Senzo Meyiwa Trial | Image 46 sparks another court showdown

The battle over one photograph has turned the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial into a courtroom tug-of-war, with the State seeking to scrutinise image number 46 and the defence pushing back over what it says is a lack of expert verification.

Proceedings resumed today following a brief adjournment over the ongoing dispute between the State and defence.

The Pretoria High Court has dismissed the defence’s bid to stop the State from cross-examining accused number three, Mthobisi Mncube, about the disputed photograph.

However, the ruling has done little to resolve the matter, with fresh objections emerging over the image’s cellphone metadata.

At the centre of the latest courtroom dispute is a photograph showing Mncube alongside his late friend, Mabungu Ntuli, and accused number four, Mthokoziseni Mapisa.

The State believes the image could help establish the movements and associations of the accused around the time former Bafana Bafana and Orlando Pirates goalkeeper, Senzo Meyiwa, was killed in October 2014.

However, the defence is questioning the State’s handling of the digital evidence, arguing that information about the cellphone allegedly used to take the picture was introduced without proper verified by the relevant experts.

The latest showdown unfolded when State prosecutor Advocate, Dr Ronnie Sibanda, read out metadata allegedly linked to the disputed image.

After Sibanda identified the cellphone make and model as a Samsung GT-E2220, defence Advocate Charles Mnisi objected, arguing that the information had not been verified by the appropriate experts.

The defence says it is struggling to grapple with what it considers new information being introduced during cross-examination.

Defence Advocate, Zithulele Nxumalo, has suggested that a witness with the necessary expertise in cellphone metadata analysis be called to address the defence’s concerns.

The photograph itself remains a major sticking point.

Sibanda questioned Mncube about whether image number 46 was taken on 26 October 2014, the day Meyiwa was killed.

Mncube initially agreed, adding that the photograph was taken using a Samsung cellphone, although he could not recall the specific model.

However, the State says further investigations suggest the image was actually taken on 21 October 2014, five days before the fatal shooting.

Sibanda explained that he had put the 26 October date to Mncube because Mapisa had previously told the court that the photograph was taken on that day.

Mncube later challenged the line of questioning, saying he had agreed with the date because that was what the documents presented in court indicated.

He accused the prosecution of using misleading tactics.

“Today you are changing and saying that it was on the 21st. Meaning that all these years, you misled the court, according to you,” Mncube said.

Mncube has maintained that he was in Johannesburg on the day Meyiwa was killed and was sleeping in Ntuli’s presence around the time the State says the goalkeeper was shot.

He has also defended his earlier account of when the photograph was taken, pointing to testimony by South African Police Service (SAPS) cellphone data analyst, Sergeant Moses Mabasa.

According to Mncube, Mabasa had also indicated that the image was taken on the day of the murder and would therefore have flagged any conflicting metadata had he found it.

The dispute over image number 46 has contributed to a procedural stand-off in the long-running trial, with proceedings previously adjourned to allow Mabasa to testify and Judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng to consider the arguments surrounding the State’s cross-examination.

The judge has maintained that an accused person cannot simply be shielded from cross-examination, as the legal battle over the photograph continues.

When it comes to the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial, can a photograph’s metadata help establish the timeline, or will the fight over how that evidence is presented continue to hold proceedings up?

Written by: Odirile Rabalao