Senzo Meyiwa: State disputes that DNA on hat believed to be that of the killer belongs to a woman

 Senzo Meyiwa: State disputes that DNA on hat believed to be that of the killer belongs to a woman

The State has disputed claims made by defence counsel of four of the men accused of murdering Senzo Meyiwa, including that DNA found on a hat at the crime scene was that of a woman.

Muzikawukhulelwa S’Tembu Sibiya, Bongani Sandiso Ntanzi, Mthobisi Prince Mncube, Mthokoziseni Ziphozonke Maphisa and Fisokuhle Ntulijave Ntuli appeared in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria for the continuation of their trial on Thursday.

Proceedings got underway with an application by State prosecutor, advocate George Baloyi, to have certain testimony struck from the record following the cross-examination of forensic field worker, Sergeant Thabo Mosia.

Mosia was the first forensic detective on the crime scene on the evening that Meyiwa was shot at his girlfriend Kelly Khumalo’s home on 26 October 2014.

In his evidence-in-chief, Mosia explained that he went to the scene to bag and tag evidence. He testified about what evidence he had collected.

During cross-examination on Tuesday, advocate Malesela Teffo claimed that DNA found on a hat allegedly belonging to the person who pulled the trigger that killed Meyiwa, was that of a woman.

Mosia had previously testified that a black, white, and brown scotch hat was found on the floor in the kitchen.

Mosia confirmed that it was believed the suspect who entered the house using the kitchen entrance had left the hat behind. He said this was confirmed by Kelly Khumalo, who was dating Meyiwa at the time.

According to the State, there were two suspects at the home of Khumalo on the night of the shooting, but only one entered the house with a firearm while the other stayed outside armed with a knife. The State accused Mncube of being the gunman.

Mosia also explained that while he collected the evidence and sent it for analysis, he had not received the results.

On Thursday, Baloyi rubbished Teffo’s claims on the DNA, saying that the information the State had was contrary to what the defence counsel previously placed on record.

Baloyi added that no DNA report had been given to Mosia, so he could not testify on something he knew nothing about.

The State also took exception to questions posed to Mosia about what sort of firearm was used in the commission of the crime.

Teffo asked Mosia to explain how there were no cartridge casings found at the scene, yet the State alleged that Mncube shot Meyiwa with a 9mm parabellum.

Mosia speculated that a revolver could have been used.


Baloyi argued that this question should have not been asked as Mosia was not a ballistics or DNA expert.

The State, in its objection to the line of questioning, asserted that Mosia gave expert evidence on the collection, marking and dispatching of exhibits, but could not answer questions about the outcome of the forensic analysis of the evidence.

Meanwhile, the defence had focused a fair number of its questions around issues that Mosia did not testify about.

Baloyi stated:

We respectfully submit that there is inherent danger in allowing such cross-examination in that such speculative evidence will be elevated by the defence to fact and seek to show a discrepancy with the ballistic expert, or be used to confront other witnesses with such evidence, when such evidence should not have been allowed to start with.

“Such evidence might cause confusion as to its status and thus become red herring.”

Baloyi asked the court to disallow this line of cross-examination and that any opinion regarding ballistic and DNA evidence be struck off the record or be regarded as pro-non scripto.

The defence counsel for the accused would submit responses to the application before Judge Tshifhiwa Maumela made a ruling. Per News24

Related post