/ 31 October 2008

Jeppe accused ‘had common purpose to resist arrest’

Eleven of the 12 Jeppestown massacre accused have been found guilty on further charges of possessing a prohibited AK-47 assault rifle, and unlicensed firearms and ammunition.

Johannesburg High Court Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng earlier on Friday convicted seven of the men on aggravated robbery, attempted murder and murder charges.

The other four were found guilty of similar charges earlier in the week. Senzo Emmanuel Mweli was the only accused convicted on aggravated robbery and attempted murder charges.

”In my view, they all had a common purpose to resist arrest and engage in a shoot-out with police … and they did so through the instrumentality of those arms,” Mokgoatlheng said.

He had earlier stated that it was impossible to conclude that all 11 accused had been armed as only nine firearms were found.

”Consequently, it follows, although the politicians do not deem it necessary to be educated, nine firearms cannot possibly be possessed by 20 people. Eleven of them were not armed,” he said.

Of the gang of 20 robbers, eight were shot dead during the gunfight with police in Jeppestown on June 25 2006. Four police officers were also killed.

The bloodbath followed a robbery at a Honeydew Pick n Pay supermarket earlier that morning. The robbers had apparently gone to the house in Jeppestown to share the stolen money.

However, seven of them justified their presence there by claiming they had gone to consult a traditional healer.

The trial was postponed to Tuesday for arguments in mitigation of sentence.

Before adjourning the case, Mokgoatlheng ordered advocate Mlungisi Buthelezi to report to the Bar Council.

This came after Buthelezi repeatedly failed to appear in court on time. On Thursday, the judge instructed Buthelezi’s client, Siyanda Mgomezulu, to apply for a new legal representative.

Buthelezi’s conduct was undermining the integrity of the court, Mokgoatlheng said.

The judge told the advocate on Friday: ”Mr Buthelezi, you must report yourself to the Bar Council, and inform the Legal Aid Board not to pay you for yesterday [Thursday].”

Mokgoatlheng also instructed Buthelezi to provide proof on Tuesday that he had done as instructed.

The Legal Aid Board said earlier in the day it was investigating Mokgoatlheng’s comments that one of its lawyers did not respect the courts. — Sapa