MEADES STAYS BEHIND BARS
LOUIS Meades will have to spend another weekend in jail after judgment in his bail application was postponed to next week, as Magistrate Dolly Mokoto “was not ready to announce judgment”.
A prominent businessman in Kimberley, Meades is facing a number of charges including attempted murder, assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, damage to property and kidnapping, after an incident on January 23 when he allegedly tried to run over his girlfriend, Sumane Kramer, with his bakkie. He has been in custody since his arrest on January 30.
Opposing Meades’ bail application yesterday, State prosecutor Bongene Timothy said that he would prove that Meades was a threat to the complainant, was disposed to violence and had a history of committing this type of offence.
“Although the applicant (Meades) has no previous convictions or cases pending, bail should not be granted,” Timothy said.
He said that the complainant (Kramer) was living in fear and there was evidence to prove this.
“The accused (Meades) said, ‘I’m going to kill you – you will not be the first one. I’m going to have fun with you.’ This is reason enough to oppose bail,” Timothy said.
He further stated that the investigating officer, Warrant Officer Raymond Visagie, had testified that Meades had also threatened that Kramer would lose her job at Vermeulens as he knew the owner.
“In another text he said ‘I will show you, jou k**t n**i. I’m going to kill you and you will not be the first one’. Your Honour you can’t wish any of this away. It is there.”
Timothy then pointed out that another person had tried to intervene in the argument between Meades and Kramer. “He failed and could not stop the assault in the house or outside.
“Meades also threatened Kramer while they were in the car,” Timothy said. “He used the words ‘Ek gaan jou bliksem (I’m going to hit you). Now we’re going to have fun’.”
Timothy said that the defence never refuted the statement made in court that Kramer had washed blood off her face. “Although nobody could say why she had blood on her face or how it got there.”
Timothy also referred to a letter handed in as evidence, believed to have been written by Kramer, begging the court not to release Meades on bail.
He also referred to an incident involving Meades’ mother. “It is believed that he (Meades) assaulted her and choked her. She is an elderly person.”
He added, however, that there was no medical evidence of the alleged injuries sustained by Kramer or Meades’ mother
Timothy then also addressed the Facebook screenshot where Meades had offered a reward of R2 000 for information regarding the whereabouts of Kramer.
“The applicant admitted that he had posted it. The explanation by the defence, saying that Meades was only concerned about the safety of the complainant, was a poor excuse.”
Magistrate Mokoto asked Timothy why, if Visagie had indicated in his statement that Kramer would not be in any danger if Meades was released, the State was now arguing that she would be.
She then wanted to know why there were no visible injuries on Kramer, to which Timothy replied that he had a witness who would testify in regards to the injuries.
Mokoto persisted in wanting to know. “I want to know now!”
“Do there have to be visible injuries? If someone shoots at you and the bullet misses is that not sill attempted murder?” Timothy replied.
Mokoto then asked why Kramer had washed blood off her face if there were no visible injuries.
She also questioned why it had taken Kramer six days to obtain a protection order and lay charges.
“Why the lapse in time? The police are here to serve and protect. Yet the complainant preferred to go into hiding. Why did she not approach the police? Why did she only apply for a protection order and lay charges six days after the incident? During this period the applicant and the complainant had contact. If she really feared for her life to such an extent, why did it take her six days to approach the court?” Mokoto asked.
Timothy responded that there was no limitation on when a charge could be laid. “In a domestic relationship it is not strange that cases are opened later. Sometimes cases are only opened years after the event,” he explained.
Mokoto also questioned the note and flowers that Kramer had received. “There is no evidence that it was the applicant (Meades). It could have been anyone.”
“Your honour, who else could it have been?” Timothy said.
Meades’ attorney, Jesse Clarke, argued that the State’s case was not strong.
“Why would the complainant only report the matter six days later? If it wasn’t for the NPO (Optimystic Bikers Against Abuse) who planted the seed in her head that she should lay a charge, she might only have taken out a protection order. Charges then would not have been laid against my client.”
Clarke also pointed out the lack of visible injuries to Kramer. “There is no evidence of any injuries. You can’t just grab things from the sky.”
He added that Kramer was also currently going through a divorce and pointed out that the flowers and note could have been left for her by her estranged husband.
Mokoto said she was “not ready to announce judgement” on the bail application and the matter was postponed to next week.