Court hears of ‘contradictions’ in Malema assault trial

Court hears of ‘contradictions’ in Malema assault trial

Economic Freedom Fighter (EFF) leader Julius Malema’s advocate Laurence Hodes attempted to poke holes in Johannes Venter's testimony during day 1 of the politician’s assault trial.

Juju
@Twitter/EFF

Malema and EFF MP Mbuyiseni Ndlozi appeared in the Randburg Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday.

 

The trial kicked off with Presidential Protection Services’ Lieutenant-Colonel Johannes Venter – whom the pair are accused of assaulting at struggle stalwart Winnie Madikizela-Mandela’s 2018 burial – telling his version of events.

 

Venter testified that he had been tasked with access control at the burial site and that he had refused Malema’s vehicle entry to the Fourways Memorial Park.

 

He said the car did not have the permit, although Malema and his party were allowed to walk to the burial site.

 

"I informed Mr Malema that he the vehicle cannot enter, but they were more than welcome to walk inside," he said. "Mr Malema informed me that they will not walk in they will drive in. I said I must first get permission from the venue operation centre.”


ALSO READ: SA's economy expected to shrink by 7.8%

 

He said before he could get permission he was shoved from behind. When he turned around he saw Malema and Ndlozi charging toward him.

 

Video footage played in court which showed that after the scuffle ensued, the vehicle was eventually allowed in. 

 

Hodes quizzed Venter on why his testimony in court contradicts his initial statement he made at Douglasdale Police Station.

 

Venter said that when he made the initial statement he was still in shock, adding that the investigating officer was meant to follow up for a complete statement but never did.

 

He also said that due to his initial shock he may have forgotten certain things when making the initial report.

 

“You weren’t shocked in that video. You were smiling, you were confident, you were anything but shocked,” Hodes retorted.

 

Venter’s response was that this was how he reacted to shock.

 

Hodes asked Venter if he had apologised to the pair.

 

"No need," he responded. “I did my duties as expected."

 

“No, you didn’t. If your duty was to prevent them from going in, you should have prevented them. If your duty was to allow them in because they were accredited, then you should have apologised for prohibiting them from going in,” Hodes said.

 

“This must be the most ineffective Presidential Protection Service I’ve ever heard of, it’s a joke.”

 

The court adjourned for the afternoon and the case was remanded to Thursday.

Show's Stories