Twist in rape cover-up trial

Defence lawyers Clinton Short and Andile Makhwanazi for Gugulethu Buthelezi, Phila Xulu and Sanele Zuma discuss their case in the Durban Magistrates Court. Photo: Benita Enoch

There was a twist on Monday in the matter involving three police officers who are accused of covering up a rape.

The defence submitted that one of the accused, who was not identified, had been cleared of wrongdoing in an internal disciplinary hearing on the same charge they face in the criminal matter.

Gugulethu faces a charge of defeating the course of justice, while Phila Xulu and Sanele Zuma each face a charge of intimidation in respect of their conduct towards Q (a name GroundUp has assigned to the rape victim in this case). Q is in witness protection.

The case is being heard in the Durban Magistrates’ Court.

Q’s rapist, Zwelakhe Mashaba, was released when Buthelezi issued a notice claiming insufficient evidence. According to the state, Q was later detained, intimidated by officers Phila Xulu and Sanele Zuma into withdrawing her complaint, and also held overnight in jail while Mashaba was placed in a nearby cell.

Mashaba was later re-arrested, found guilty of raping Q, and sentenced to ten years in prison.

In prior court testimony, it was established that Q was raped on 4 March 2023 at knifepoint in the Bluff. Despite correctly identifying her rapist, Q claimed the three police officers did not act properly. This led to IPID investigating the case and charging the three.

On Monday, Magistrate Mayne Mewalal heard that the internal disciplinary document was issued almost a year ago on 24 September 2024 and that the accused (who was not identified) had “forgotten” about its existence.

The defence said that they were only informed of its findings, which are in favour of their client, last week, and they needed time to source the original document.

The defence submitted that the charges their client faced in the disciplinary hearing mirrored those of the criminal case, and on those grounds, were pertinent and therefore an adjournment was warranted.

In granting the adjournment, Mewalal acknowledged that it was in the interests of justice to permit the document, despite internal disciplinary procedures not being equal to those of a court of law.

The case is expected to resume in October, pending the availability of the state.

Support independent journalism
Donate using Payfast