Special ops soldiers linked to murder of Hawks officer Mathipa granted bail
The state has announced it will appeal against the decision by the Randburg magistrate's court.
The court ruled they have shown circumstances that warrant their release on bail and that the state failed to show the role of each accused in the charges.
There was no evidence they would intimidate state witnesses, the court ruled.
The defence teams successfully argued there was no evidence to support that the soldiers are a danger to society or that they will avoid the trial.
The state previously pushed for the soldiers to be denied bail, arguing they would compromise police investigations and endanger the safety of the public if granted bail.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
11 minutes ago
- The South African
Limpopo farmers devastated as invaders from Zimbabwe destroy crops
Farmers and residents at Niani, outside Musina in Limpopo, say their livelihoods are under siege as elephants migrating from Zimbabwe and Botswana trample through the area, destroying everything in their path. As reported by SABC News , elephants are allegedly flattening maize fields, breaking fences, and forcing families from their homes. For local farmer Samuel Nembahe, what should be a season of hard work has turned into days of fear and sleepless nights. He says his workers have had to abandon the fields on several occasions as large herds moved in, wrecking fences, breaking water sources, and leaving nothing but chaos behind. 'Sometimes they come in bulk, especially the ones with calves,' Nembahe told SABC News . He said they are scared for the workers who are helping take care of cattle. 'They must stay here, but their safety is always at risk.' Over the past few weeks, villagers say the elephants have been damaging infrastructure along the Limpopo River. Resident Rosina Ndou recalled a terrifying encounter. 'Just recently, they (elephants) invaded the farm. We had to run and spent the night on top of the mountain,' she said. The danger extends beyond farmers. Last month, a South African National Defence Force member was killed by a herd of elephants while on border patrol near Madimbo, highlighting the deadly risks associated with the annual migration. Provincial authorities acknowledge the challenge. Hitekani Magwedze, spokesperson for the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET), said the movement of elephants is a natural cycle but warned communities to stay vigilant. 'It's part of the annual migration we experience in Limpopo,' Magwedze explained. 'While we appreciate this natural phenomenon, we urge people to exercise caution and stay away from the animals for their own safety.' Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
Witness Admits Contradictions in Rushil Singh Fraud Trial
During the ongoing fraud trial of Rushil Singh, a key Investec employee testifying for the State admitted under cross-examination that Singh was not directly involved in the alleged fraud. This acknowledgment challenges a central aspect of the prosecution's case, which is based on Singh's position as CEO of BIG and assumptions about his knowledge of the loan witness initially testified that the financial guarantee involved in the case was 'cash backed.' However, under questioning by the defense, he conceded that this was incorrect. 'The guarantee was not, in fact, cash backed,' the witness said. He further explained that no contractual agreement explicitly required the guarantee to be backed by cash. 'There was an assumption that the guarantee was cash backed, but there is no documentary proof to support this,' he added. This admission weakens the prosecution's argument that Singh knowingly engaged in fraudulent activity related to the guarantee. The witness also contradicted himself multiple times during cross-examination. When reminded that he was under oath, he responded, 'No man is infallible.' The defence highlighted these inconsistencies to question his credibility. Compounding these issues, the court heard that the original R20 million guarantee issued by Stanbic Bank was initially cash backed and included a conditional clause confirming this security. However, it was Investec that requested the removal of this clause, transforming the guarantee from a secured instrument to an unsecured one. 'The original Stanbic guarantee was secured, but Investec itself asked for the security to be removed,' the defence argued, raising concerns about Investec's internal oversight and defense further emphasized that Singh's involvement is based on presumption rather than evidence. 'The State's own witness conceded Rushil Singh was not directly involved,' the defence said. 'Singh's implication rests solely on the assumption that he must have known about a cash backing requirement, a notion without contractual or factual basis.'Adding to the scrutiny of Investec's role are allegations that several Investec employees received personal benefits from Nishani Singh, related to the loans. The Star has learnt of a new man on the story, referred to as Mr X reportedly received monthly payments of R19,000 through a shell company registered in his name from December 2020 to October 2021 — the period during which the loan agreements were being structured and finalized. Mr X. also received a lump sum payment of R70,000 in August 2020 and may have received a R2 million contribution towards his Pretoria home's construction. After resigning from Investec in June 2021, he joined BIG as a director with a reported monthly salary of R300, other bank employees were linked to questionable benefits. Mr X.2 received two Sandton City gift vouchers worth R10,000 each, given during active loan negotiations. Mr X.2 was given a fully paid Sun City trip in December 2016. The defence suggests these benefits breached banking ethics and could constitute inducements.
IOL News
3 hours ago
- IOL News
Witness Admits Contradictions in Rushil Singh Fraud Trial
During the ongoing fraud trial of Rushil Singh, a key Investec employee testifying for the State admitted under cross-examination that Singh was not directly involved in the alleged fraud. This acknowledgment challenges a central aspect of the prosecution's case, which is based on Singh's position as CEO of BIG and assumptions about his knowledge of the loan witness initially testified that the financial guarantee involved in the case was 'cash backed.' However, under questioning by the defense, he conceded that this was incorrect. 'The guarantee was not, in fact, cash backed,' the witness said. He further explained that no contractual agreement explicitly required the guarantee to be backed by cash. 'There was an assumption that the guarantee was cash backed, but there is no documentary proof to support this,' he added. This admission weakens the prosecution's argument that Singh knowingly engaged in fraudulent activity related to the guarantee. The witness also contradicted himself multiple times during cross-examination. When reminded that he was under oath, he responded, 'No man is infallible.' The defence highlighted these inconsistencies to question his credibility. Compounding these issues, the court heard that the original R20 million guarantee issued by Stanbic Bank was initially cash backed and included a conditional clause confirming this security. However, it was Investec that requested the removal of this clause, transforming the guarantee from a secured instrument to an unsecured one. 'The original Stanbic guarantee was secured, but Investec itself asked for the security to be removed,' the defence argued, raising concerns about Investec's internal oversight and defense further emphasized that Singh's involvement is based on presumption rather than evidence. 'The State's own witness conceded Rushil Singh was not directly involved,' the defence said. 'Singh's implication rests solely on the assumption that he must have known about a cash backing requirement, a notion without contractual or factual basis.'Adding to the scrutiny of Investec's role are allegations that several Investec employees received personal benefits from Nishani Singh, related to the loans. The Star has learnt of a new man on the story, referred to as Mr X reportedly received monthly payments of R19,000 through a shell company registered in his name from December 2020 to October 2021 — the period during which the loan agreements were being structured and finalized. Mr X. also received a lump sum payment of R70,000 in August 2020 and may have received a R2 million contribution towards his Pretoria home's construction. After resigning from Investec in June 2021, he joined BIG as a director with a reported monthly salary of R300, other bank employees were linked to questionable benefits. Mr X.2 received two Sandton City gift vouchers worth R10,000 each, given during active loan negotiations. Mr X.2 was given a fully paid Sun City trip in December 2016. The defence suggests these benefits breached banking ethics and could constitute inducements.
