At scene – coroner

where there were marks which were left by the car when it overturned,” the witness submitted.

Thereafter, the prosecutor asked if he meant that his eyes did not go beyond that area and he responded to the positive. The prosecutor added that there was also evidence that on the day when the body was discovered, it took the family less than five minutes to discover it. He was asked what he could say about that. “The point where the body was found was a bit bushy,” the witness alleged.

The Coroner, Senior Magistrate Nonhlanhla Dlamini asked t he witness what made them not to go beyond the area where the car landed because the i nstruction t hey were given was t o search the area for anything that would give them a clue about the occupants of the car and see if they could find them. In response, he said they concentrated much on the marks which they found at the accident scene.

Again, the coroner said the witness had submitted that at the area where the body was found, there was vegetation, but the family of Thabani alleged that they separated when searching and within five minutes, they discovered the body. She said the family went there on a Thursday, which was four days after he was there ( Sunday), which meant that the vegetation was still the same.

The witness agreed with the coroner. “Why is it that they were able to discover the body within five minutes, but you ( witness and two colleagues) failed to do so when you had all the time as your intention to find something that would give you clues. My understanding is that as police officers you have been trained how to investigate and clearly your method and diligence should have been of a higher level as opposed to that of a layman. In fact you did not tell us how long you spent at the scene,” the coroner said.

In response, the witness submitted that most of the time when they investigate a car accident, they deal with something they could see. He added that could be the things that could lead them forward. However, he submitted that in this case, what they were looking for ended where the car landed.

COP’S JUDGMENT QUESTIONED

Once more, the coroner wanted to know from Constable Nkabinde that when they went to the scene, were they aware that a tyre of the car was missing and he responded to the negative. In fact, he submitted that he was not told about a missing tyre.

The coroner said her understanding from his submissions was that when they inspect an accident scene, they are guided by the marks on the ground and he responded to the positive. Thereafter, the coroner said there was this peculiar case where a car accident occurred and there was no driver or occupants in the vehicle and so they did not find it proper not to concentrate on the marks, but search the whole area to make sure that indeed there was no one there, considering the terrain wherein the accident happened. “Your Worship, what I had in mind was that maybe the driver of the car had ran away as some drink- drivers do after being involved in an accident,” the witness claimed.

Thereafter, the coroner asked Nkabinde if he would agree with her that at the time they went to the accident scene, they did not exercise diligence, but what they did was just to search with the assumption that the driver of the car had allegedly fled the scene as he was supposedly under the influence of alcohol. The coroner said she was saying this because as they were conducting the search, in their minds they had an assumption that the driver could have fled the scene.

“You were already clouded when you went there. You did not just take this as an accident which you had to investigate, instead you were clouded with the assumption that the driver had fled the scene,” the coroner said.

However, in response the police officer submitted that it was the manner in which drink- drivers behaved after being involved in an accident. He alleged that they usually left the car in a bid to avoid being arrested for drink- driving.

Thereafter, the coroner asked if in his experience of five years in the Traffic Department, he had not been exposed to a scenario wherein at an accident scene some of the occupants would be found in the car, but later on leant that another person was left at the scene, more so because that individual could not be located at the scene of the accident.

She said she believed that there had been or heard about such scenarios. Sometimes, he said this could be gathered after interviewing the other survivors. “I have never heard about such accidents,” he submitted and the coroner