The judge in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial as ruled against the admission of the recording of a confession by accused 2, Bongani Ntanzi.
Delivering a ruling on the admissibility of a recording, which advocate Zandile Mshololo on Thursday said contained incriminating information, Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng concurred with the defense that the constitutional rights of the accused were violated in the making of the recording. This after Magistrate Vivian Cronje, earlier this week, told the court that she had not informed the accused beforehand that she was going to be recording the confession as required by the law and that she was merely recording it for her own personal use.
The defense hung onto to argue against its inadmissibility.
“If the court allowed such egregious flouting of the accused’s rights, it would not be in interest of the justice to do so. This court rules that the recording should not form part of the proceedings.”
During arguments on the admissibility of the recording on Thursday morning, Advocate Zandile Mshololo for accused 5, Fisokuhle Ntuli, told the court that having listened to the recording and having heard the nature of the information contained in it, Ntanzi’s constitutional rights were violated.
“My submission my lord is that as we are in a trial within a trial, until such a ruling has been made by this court, the video recording which was unconstitutionally obtained in terms of Section 35 (5) should not be played to the court because it contains incriminating information. My lord, why I am raising this is because I have listened to the recording,” said Mshololo.
Magistrate Vivian Cronje made the recording for her own use when she took down a confession by Ntanzi at the Boksburg Magistrates’ Court on the 24th of June 2020, eight days following his arrest.
The state, in its submission, had told the court that the recording, although was not done for official purposes was done by Cronje in her official capacity recorded on her official laptop and was a mere electronic version of what she was reducing in writing.
However, Mshololo, in her submission, shot this down saying the recording was different to the statement which was submitted in court.
“I have read the document which is in front of the court (written confession) and the state has also indicated my lord that there is additional information which is not contained in the Exhibit JJ (written confession). I am submitting to say the information that the information contained in the video recording is not the same as the document submitted as Exhibit JJ if you listen to it. As a result, I submit we continue with the trial within a trial and after the ruling, the court may then listen to the video recording.”
Advocate Thulani Mngomezulu had argued the court didn’t need to listen to the recording, saying it had had enough information at its disposal to come to make a ruling without having listened to it.
Senzo Meyiwa trial under way:
