SIPHO TRIAL: DID COP TAMPER WITH CRIME SCENE? SCENE

MBABANE – “You tampered with the crime scene.” Sipho Shongwe’s representative, Advocate Laurence Hodes, who has been instructed by Ben J Simelane and Lucky Howe, made the statement yesterday during Shongwe’s trial for the murder of Victor Gamedze.

The advocate was cross-examining Detective Inspector Patrick Dludlu, who was dispatched to Lundzi where the alleged getaway car was abandoned after Gamedze was killed on January 14, 2018.

Dludlu submitted that he removed a SIM card holder, a receipt from Ezulwini SuperSpar and an SRA road toll receipt from the abandoned Toyota Yaris. This, according to Advocate Hodes, was before Scenes of Crime officer Detective Patrick Dlamini took pictures of the crime scene where the car was abandoned.
Dludlu admitted that he removed the items from the motor vehicle and he explained that he did so because the car was not locked and anyone could have tampered with the evidence.

On Tuesday, Dlamini told the court that he checked the motor vehicle inside out and discovered that there were no traces of fingerprints since they were expertly wiped off.

Information

When he was cross-examined on the presence of a SIM card holder in the car, the detective said from the way he searched the interior of the vehicle, he would have found a SIM card holder if it was in the car. His evidence was that there was no SIM card holder in the car.

Yesterday, Dludlu submitted that he attended the crime scene at Galp Filling Station in Ezulwini on January 14, 2018 and he said he learnt that Gamedze had died. He also stated that he received information that there was an abandoned car at Lundzi and he attended that crime scene together with two police officers.
Dludlu alleged that the registration plates had been removed, the ignition switch was tampered with and doors were not locked.

He informed the court that on the front passenger seat, he found a MTN Eswatini SIM card holder, receipts from Ezulwini SuperSpar, LM Swazi Cleaning Suppliers and SRA road toll.

When he was cross-examined, Dludlu alleged that he was the first to arrive at the scene of crime and the Scenes of Crime officer found him there. According to Dludlu, he allegedly informed Dlamini about the SIM card holder and other items he had removed from the vehicle but he did not photograph them because he (Dlamini) did not find them in the car. Advocate Hodes said Dlamini was the first to arrive at the crime scene and took pictures. The advocate said if the SIM card holder was in the car, the Scenes of Crime officer would have found it and photographed it. According to the advocate, the photographs at Lundzi were taken by Dlamini at 11am, before Dludlu arrived.

However, Dludlu disputed this and maintained that he arrived at the scene of crime before Dlamini did. The advocate said when Dlamini took the photographs there were items on the front passenger seat where Dludlu alleged to have removed the SIM card holder and receipts.
“What right did you have to remove the items before they were photographed by the Scenes of Crime officer? I put it to you that you were not entitled to remove the items. You were not there before the place was photographed.

Exhibition

 “You cannot prove that the SIM card holder was in the car. You tampered with the crime scene. There is no reason justifying your removal of the evidence. You give so many versions such that we cannot trace the SIM back to the car. You could have removed or placed what you wanted in the car,” said Advocate Hodes.

Advocate Hodes said even if there was evidence in the car, Dludlu did not communicate with the Scenes of Crime officer to photograph it. Advocate Hodes stated that Dlamini had earlier on testified that if a SIM card was in the car, he would have photographed it due to its importance in the matter.
Dludlu said he could prove that the SIM card holder was in the car. He said after removing the items from the vehicle, he obtained an order to keep them in his custody. He alleged that he later booked the seized items at the exhibition room.

Advocate Hodes asked the detective where the order he was granted was and the witness said it was not with him. The advocate said in his statement, there were no serial numbers on the forensic bags which contained the seized items which were presented to the court as exhibits. He explained that the bags were for keeping the items safe.

Advocate Michael Hellens, who appears for the Crown, said the crime scene was photographed at 3pm not at 11am. He clarified that the Scenes of Crime officer was dispatched at 11am not that he took the photographs at that time. In re-examination, he told the court that this was a murder trial not an examination on police procedure.

 The matter continues today.
Other exhibits which Dludlu presented to the court included an empty packet of Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes, an empty can of Flying Fish and Redbull Energy Drink as well as an unopened can of Schweppes Lemon. He said the items were found in the getaway car at Lundzi.

Some of the items reflected on the SuperSpar receipt also found in the getaway car are a brown loaf of bread, bananas, trifle, fresh chips and golden delicious worth E112.20

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: