DNA Evidence Excludes All Accused in Senzo Meyiwa Murder Trial

DNA Evidence Excludes All Accused in Senzo Meyiwa Murder Trial

In a surprising turn of events in the ongoing trial of five individuals accused of the murder of former Bafana Bafana captain Senzo Meyiwa, a DNA expert has presented evidence that excludes all the accused from being present at the crime scene. The murder, which occurred in 2014, has been a high-profile case in South Africa, and the latest developments have left many shocked.

DNA expert Mampshedi Masetla, a police officer involved in the case, testified in the high court in Pretoria, shedding light on crucial DNA evidence. He explained that the DNA samples collected from the crime scene, specifically from the bedroom door handle and a scotch hat left behind by the assailants, did not match the reference samples taken from the accused.

The accused individuals, namely Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Mthokoziseni Maphisa, Sifisokuhle Nkani Ntuli, Bongani Sandiso Ntanzi, and Mthobisi Prince Mncube, have been on trial for their alleged involvement in Senzo Meyiwa’s murder.

In his detailed testimony, Masetla emphasized the importance of a full DNA match in establishing a connection between reference samples and samples from the crime scene.

He explained, “What is important for us when we do DNA comparison is to check whether the reference sample [DNA of the known person when conducting the DNA comparison] can be compared to the sample we received from the crime scene, basically by looking at the characters on the regions of the chromosome. And to confirm that you are the donor of that sample, you have to match all the regions of the sample.”

Notably, the reference samples from the accused were thoroughly examined, including those from MZ Mapisa, M Mncube, B Ntanzi, F Ntuli, and M Sibiya. The results of this examination led to the exclusion of the accused as donors of the DNA samples found on the swabs and the hat left at the crime scene.

This development contradicts the testimony of Kelly Khumalo’s sister and Meyiwa’s friend, who had previously identified Mncube and Ntanzi as the intruders. They claimed that one of the suspects had left the scotch hat behind, which they alleged belonged to Ntanzi. However, the DNA evidence does not support this claim, leaving room for significant doubt in the case.

Furthermore, Hendrik Louis Mulder, a human resource manager from Sibanye Gold in Carletonville, testified about Bongani Ntanzi’s work schedule during the time of Senzo Meyiwa’s murder.

According to Mulder, Ntanzi reported to work on October 25, knocking off around 7 am after a short shift. He then resumed work on November 2, taking five days of unpaid leave to attend to a family matter in KwaZulu-Natal.

Ntanzi’s defense attorney, Sipho Ramosepele, elaborated on his client’s work schedule, explaining that Ntanzi did not clock in on October 26 because it was a Sunday and not a workday. During his leave, Ntanzi was allowed to work for two hours since he was traveling to another province.

While this deviation from standard procedure might raise questions, it is pertinent to note that the accused was granted permission to work this short shift due to his travel arrangements. The defense further indicated that it was not the first time Ntanzi took unpaid leave; he had previously taken annual leave in July of that year.

Presiding judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng ordered Mulder to produce Ntanzi’s payslip for October 2014, which could provide insights into whether the accused received full pay for the day he worked two hours.

These recent developments have cast significant doubt on the case against the accused individuals, and the trial continues with newfound complexities. As South Africa closely follows the proceedings, the search for justice in the Senzo Meyiwa murder case remains ongoing.

Related Articles

Back to top button