Ntanzi cross-examination proceeds in Meyiwa trial after defence concession

State and defence agree prosecutor may question accused on disputed confession statements after torture allegations.

The state and defence in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial agreed that accused number two, Bongani Ntanzi, may be cross-examined on confession statements he allegedly made following his June 2020 arrest, the High Court in Pretoria heard.¹ State prosecutor George Baloyi described the agreement as rare, saying both parties concluded that filing heads of argument was unnecessary after the defence conceded the state's entitlement to cross-examine Ntanzi on the confession.¹

Ntanzi and four co-accused face charges related to the October 2014 killing of the former Bafana Bafana captain.¹² Ntanzi alleges he was tortured and suffocated with a plastic bag before being forced to sign documents he did not understand.² He claims investigators already had documents in a brown envelope when he was compelled to sign the confession statements.⁴

The state accused Ntanzi of fabricating his assault claims, using vehicle tracking data that prosecutors say contradicts his version of events.² Baloyi told the court that the alleged incident near staircases was "merely a fabrication."² Ntanzi disputed state claims that a vehicle spent time in Alberton near a garage due to mechanical problems, maintaining all that time was spent while he was being tortured.²

Under cross-examination, Ntanzi denied providing information or making a statement at Moroka Police Station in Soweto, though the state alleges his confession led to the arrest of other accused.⁴ When questioned how Lieutenant-Colonel Solomon Raphadu would have known his personal details for the confession document dated 19 June 2020, Ntanzi said he saw Raphadu in possession of his identity document.⁵ He emphasized he never said he wanted to make a statement.⁵

The state noted Ntanzi mentioned the brown envelope for the first time since taking the stand.⁴ Ntanzi countered that he had previously mentioned it to the court in relation to a statement claiming he gave his confession voluntarily.⁴