Ex-cop fails in attempt to get out of jail for armed robbery

AN EX-POLICEMAN’S application for leave to appeal against his conviction and 18-year-sentence for robbery with aggravating circumstances, failed in the Supreme Court of Appeal this week.

Former constable, David Komani, was convicted with three co-accused for a 2015 robbery at security company G4S in Limpopo after they ambushed the facility camouflaged in women’s clothing and took R11 million in cash.

The woman cashiers, who were counting the money, sought refuge in the office within the counting hall.

A technical support officer, who was operating the cameras, said the incident lasted no more than 30 minutes.

After the mayhem, the robbers fled in a number of vehicles while firing gunshots.

Komani, who was linked to the robbery by a confession and DNA evidence, was sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment for his involvement.

Most conclusively, Komani’s DNA was found in a single place with the DNA of his co-accused.

Court documents read: “This cannot be said to have been a coincidence. Komani sought to challenge the chain of evidence regarding the DNA evidence on the basis that the origin of the bin (in which money that was taken during the robbery was found) was not established.

“This was correctly rejected by the trial court as there was no evidence that suggested that the (evidence) seals were tampered with.”

Hours after Komani was arrested at his place of work at Marble Hall SAPS, he made a statement to a Colonel Serfontein in which he gave a detailed explanation which “showed that he had personal knowledge of the events”.

Komani also directed the investigating officer and other police officers to a homestead of a healer/priest in Siyabuswa. There they collected a parcel containing more than R600 000 in cash, believed to be Komani’s share of the loot.

“There is sufficient circumstantial evidence on which Komani was convicted.

“The failure by him to testify in his defence and in the face of overwhelming prima facie evidence against him, led that prima facie evidence to be proof beyond reasonable doubt.

“This Court has stated and repeated this trite principle of the right to remain silent … Komani’s silence also indicates that he was not taking the court into his confidence.

“As a result, the evidence adduced on behalf of the State was the only evidence that was before the trial court as Komani failed to testify,” the documents read.