School of sex abuse ‘divided’
Patroller on trial for rape, sexual assault of pupils
The principal of a Soweto school where girls were raped and sexually assaulted allegedly by a school patroller, said she did not know about the incidents until a month before the scandal broke.
AB Xuma Primary School principal Maria Mthimkhulu was giving evidence in the South Gauteng high court sitting in Palm Ridge yesterday where Johannes Molefe, 58, stands accused of two counts of rape and 11 of sexual assault. Molefe allegedly abused the children at the school in 2017. Mthimkhulu said she first learned of the allegations of abuse when a pupil’s grandmother complained that Molefe had told her granddaughter that she had beautiful legs and that he wanted to marry her. “The grandmother said that it was not the first incident. She said on September 22 (2017) the child was going to the toilet [when] Mkhulu (Molefe) said, ‘why is your skirt dirty like that as if you were having sex’?” Mthimkhulu said. She said she then instructed her management team to investigate the allegations and the team came up with a list of 54 pupils who claimed they were abused by Molefe. Molefe’s lawyer Lumka Qoqo put it to Mthimkhulu that the list was compiled randomly, and that they were fishing for complainants. Qoqo said the reason why Molefe was accused of the crimes was because teachers at the school were divided. Mthimkhulu told the court there was tension at the school because parents and school governing body members did not want her as a principal. She said a lot of things happened at the school which made her fear for her life.
Qoqo put it to Mthimkhulu that it was impossible for someone to abuse pupils on the school’s premises as there were CCTV cameras and she responded, “Yes”.
The proceedings started with a formal application by prosecutor Jackie Steyn asking presiding judge Peet Johnson to recuse himself on the grounds
of reasonable apprehension of bias. Steyn said the state felt the victims would not get a fair trial because Johnson already made conclusions on the case. She said after the testimony of the first child witness [who was assessed by Teddy Bear Clinic] and her mother who contradicted each other, Johnson asked if the rest of the witnesses
were assessed at the Teddy Bear Clinic.
“... the court then indicated that if that was the case then the state has a problem. The state felt the judge pre-judged the matter before the other 12 witnesses testified.” Johnson, however, dismissed the application. The trial continues.