Home | News | WHAT BECAME OF SCHAZA’S PHONE, SHOES?

WHAT BECAME OF SCHAZA’S PHONE, SHOES?

06/02/2020 02:32:00 BY MBONGISENI NDZIMANDZE

Font size:

MBABANE – The court found that from the onset, there was no iota of evidence indicating what became of the mobile phone and shoes of the late Mduduzi ‘Schaza’ Matsebula.

Matsebula is the police officer whose battered body was found floating in a river at Ezulwini in May 2017.
The cellphone and the shoes were suspected to have been stolen by Lucky ‘Obama’ Matsenjwa, who was accused of having a hand in Matsebula’s death.
He was accused of having stolen the items after the death of Matsebula.

On Tuesday, Judge Mbufto Mamba acquitted Matsenjwa on the counts of murder and theft.
The court went on to acquit the accused on five other charges which include contempt of court, defeating and attempt to defeat the ends of justice.
However, the judge found that Matsenjwa had a case to answer on four of the 11 charges he was charged with.

Defeat

The four remaining charges include attempts to defeat the ends of justice and that of attempting to defeat the course of justice.
Matsebula was a key witness in a case involving Matsenjwa and other police officers who were accused of allegedly wrongfully deleting fingerprint records from the criminal data system.

Matsebula was also part of Chief Justice Bheki Maphalala’s security detail.
Matsenjwa was widely believed to have allegedly eliminated Matsebula to prevent him from testifying against him in the ongoing fingerprints case.
In acquitting and discharging him on the charge of theft, Judge Mamba said the only evidence before court was provided by the wife of the deceased, Nomvuyo Dlamini.

Nomvuyo testified that on the Friday in question, her husband (Matsebula) was wearing the shoes stated when he left the house and he also took with him his cellphone. She said that was the last time she saw the items.

Judge Mamba said it was common cause that when Matsebula’s body of the deceased was found a few days later, these items were not there.
“There is no evidence of what became of them or that the accused or some other person or persons, acting in furtherance of a shared or common purpose with him stole these items,” said Judge Mamba.

Acquitted

The court said: “Clearly, therefore, there is no evidence implicating the accused on this count and he is accordingly acquitted and discharged thereon.”
This is contained in a ruling that was made by the court after Matsenjwa filed an application in terms of Section 174(4) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act of 1938 (as amended) after the Crown closed its case upon leading 34 witnesses.

The section provides that; ‘If at the close of the case for the prosecution, the court considers that the accused committed the offence charged or any other offence which he might be convicted thereon, it may acquit and discharge him’.

Whether or not to acquit the accused is the discretion of the court which, when improperly exercised, according to Judge Mamba, is abuse of such power and no discretion at all.
One of the people who testified against Matsenjwa in the case was Terry Ngcebo Vermaak, who is also a police officer.

Informed

Vermark had earlier informed the court that he was supposed to meet with Matsebula and kept trying his number but failed to reach him.
Vermaak said he then called Matsenjwa.
From his evidence in chief, Vermaak said Matsenjwa kept calling to ask if Matsebula had returned.

He said the accused called him about four times per day and he started to receive threatening calls from unknown people. He alleged that Matsenjwa kept asking him not to reveal that they were ever together at Solani’s on the night Matsebula disappeared.

Vermaak stated that he overheard a police officer, Malayisha Simelane, who asked about the whereabouts of Matsebula, commenting that; “Lomfana wakaMatsenjwa uyobe sowumbulele Schaza.” (Matsenjwa could have killed Matsebula).

“Lucky called me and said should the police question me if we met at Solani’s I should deny it. He said I should just deny having been in his company in Mbabane and I agreed,” he said.

He alleged that Matsenjwa once called him to inform him that he was in Nelspruit to cleanse himself of bad luck because he was suspected to have had a hand in the disappearance of Matsebula.

Recorded

Vermaak told the court that he recorded and saved on his cellphone his conversations with Matsenjwa.
He said the conversations were in the form of voice recordings and WhatsApp messages.
The Crown said the recordings could be played in court and the defence did not object.

He said he was advised by a senior police officer in the Shiselweni Region not to honour an invitation to Manzini for drinks by Lucky ‘Obama’ Matsenjwa because he would kill him.
Vermaak said he decided to call the senior officer he identified as Shabangu for advice while he was at the residence of the chief justice on duty.
Matsebula’s body had been found and Matsenjwa, according to Vermaak, allegedly persisted to call him requesting that he should not mention his name when questioned by the police.

Vermaak told the court that while he was at the residence of the chief justice in the Shiselweni Region, Matsenjwa called enquiring where he was and he told him that he was at home.

He said Matsenjwa allegedly wanted to come to see him at home but he told him that he was about to go back to Mbabane. According to Vermaak, Matsenjwa invited him to Manzini and promised to refuel his car so they would have drinks together.
Vermaak said Shabangu advised him against going to Matsenjwa because he would kill him.
Fears
He said Shabangu also called the then Desk Officer, Solomon Mavuso in Mbabane and informed him about the matter.
Vermaak said he requested to meet senior police officers at Mbabane Police Station and he informed them about his fears and what he knew about the matter.
He said hardly five minutes after returning to his house, Matsenjwa called and enquired what the meeting was about and he told him that the police wanted to find out what happened to Matsebula because he was still missing.
In delivering its ruling, the court noted that Crown relied more on the evidence of Vermaak.
Appearing for Matsenjwa was Advocate Lucas Maziya who had been instructed by Human Rights Lawyer Sipho Gumedze.