THABANI INQUEST: TRAFFIC COP ADMITS GROSS NEGLIGENCE

MATSAPHA – A senior traffic officer from Matsapha Police Station has admitted there was gross negligence in the manner in which they handled the matter of the late Thabani Nkomonye.

The officer, Sergeant Ntombikayise Sithole, was shift officer on Saturday May 8, 2021 when the car which was driven by Thabani was involved in a road traffic accident at Nhlambeni, along Mhlaleni/Nhlangano Public Road. Sithole, who is witness number 14 in the ongoing inquest into the death of Thabani, was led in evidence by Prosecutor Fikile Dlamini. The prosecutor asked her to narrate what she knows about the matter which was before the Coroner, Senior Magistrate Nonhlanhla Dlamini. She submitted that on May 8, 2021, she was on duty and at around 9:30pm three officers, who are constables by rank; Kunene, Msibi and Thusi reported for duty and she gave them an instruction to patrol D13 Public Road (Ka-Hlobile via Masundvwini to Nhlambeni), then MR 9 Public Road (Nhlambeni to Mhlaleni) and join MR3 Highway. She alleged that she gave them this instruction because during those days, there were many road traffic accidents, which involved cattle. At around 11pm, she alleged that she received a call from Msibi, who told her that they had just came across a car which had overturned and when they inspected the scene, they did not find the occupant(s), not even the driver.

Accident

In fact, she claimed that when they reported the accident, the officers told her that they found cars parked along the road, something which drew their attention and asked what was happening. She submitted that according to the officers, the motorists told them that there was an accident and they went together to where the car had landed, but they did not find anyone. “I told them to give themselves time to look around. They did look, but did not find the occupant(s),” the witness submitted. Later on, she claimed that she suggested to the officers that they should call a tow truck to tow the car with the assumption that maybe the driver was beneath the car. She alleged that indeed a tow truck was called and it towed the car, but still they did not see anyone, except for beer bottles, some of which were inside the vehicle. She submitted that the car was towed to Matsapha Police Station and the officers continued to attend to other reports. As they were carrying out their duties on the night, the sergeant claimed that she gave them instructions that they should also go to check at hospital (Raleigh Fitkin Memorial (RFM) Hospital) if there were any patients from a road traffic accident that happened at Nhlambeni.

In the following morning, she submitted that another shift came in at around 5:30am and it consisted of Constables; Nkabinde, Malaza and Simelane. She claimed that she asked them to go to the accident scene, where occupants of the car were not found, to check as it happened at night. “They went there and called to report that they did not find anyone,” the witness submitted. She added that they also told her that they saw marks of where the car veered off the road and rolled before it landed on a tree. She claimed that since it was a Sunday, Matsapha Weighbridge was closed, which was where they were going to use the registration plate of the car to identify the owner. “I also assumed that maybe the driver of the car will come to claim it as most motorists do so in such cases,” Sithole submitted. On Monday (May 10, 2021), she alleged that there was a strike action by public transport workers and she found that her superior had deployed her to work at Matsapha Traffic Circle. As she had a busy day, she claimed that she forgot to go to Matsapha Weighbridge and told herself that the investigator (Kunene) would continue.

Procedure

Thereafter, Lawyer Gigi Reid, who was together with Lawyer Mangaliso Nkomondze, asked the witness to enlighten them about the normal reporting procedure of an accident, until it reached the regional headquarters. In response, the witness said an accident was normally reported to 999, which then give the report to the communications office of the particular police station. Upon receiving the report, she submitted that the station’s communications officer sends the report to on duty officers, who then go to attend it and report to the sergeant on duty or on standby. She added that the sergeant should issue instruction to the officers on what to do as they attend the matter and after getting feedback the junior officer, he (sergeant) should report to traffic-in-charge, who would then report to the station commander.

When concluding the reporting procedure, she submitted that the station commander is supposed to report to the regional commander. She claimed she did not know the next stages of reporting. Thereafter, Reid asked that they should relate the said reporting procedure to Thabani’s accident and said they would cancel the stage of 999 as the report did not come from the police toll free emergency line. They asked her if she reported to traffic-in-charge (Sergeant Motsa) after receiving a report from the patrolling officers, whom she also gave instructions to call a tow truck, among others.

In response, the witness claimed that she reported to the traffic-in-charge on the following morning (Sunday May 9, 2021). The lawyers asked what exactly did the witness report to traffic-in-charge and she submitted that she told him that there was an accident at night and that the occupant(s) were not found, including the driver. She added that in her report she also mentioned that the car was towed to the police station and the accident was recorded in the occurrence book. The lawyer then asked Sithole if she had any knowledge as to whether the traffic-in-charge reported to the station commander and in response, she submitted that she was not sure. Again, Reid told the witness that in her evidence, she told the coroner that the report was supposed to be recorded in the occurrence book and impound book. She then asked who was supposed to record it and the witness submitted that it was the investigating officer, Kunene.

The lawyer then asked Sergeant Sithole if Kunene recorded the report and in response, the witness said; “I am not sure, but I am aware that the report was recorded.” Thereafter, Reid wanted to know if it was not her (witness) duty to verify if Kunene recorded the report, as she was supposed to report about it to her superior (traffic-in-charge). In response, Sergeant Sithole submitted that it was her duty. “I pick up some negligence there as you were supposed to ensure that Kunene recorded the report,” Lawyer Reid said. She then asked Sithole if she could see what time the report was recorded in the occurrence book and she responded to the positive.

She also recapped what time did the witness receive the call from the patrolling officers about the accident report and she submitted that it was around 11pm. After that, the lawyer told her that according to the occurrence book, the report about the accident was recorded at 10:40pm. The lawyer wondered how come the accident was allegedly seen and reported to her at around 11pm, but it was recorded at 10:40pm in the occurrence book. “How can you explain this discrepancy?” the lawyer asked. Reid also highlighted that evidence that was submitted before the coroner was that there was a two-hour search at the scene after the police had arrived. In response, the witness submitted that she said she received the call at about 11pm, not exactly 11pm.

Agreed

The lawyer agreed with the witness that she submitted that it was about 11pm when he received the call from the patrolling officers, but she stated that what worries her was that the accident was recorded at the occurrence book at 10:40pm yet at that time, the officers were supposed to be at the accident scene, searching for the occupant(s) of the car. “Do you see that this does not make sense because the timeline is confusing?” the lawyer asked and the witness responded to the positive. “Yes, I see it Your Worship,” the witness submitted. Again, Reid emphasised that she saw some negligence in the manner in which the accident was handled.  When she was asked to comment, Sergeant Sithole submitted that she would not deny or agree with Reid because it would depend on one’s perspective.

However, the lawyer mentioned that the witness did not ensure that Kunene recorded the occurrence book and on top of that the issue of the time was on oversight to both of them (witness and investigating officer). She said the time did not match or add up and the witness submitted that she was aware of that, but she did not know what to say. “Do you see that there is gross negligence in terms of following the normal procedure?”  The lawyer asked. In response, Sergeant Sithole said; “Yes Your Worship.”

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: