It was a day of wrangling over evidence in the drunken-driving trial of Judge Nkola Motata at the Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court on Thursday.
It started with the continued testimony of the state’s first witness and owner of the house the judge crashed his Jaguar into, Richard James Baird.
The court adjourned on Thursday afternoon after prosecutor Zaais van Zyl attempted to enter five video clippings recorded by Baird on his cellphone, allegedly of Motata using derogatory language and racial slurs.
Baird used the video function of his cellphone to capture sound, but no visuals were recorded.
Van Zyl said the evidence was both relevant and real and added that once the evidence was before the court, it could then be disputed.
”… but it must still be seen and heard,” he said.
He also said there was no ”originality prescript” regarding the recordings, after an earlier decision by magistrate Desmond Nair not to allow copies of a note given to Baird by Motata on the night of the accident.
The note allegedly contained Motata’s contact details, which he volunteered to Baird in order to pay for the damage to his property.
Baird told the court that Motata’s handwriting was barely legible, saying it was ”very difficult to read and there was repetition and incorrect spelling on it”.
However, the original piece of paper could not be located — Baird said it was somewhere on his Mpumalanga farm and he could not find it.
Baird had made copies of the document, which the state attempted to use as evidence.
Danie Dorfling for the defence disputed the evidence, requesting that the original note be presented to the court.
A quick adjournment for magistrate Nair to decide on the matter ended the debate. Nair halted the state’s attempt to use copies of the note, saying they could only be used once a ”thorough” and ”diligent search” had been conducted for the originals.
Dorfling then requested a postponement before the recordings could be heard in order to consult an expert.
He said the defence was provided with a CD of the recordings without any ”fingerprints”, described by the court as the date and time that the recordings were made.
Van Zyl said a copy of the recordings downloaded from Baird’s phone on to his laptop bore the date and time the recording was made.
Dorfling suggested to the court that the state proceed with other witnesses and recall Baird on Monday in order for them to consult the necessary expert and prepare themselves adequately.
”We will seek the expert to advise us on the issue of whether or not the sound recording that we are going to hear can be relied upon,” said Dorfling.
”… the issue of authenticity also arises.”
Nair denied the defence’s request to stand the witness down but said he was prepared to give them a chance to prepare themselves to address the court.
”I am not going to grant a postponement for an expert to be consulted. The only indulgence … [is] to give counsel time to address the court.”
Motata’s defence team has until 9.30am to prepare its argument on why the recordings should not be heard by the court.
Nair will then return with a ruling on what is to be presented and how.
Motata arrived at the court in a navy blue pin-striped suit with an austere blue pocket square in his jacket pocket. His family sat in court throughout proceedings.
The judge sat in the dock again vigorously taking notes and snatching a quick word with his legal team while court was in session from time to time.
He is facing a charge of driving under the influence of liquor or drugs with an alternative count of reckless and negligent driving and a charge of defeating the ends of justice, with an alternative charge of resisting arrest. — Sapa