Home | News | CONTRADICTIONS IN JOMO MURDER CASE

CONTRADICTIONS IN JOMO MURDER CASE

19/11/2020 07:00:00 BY KWANELE DLAMINI

Font size:

MBABANE – Advocate Lucas Maziya has punched holes in the evidence that State witness Senzo Sithole has given in the Jomo Khumalo murder trial.

The advocate, on the instruction of Nzima and Associates, represents Maxwell Nkambule, who has been charged with the murder of the public transport operator.

Khumalo was shot at the Manzini Traffic Circle on November 27, 2019, while travelling with his wife and children.

Sithole was arrested with Nkambule, however, the former was turned into an accomplice witness.

Judge Ticheme Dlamini, who presides over the matter, makes sure to remind Sithole whenever the matter begins each day, since July 16, 2020 when it started, that as a State witness, he is expected to give evidence to the satisfaction of the court if he is not to lose his immunity to prosecution.

Before cross-examining him, Maziya reminded Sithole that since the start of the trial, he had been warned about what was expected of him and that he could be prosecuted for perjury if he lied to the court.

Contradiction

Maziya then pointed out inconsistencies and contradictions in the affidavit accompanying Sithole’s bail application and his evidence-in-chief.

The first inconsistency the advocate pointed out related to when Sithole first met the alleged hit man, Xolani Nkosi.

When he gave evidence on Monday, Sithole said he first met Nkosi at the staff canteen at Matsapha Correctional Services.

He said he was in the company of Nkambule.

He told the court that it was after four days since Nkambule’s Iveco mini-bus had been burnt for the second time on October 15, 2019, when he met two men at staff canteen and one of them was Nkosi.

He alleged that Nkambule signalled to the hit man with his head, pointing to the direction of Khumalo, the deceased.

Maziya read a paragraph from Sithole’s bail application affidavit, attested to on February 4, 2020, that: “In around November 2019, I travelled to the Republic of South Africa with Maxwell Nkambule for business purposes.

“He did business there; that is when I first met one Xolani Nkosi, whose particulars were unknown to me.” Maziya asked the witness if he first met Nkosi in November 2019. Sithole disagreed.

He admitted that the affidavit that was read by the advocate was his (Sithole).

Maziya said if Sithole did not agree with the contents of his affidavit, it could be that he was not telling the truth that he met Nkosi around October 18 or19, 2019 after the Iveco mini-bus was burnt or he was not telling the truth when he deposed to the affidavit. Sithole said he first saw Nkosi in October 18 or 19, 2019. He said that was what he attested to in his affidavit.

Enquired

The advocate enquired from the witness as to why he did not state in his affidavit that he first met Nkosi in October 2019 instead of November 2019. Sithole said at the time, he was still confused. Maziya wondered why Sithole was still confused because he was arrested on December 1, 2019 and deposed to the affidavit on February 4, 2020.

The witness said he was confused by the fact that he had to hire and pay an attorney. Maziya reminded Sithole that he had hired Noncedo Ndlangamandla to apply for bail on his behalf and the witness said he still had not paid her and that confused him.

However, Maziya said the confusion was caused by the fact that Sithole was trying to mislead the court, which the witness denied.

Sithole said he did not remember mentioning in his affidavit that: “I eventually left Maxwell Nkambule in the Republic of South Africa.” Again, Maziya asked him if he had deposed to the affidavit and he responded to the affirmative.

Maziya said: “In view of the contradictions, which of these should the court accept as the true version?”

Principal Crown Counsel Macebo Nxumalo chipped in and clarified that Sithole, in his evidence-in-chief, said he left Johannesburg together with Nkambule and Nkosi, whom he left at Oshoek Border Gate to enter the country through an informal crossing.

Maziya further read from Sithole’s affidavit that: “Later, I received a call from Xolani to get my car in Big Bend as he had got a lift to South Africa with some friends.” Sithole denied that he ever said that.

The advocate read another paragraph from the affidavit to the effect that: “…I woke up and went to Big Bend to get my car.”

Sithole said what was being read to him was not true. In another paragraph, it read: “Upon my arrest, I was questioned about the whereabouts of my car on the day of the death of the deceased. I informed the police that I fetched same from Big Bend where a friend had left it.”

Sithole said that was not true. He told the court that he informed the police that his car was with him on the day Khumalo was murdered.

Fetched

He also denied that: “I was then taken to Big Bend to show the police where I had fetched my car,” which Maziya read from his affidavit.

Sithole further said he had no knowledge of the paragraph that read: “Upon arrival there, police combed the area and found a firearm in the bushes next to where the car was parked.”

The witness went on to deny that he said: “I never led the police at any point to a firearm nor was any found in my possession.”

He explained that he led the police to Big Bend to fetch the firearm where Nkosi had allegedly hidden it.

Sithole said it was also not true that in his affidavit, he stated that: “I never committed the offences I am charged with. I learnt during interrogation that my car was used.”

The witness kept saying what the advocate was reading from the affidavit was not true.

Maziya asked Sithole if he meant that what he was reading was something he had made up. Sithole said he agreed only to what was true and denied what was not.