Latest news with #LegalAidSouthAfrica
TimesLIVE
5 days ago
- TimesLIVE
Legal Aid won't fund Meyiwa accused preparations for their discharge bid
Three of the four lawyers representing the men accused of murdering Senzo Meyiwa plan to proceed with their discharge applications, despite Legal Aid South Africa declining to fund their preparation for the applications. Four of the five accused indicated to the Pretoria high court they wished to apply for their discharge after the state closed its case in July, as they believed the state had failed to present a strong case. Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that if, at the close of the state's case and the court is of the opinion there is no evidence the accused committed the offence of which they may be convicted on the charge, the court may return a verdict of not guilty. The lawyers for the accused, who are receiving instructions from Legal Aid South Africa, had been waiting to hear if they would be compensated for their work in preparation for the section 174 applications. Meyiwa was shot dead in the presence of his then girlfriend Kelly Khumalo at her mother's home in Vosloorus in October 2014. Mthobisi Mncube, Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Bongani Sandiso Ntanzi, Mthokoziseni Maphisa and Sifisokuhle Nkani Ntuli are on trial for Meyiwa's murder. They have pleaded not guilty. When proceedings got under way on Thursday, the Pretoria high court heard from a Legal Aid South Africa official that the entity was 'not amenable' to funding the lawyers' preparations for the discharge applications. 'The (Legal Aid South Africa's) constitutional committee said that they are of the view that to pay an additional four weeks to prepare for a section 174, they weren't amenable to that,' said the official. She said when Legal Aid assumed the mandate to fund the accused, they undertook to fund them through the whole process. However, she said, when deliberating the issue of the section 174 application, the question that came before the constitutional case management committee was whether they would fund a four-week preparation for a section 174 application. 'A decision was made that they won't fund it. We won't stop them from doing a 174, because that is part of the Criminal Procedure Act,' she said. Advocate Charles Mnisi, representing Sibiya and Mncube, had indicated that four weeks was the amount of time he would need to prepare. He said it would be a challenge for him to prepare for the application without any reimbursement. 'I don't think I'll be in a position to do that. I've already done that since January. I've read almost 40,000 pages and I don't want to get there, but I don't think I'll be in a position to do that for the second time again,' he said. Mnisi, however, informed the court that Sibiya and Mncube's instructions were that they still wished to bring the section 174 application. 'The challenge is, who is going to finance it?' he said. Defence lawyer for Ntanzi, Sipho Ramosepele, though faced with the same challenge, refused to dwell deeply on the financing challenges and informed the court he would proceed with the application on behalf of Ntanzi. Ntanzi said Legal Aid had indicated that the defence stood a slim chance of succeeding in the section 174 application. 'That's what they've just told our clients — that we don't have a leg to stand on in the 174 application,' he said. Advocate Zithulele Nxumalo, for Maphisa, said that though Legal Aid had declined to fund the preparations for the application, he would continue as he had already begun preparing and drafting the application. Advocate Zandile Mshololo, for Ntuli, declined to bring a discharge application and said she was ready to present Ntuli's defence. The court ordered that the heads of arguments in the discharge applications must be filed on August 15, the responses, if any, on August 22 and that arguments will be on August 25. TimesLIVE
The Citizen
5 days ago
- The Citizen
'Rats as big as cats,' Louis Liebenberg sent to psychiatric hospital
Liebenberg accused the magistrate of being biased and of enjoying the media attention on the case. Alleged Ponzi scheme kingpin Louis Liebenberg has been sent to a psychiatric hospital for 30 days. This comes after the Bronkhorspruit Magistrate's Court referred the notorious diamond dealer for evaluation during his bail application after a heated debate with the magistrate and various accusations. His rant included comments on bullying, prison abuse, white bread for his gout, the Bible and making various accusations against the magistrate, the court and even the minister of correctional services. 'You know Groenewald talks a bit retarded, you can hear it's him, you can clearly hear it's him. He said, 'Give that man a hard time in prison',' he said. Liebenberg accused the magistrate of being biased and of enjoying the media attention on the case. [WATCH] The court orders that alleged diamond scammer Louis Liebenberg be referred to Weskoppies Hospital for psychiatric observation for 30 days. It also orders Legal Aid SA to provide him with a lawyer. #Newzroom405 August 7, 2025 ALSO READ: Mashatile fined for failing to declare diamond gift from Louis Liebenberg 'Rats bigger than cats' He also complained about conditions in the C-Max prison, where inmates were held at the Kgoši Mampuru II Correctional Centre in Pretoria, claiming that there were rats bigger than cats in the basement cells. 'They run over your body at night; that happens.' The court ordered that Liebenberg be referred to Weskoppies Hospital for psychiatric observation, and also ordered Legal Aid South Africa to provide him with a lawyer. Bail application A visibly upset Liebenberg listened to the magistrate as she delivered the orders. 'Currently, the bail application is not progressing because you are not focused on the bail application; you are focused on other opinions of your own. So it is this court's responsibility to ensure that you understand the court proceedings and what is at stake at your bail application.' Observation by Weskoppies Hospital The magistrate said the court has also not received any clear indication from Liebenberg whether he wanted Legal Aid or not. 'You have certain requirements from the Legal Aid board, which is also to your disadvantage. Therefore, the court is making two orders today. The first one in terms of section 77, one is to be referred to Weskoppies [Hospital] for observation for 30 days for the court to be certain that you understand the court proceedings. 'Secondly, the court is ordering Legal Aid South Africa to provide you with a legal representative,' the magistrate said. Verbal exchange When asked if he understood what was said, Liebenberg asked if he could appeal the decision, but the magistrate replied that he could not. Liebenberg told the magistrate that he wanted her removed from the matter. 'On what grounds?' she asked 'You are not objective. I don't feel I will have a fair hearing in front of you,' Liebenberg responded, before pointing out that the doctor had found him to be compos mentis (mentally competent). The magistrate told Liebenberg could brief his Legal Aid lawyer to lodge an application for her recusal, but he insisted that he would not use their services. Multiple charges against Liebenberg and co-accused Liebenberg, his wife, Desiree Liebenberg, Magdelena Petronella Kleynhans, Johannes Petrus Badenhorst, Helena Dorothea Amy Schulenburg, Adriaan Dewald Strydom, Christelle Badenhorst, Nicolize van Heerden and Walter Niendinger are accused of more than R4 billion in fraud. They face 42 counts of fraud (alternatively theft), five counts of racketeering, six counts of money laundering and various statutory offences, including contraventions of the Companies Act. NOW READ: Mashatile fined for failing to declare diamond gift from Louis Liebenberg
The Star
5 days ago
- The Star
Court orders mental evaluation for diamond dealer Louis Liebenberg after courtroom outburst
Zelda Venter | Published 49 minutes ago Following a verbal outburst in court this week by diamond dealer Louis Liebenberg, the 61-year-old will now have to undergo a 30-day mental evaluation at Pretoria's Weskoppies Hospital. The Bronkhorstspruit Magistrate's Court decided to refer Liebenberg in this way , although a doctor who had evaluated him on Thursday morning did not recommend that he be referred for psychiatric observation. The magistrate hearing his bail application on Wednesday ordered that he had to see a doctor so that the latter could determine whether Liebenberg understood the court procedures. This was after what was supposed to be his bail application, conducted by himself, ended in chaos. Instead of arguing for bail, Liebenberg heatedly accused the magistrate, the prosecution, and correctional services of bullying him. During Thursday's proceedings, the magistrate told Liebenberg that the doctor probably saw him for half an hour or so, and cleared him to conduct his trial . But, after the previous day's actions where Liebenberg 'disrespected' the court and used 'foul' language, the final decision is with the court on whether to send him for mental observation. The magistrate said she needed to be sure that Liebenberg fully understood the court proceedings; thus, it is necessary to send him for an evaluation. The court further ordered that Legal Aid South Africa had to appoint a lawyer, free of charge, to represent Liebenberg. This is after his lawyer withdrew his services due to non-payment. Liebenberg, in turn, told the magistrate that he wanted her removed from his matter, as he claimed she was biased towards him. The matter was meanwhile postponed to August 29 to ascertain when a bed will be available at Weskoppies for Liebenberg. Apart from using foul language in court on Wednesday and telling the magistrate that she sounded like his mother, Liebenberg also addressed the fact that he had to address her as 'your worship". 'The Bible says clearly that I cannot worship anyone apart from God… We got this thing (calling a magistrate your worship) from England. It does not mean I don't have respect, but I have a problem calling someone 'worship' . We are in Africa. We have potholes. We are falling apart. And we are worshipping one another…,' Liebenberg told the magistrate. The magistrate on Wednesday, time and again told Liebenberg to get on with his bail application. She eventually ordered that he be seen by a doctor as he simply vented on. [email protected]
TimesLIVE
6 days ago
- TimesLIVE
Broken evidence chain, contradictions may aid Meyiwa defence in Section 174 bid: experts
Legal experts are divided about whether the defence's Section 174 application for discharge will succeed, after the closure of the state's case in the murder trial of soccer star Senzo Meyiwa. While the defence argues there is insufficient evidence to continue, analysts agree that the state's case has several weaknesses that the defence is likely to exploit when they argue their case from Thursday to have the charges dropped against the five men accused of killing the soccer star. These include a broken chain of evidence, contradictions in witness testimony and the state's failure to call all the individuals who were present in the house at the time of the murder. Meyiwa was shot dead in the presence of his then-girlfriend Kelly Khumalo at her mother's home in Vosloorus in October 2014. Also present were Kelly's sister Zandile, her boyfriend Longwe Twala, the sisters' mother Ntombi Khumalo and two of Meyiwa's friends visiting from KwaZulu-Natal. The occupants claimed Meyiwa was killed by one of two intruders who barged into the home and demanded cellphones and money. Mthobisi Mncube, Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Bongani Sandiso Ntanzi, Mthokoziseni Maphisa and Sifisokuhle Nkani Ntuli are on trial for Meyiwa's murder. They have pleaded not guilty. When the trial resumes on Thursday, the court is expected to hear whether the defence will proceed with its section 174 discharge application. The decision is pending approval from Legal Aid South Africa, which is funding the defence. According to senior legal consultant adv Romeo Nthambeleni, the section 174 application is brought by the accused when they feel that the state has not discharged its onus of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. However, Nthambeleni does not believe the defence's application will succeed. 'The state has brought enough evidence to be able to link the accused to the crime scene. The state has brought enough evidence for the court to actually consider that they have committed the offence that they are charged with. As far as I'm concerned, they will not be successful on section 174.
The Citizen
30-07-2025
- The Citizen
Likely to destroy evidence: Accused's third bail attempt rejected in Ditebogo Phalane murder case
The suspect did not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to justify his release. Elia Maeko, one of three men charged in connection with the murder of five-year-old Ditebogo Phalane Junior, has been denied bail for a third time. Maeko, along with co-accused Ali Sithole and Nido Gumbo, appeared in the Pretoria North Magistrate's Court on Wednesday for the outcome of his latest bail application. The trio faces charges of murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances. The charges stem from a tragic incident in May 2024, when Phalane was fatally shot outside his Soshanguve home during a hijacking involving his father. ALSO READ: Parents sentenced for murder and abuse of one-year-old daughter Gumbo faces an additional count of contravening the Immigration Act, as he is in South Africa illegally. While Sithole and Gumbo previously abandoned their bail bids, Maeko persisted, citing personal reasons. He contended that he is the family's breadwinner and needed to care for his ailing mother. However, investigating officer Sergeant Sevhasa Mashudu opposed the bail bid, arguing that Maeko and his co-accused routinely ambushed victims at home, stealing their vehicles and firearms. Bail in Ditebogo Phalane Junior murder On Wednesday, state prosecutor Tumelo Letaoana informed the court that the three accused had changed their legal representation. The suspects were previously represented by Thulani Kekana from Legal Aid South Africa. Magistrate Naseema Khan, in delivering her judgment, noted that Mashudu's testimony revealed the Phelane family was compelled to relocate after Maeko's arrest, driven by safety concerns and threats directed at the father. READ MORE: Khayelitsha court hears disturbing details of seven-year-old's rape and murder Khan highlighted the investigating officer's claim that the accused and his two co-accused pose a danger to society, having previously 'terrorised' the communities of Soshanguve, Mabopane, Akasia, and Rustenburg. The magistrate also pointed out a separate incident that reportedly took place on 26 April 2024. 'Another case was open in Hebron, where the accused shot at the complainant, whilst hijacking him. 'He survived because he shot back. To my mind, this was an obvious attempt to get rid of an eyewitness. 'I feel that through the applicant's past behaviour, there is a likelihood that there would be a concealment or destruction of evidence and intimidation of witnesses,' she said. Accused might abscond bail conditions Khan also highlighted that Maeko failed to disclose a prior conviction from 2009 for assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm (GBH). 'He does not appear to be someone who honours the bail system, not even stringent conditions will deter him,' she added. The magistrate further raised concerns over possible unrest should Maeko be released. 'His release may disturb public peace because the outraged Soshanguve community could take things into their own hands.' Maeko had also claimed financial responsibility for his deceased brother's child and his own two children, one of whom was born while he was in custody. READ MORE: 'Why were alarm bells not sounded sooner?' – Jayden-Lee Meek's mother denied bail But Khan rejected this. 'The evidence clearly shows that the applicant is not the primary caregiver of the minor children.' The magistrate added that Maeko's elderly mother had denied relying on him for support. She ultimately ruled that the suspect had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances to justify his release. 'Bail is denied and the applicant will remain in custody until the matter is finalised in court.' Letaoana confirmed that the state would serve an indictment before the case is transferred to the high court for trial. The case was postponed to 10 September. Other cases Maeko is also facing separate charges at the Pretoria North Magistrate's Court for possession of an unlicensed firearm and ammunition. Sithole and Gumbo, meanwhile, are facing pending charges at the Atteridgeville Magistrate's Court for possession of a prohibited firearm and ammunition. Sithole is further implicated in a separate matter at the Ga-Rankuwa Magistrate's Court involving charges of possession of a firearm and ammunition, attempted murder, and robbery with aggravating circumstances. NOW READ: Moz woman jailed for murder of SA neighbour's child in alleged love triangle
