DESERVING BENEFIT OF POSSIBLE DOUBT

THE front-page lead of October 24, concerning the shooting of two men in Clermont, refers.

According to your article, the men were wanted for the brutal murders of two security guards in Gauteng and had been traced from that province to Durban.

The report brought to mind the Cato Manor Serious and Violent Crimes Unit and subsequent accusations – subsequently retracted – that it had deliberately killed suspects instead of arresting them.

In the absence of incontrovertible proof, my view is that – as in the present case – these were desperate criminals, who had already demonstrated by their actions their callousness and utter disregard for the law.

It is well within the realm of possibility, and highly likely, that these men would not give in without a fight.

The Cato Manor unit got its name from the type of criminals it was tasked to go after. These were not run-of-the-mill first-time muggers, but well-armed, habitual, violent criminals who, in most cases, had killed multiple times.

The two men killed in Clermont, if they were the guards’ murderers, could potentially have had three guns between them: the one they killed the guards with, and those they took off the dead men.

My inclination is to give the police the benefit of the doubt.

F NXUMALO Durban