the day he was released

TP: That has nothing to do with it

02 May 10:51

TP: In the following three emails, Stander says it worries him that Siyoni says he doesn't want to stand by the content of his statements

TP: Stander says I cannot agree to his release if I dont even know what the witness is going to testify

TP: Stander is clearly concerned that he doesnt know what Siyoni is going to say

TP: I am going to take you to the last email, it is the most NB

TP: This is dated 4 October 2016. It comes from Ngeza to Stander

TP: Again in paragraph 1, he asks, why are you continuing to speak to my client. I have intimated to you that you are not supposed to speak to him

KS: I was, once, without Ngeza's consent, at the cells to see Siyoni

KS: I was there with Stander

TP: The hunger strike

TP: I am not speaking of that

KS: Except for that particular day, I have never been to speak to Siyoni without Ngeza

TP: I am not talking about that, I accept that you never consulted with him on that day 

TP: I am concerned about what you said after that, that after that you never consulted with Siyoni

02 May 10:46

TP: Mr Ngeza says he will not rehearse any written statement

KS: He never says what is in his statement is false

TP: That is not what I am saying

TP: Let us go to Ngeza's next email

TP: It is from our instructions, of the 3 statements, there are elements that are not accurate

TP: Here it is clearly stated

KS: That is what is written here

TP: Stander replies that since the death of Mr Vumazonke, Mr Siyoni is no longer scared        

KS: That is what Stander says

TP: Ngeza says it is his understanding that Siyoni has never been afraid for his life

TP: He says before or after; all I am asking is does it stand in the email?

KS: It is correct

DC: We know what is in the documents

02 May 10:43

TP: He will not rehearse any statement by any party in his preparation for his testimony in the trial

KS: That is correct

TP: The next email is not important, I will argue it, but it says that Van Der Spuy is no longer his legal representation

TP: The next email is important, it is Stander's reply to that email from Ngeza

TP: This is 11 days prior to the commencement of the trial

TP: Paragraph 1, Van der Spuy's mandate is terminated. Paragraph 2, 3 and 4 are clear. I want to look at paragraph 5

TP: This is clearly worng

TP: "Mr Siyoni has confirmed that the content of the statement is correct"

KS: That is what is written there

TP: But that is not correct

Jump to


Inside News24

Competition regulation for a growing and inclusive economy

ADVERTORIAL: The Competition Commission of South Africa is conducting advocacy work in the South African automotive aftermarket industry and has gazetted a Draft Code of Conduct for public comment.

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.