A police officer tricked two farmworkers into revealing all they knew about the murder of a fellow worker, who was fed to lions after being assaulted, the Phalaborwa Circuit Court heard on Wednesday.
Wednesday was the second day of closing arguments by the state and defence.
Johann Engelbrecht, SC, for Mark Scott-Crossley, said the evidence of Sergeant Albert Ferreira of Hoedspruit police station, a state witness, could not have been the truth.
He said the court should reject Ferreira’s evidence in which he denied being told by Scott-Crossley that his co-accused were lying when they said they had not seen murder victim Nelson Chisale (41) on the farm the day of the assault in January last year.
He contended that Scott-Crossley (37) could not have known what the two men — Simon Mathebula (43) and Richard Mathebula (41) — had told Ferreira unless Ferreira himself had told him.
Scott-Crossley was not present when Ferreira found them on the farm, nor was he present when they were taken to the police station and questioned.
”On the probabilities, Ferreira must have mentioned what he learned from them and received the response from [Scott-Crossley] that they are lying,” Engelbrecht said.
It could also not be ignored that Ferreira ”deliberately made a misrepresentation” to the Mathebulas on his return to the police station after speaking to Scott-Crossley by telling them Scott-Crossley was on his way there and they should ”reveal what they know”.
Interjecting, Judge George Maluleke — hearing the case with assessors Kate Choshi and Elphus Seemela — remarked: ”One would expect police officers to be scrupulous, utterly truthful … when confronting witnesses. You are saying he cannot be trusted. He must be a lying policeman who extracts information by telling fibs.”
Engelbrecht went on to question why in one breath Ferreira told the court Scott-Crossley claimed to have given instructions that Chisale be assaulted, and in another that the Mathebulas assaulted him.
He questioned why Scott-Crossley would say this if the Mathebulas’ contention was that their instructions were to arrest any non-employees found on the farm and not assault them.
He pointed out that Ferreira did not make notes when he spoke to Scott-Crossley.
”He has to rely on his memory,” he said. ”Not only did he speak with [Scott-Crossley), but [also] with [the Mathebulas], and the possibility of confusion cannot be ruled out.”
Engelbrecht further contended that, with a security company employed on the farm, it was improbable Scott-Crossley would have instructed the Mathebulas to arrest any strangers of the farm.
This was strengthened by Simon Mathebula’s actions in approaching the guard at the gate of the farm and telling him he wanted to phone his employer to tell him what he and Richard had done.
It could be inferred from this that he was afraid of what he and Richard had done to Chisale, which was not compatible with an instruction to either assault or arrest him.
Neither could such an instruction be reconciled with Simon Mathebula’s explanation that he and Richard assaulted Chisale not because he was trespassing, but because he was there to collect pots, which they did not want to give him until he had explained himself to Scott-Crossley.
If all the minor discrepancies and contradictions were to be viewed in the totality of the evidence, where there were also material contradictions, ”then a tiny contradiction may press down like a ton of bricks”, submitted Engelbrecht.
Scott-Crossley has already pleaded not guilty to a charge of murdering Chisale, as has Simon Mathebula. Richard Mathebula also pleaded not guilty before his trial was separated from theirs when he fell ill with tuberculosis and was declared temporarily unfit to stand trial.
Charges against a fourth accused, Robert Mnisi, were withdrawn after he chose to testify for the state. — Sapa