Judgment in the murder, robbery, and theft case involving the late well-known businessman Piet Els is expected to be handed down in January next year.
JUDGMENT in the murder, robbery, and theft case involving the late well-known businessman Piet Els is expected to be handed down in January next year.
During closing arguments in the Northern Cape High Court, senior State advocate Hannes Cloete argued that Jabulani Zuma, the son of former President Jacob Zuma, played an integral role in the commission of the crime.
Zuma and his co-accused – Morapedi Rankali, Montlalentwa Qhautse, Lizbeth Ndlala, Themba Lawrence Maja, Oupa Jeffrey Mahomane and Samson Mbokane – face charges of murder, house robbery, housebreaking with the intent to commit robbery and the unlawful possession of firearms.
Els and his partner were brutally attacked on his farm outside Kimberley in the early hours of January 24, 2018, during which jewellery, diamonds, Kruger Rands, cellphones, and two firearms were stolen. Els’s white Mercedes-Benz was found abandoned near Phuthanang later that day.
Cloete argued that the accused had shared in the spoils of the robbery, receiving cash bundles of R10,000.
“There was continuous association between the accused. Zuma transported the accused from Nelspruit to Kimberley. There is no doubt that they came to Kimberley for the robbery. Zuma dropped off the attackers on Els’s farm and collected them after the robbery. Mbokane admitted to spending the R10,000 while Ndlala and Maja, who were traditional healers, came to perform a cleansing ritual,” said Cloete.
He added that Mbokane told the police he came to Kimberley because Zuma had informed him that someone there had “Paul Kruger money” (Kruger Rand coins).
He added that Zuma was “charming and comfortable” when he was arrested in KwaZulu Natal.
Cloete stated that Zuma’s demeanour was “charming and comfortable” when he was arrested in KwaZulu-Natal.
“He mentioned the name of the victim to the police, which implies that he knew about the robbery. Blame was shifted onto Mahomane, whom he identified as having knowledge of Kimberley. Mbokane told him that ‘if everything goes well, we will be rich’.”
Cloete stated that Zuma created the impression that the other accused all had access to his cellphone, claiming he was tired and had gone to sleep. “He wanted to distance himself from the cellphone.”
The legal representative for Rankali and Maja, advocate Japie Schreuder, stated that there were no links between his clients and the other co-accused.
“There is no evidence to place my clients at the crime scene,” he said.
Schreuder added that Rankali should only be found guilty on a charge of theft. “He was only keeping the rings on behalf of his brother Karabo Rankali. Maja knew nothing about the possession of two broken pieces of a ring belonging to the victims. He should only be found guilty of robbery and not of murder.”
Schreuder added that Maja was a traditional healer in training.
“He also received R10,000 and was found in possession of stolen property.”
The legal representative for Mahomane, advocate Kenny Pretorius, admitted that there was cellphone communication between his client and Zuma.
“R10,000, a cellphone belonging to the deceased and other stolen items found in possession of Mahomane link him and his co-accused to the crime.”
He pointed out that given the age of the deceased and the brutal nature of the assault, the accused should have known that the consequences could have been fatal.
The legal representative for Zuma, Moetleetsi Mogwere, argued that due process was not followed when evidence was seized from the accused and the charges against his client should be withdrawn.
“My client was only the driver who transported the accused from Mpumalanga to Kimberley and back to Nelspruit. He did not plan nor was he involved in any crime. The money he received was for transport fees and he did not know that the origin of the money was the proceeds of crime. Transcripts of cellphone records do not conclusively link any communication between the accused.”
He added that Zuma was “tired and had gone to sleep”, where he had allowed people in the house access to his cellphone.
“He woke up when he heard pandemonium outside and was chased out of the house.”
Mogwere pointed out that without the evidence of co-conspirator Amos Ralihare, who was a fugitive of the law, there were gaps left in the State’s case.
“All charges should be withdrawn against Zuma.”
The legal representative for Qhautse, Ndlala and Mbokane, advocate Thema Diba, stated that it was never proven through DNA analysis that the shoeprints that matched the pair of sneakers that were found in a shanty when Qhautse was arrested, which were found near Els’s property, were his footprints.
He added that the shoes were also not his size.
“Ndlala was not present at the crime scene and was not aware of the offence. She was not involved in the crime and did not know the circumstances of how the goods were stolen.”
Diba said there was no evidence against Mbokane.
Judge Lawrence Lever postponed the case until January 27-31, 2025.
