Ruling expected in September in Malema firearm trial

The case follows an eight-year-long trial relating to a 2018 shooting incident at the EFF’s fifth birthday celebrations at Sisa Dukashe Stadium in Mdantsane.

Malema’s legal counsel, Advocate Laurence Hodes, listed several reasons why the EFF leader should be acquitted of the charges, stating that the state had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

He said the viral video at the centre of the case could not be authenticated and that no witness had testified to seeing Malema discharge a weapon.

“There is no evidence linking the firearm to Mr Malema. The stage showed no signs of any physical damage, and no live rounds were recovered,” said Hodes.

He added that thousands of people were in attendance on the day, yet not a single eyewitness came forward, nor did any member of the SAPS VIP Protection Unit report anything untoward.

Meanwhile, Advocate Shane Matthews told the court Malema’s co-accused, Adriaan Snyman, should also be acquitted, as the state had brought no evidence to substantiate the claim that his client had given Malema a loaded gun and endangered public safety.

He said the State had further “conceded that in the viral video in question, the rifle handover cannot be proven. There is no evidence that Snyman was in possession of a loaded firearm”.

He argued that “the State is not in a position to secure a conviction as Snyman did not unlawfully supply a firearm to a person not allowed to possess a firearm”.

Addressing the link between the rifle and cartridges found, Matthews said, “Larry Mavundla signing out the rifle had nothing to do with Snyman. If anyone could have answered that, it would have been Larry Mavundla.”

He added, “He was present in East London, he was present at the stadium, he was present on stage, so I am failing to understand why the State did not engage Larry Mavundla.”

He criticised the use of the video, stating: “Certain steps should have been taken to authenticate the video,” and suggested that “there should be a guideline on how the court should accept these videos.”

To illustrate the dangers of unauthenticated content, he told the court, “I had actually seen a video of Her Worship, Magistrate Twanette Olivier, dancing on the EFF stage.

Prosecutor Joel Cesar responded to the closing arguments by stating that the spent cartridges found at Sisa Dukashe Stadium were discovered two days after the EFF’s celebrations and were linked to Snyman’s company.

He said four cartridges had tested positive for the spent case cartridge found. “Among many guns handed in, the rifle in question was the only one with changed parts — the bolt carrier, the bridge lock had been changed to affect the outcome of the firearm.”

He disputed the defence’s argument on the video, saying that the only issue was the relevance of the video, but never its authenticity. “The defence never made submissions proving that the video had been edited or doctored.”

He further maintained that “The evidence before the court is real, and the issue of Mavundla being subpoenaed would have been a waste of State resources.”

He said it was Malema’s evidence that the firearm was given to Mavundla. And the spent cartridges linked to Mavundla’s gun were found in close proximity to the stage.”

Cesar laid out the timeline:

“The 28th of July was the celebration, and then the next day, Gearhouse cleared the stage, and on Monday, the cartridges were found.” Stating that there was no other major event in between.

When responding, Advocate Hodes argued the cartridges could have been there long before or even after the event, or they could have been dropped there, as there is no evidence that they were even shot.

Cesar insisted that “The video was the best silent witness and the best evidence the court could have gotten to know what transpired, as no eyewitness would have been able to be as descriptive, all the way down to song, outfits.”

He concluded by countering the defence’s argument that the crowd did not react: “The submission that no one was scared was incorrect, as at least seven people had moved away when Malema had fired in their direction.”

The trial had been set to continue until Wednesday, with the accused hoping the magistrate would be able to deliver judgment. However, Magistrate Twanette Olivier asked for a postponement.

Following the court, Malema addressed the media, saying Magistrate Olivier’s delay in handing down judgment is driven by a particular motive, as she had ample time to go through the heads of argument and deliver judgment.

“In a normal magistrate’s court, the magistrate would have passed judgment and said I will send my reasons later, because matters have been canvassed with her for a very long time. And these heads of arguments were submitted to her by December.

“You can see clearly it’s a political trial, a lot of manoeuvring needs to be done, and they will now decide as to whether they are moving in which direction.”

He said the judgment would be interesting because the State says they have no evidence against Snyman.

“The prosecutor, in his fake 50 years of experience, says he is not desperate for a conviction, but he has never said Snyman is innocent. When he could not find him guilty, the prosecutor tried other things outside of what he was charged with. Which is a sign of desperation that there must be a guilty verdict at all costs.

“The case has crumbled before the magistrate, and the prosecution messed up the case; they must take full responsibility.”

ALSO READ