Tatane ruling a miscarriage of justice

NDRIES Tatane’s family is shellshocked. And so are we. How can a man draw his last breath live on TV for the entire world to see and the people responsible for his bloody end cannot be identified? It beggars belief.

Perhaps the oft-repeated accusation that the police protect their own is not farfetched. The acquittal of seven police officers for the murder of Tatane has seriously undermined the entire criminal justice system.

First, we must ask questions about the state’s case and the quality of the police’s work. The courts often bear the brunt of the public’s anger and fierce criticism when those who should account for breaking the law walk away scot-free.

But the courts can only work with the evidence presented. The defence’s refusal to crossexamine Kabelo Pule, a key state witness and colleague of the accused, all but confirmed that the state’s case was in tatters.

Pule had initially said he had not seen any of the accused at the scene of Tatane’s death, but he quickly backtracked when shown footage by the Independent Police

AInvestigative Directorate.

He signed a statement in which he identified four of the accused. Alas, last week he told the court he was not satisfied with his statement and could not identify a single one of the seven police officers. And so the cookie crumbled.

The state’s case looked bleak if you consider that Pule was the second witness to change his statement in court.

Like Captain Matshidiso Lesemola, he claimed his statement was made under duress after he was threatened by investigators. What hope is there for us as ordinary citizens if police officers, who should be well versed in taking statements from suspects and should know their rights when pressured — if at all they were pressured — make such claims? Did they not know that they could expose the investigators for this?

They knew, but they chose to protect their own. It is the incompetence of the prosecution team, not the court, that has led to this blatant miscarriage of justice.

The state had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a requirement in a murder charge. And, as a matter of law, the court must acquit the accused.

But in acquitting the officers, it would seem the magistrate, Hein van Niekerk, also put a dead man on trial. He said Tatane could not be called a hero and an innocent, peaceloving protestor. He had been aggressive towards the police.

Yes, in the video footage Tatane was very quarrelsome and seemed to be daring the police to a fight. So what?

People who argue with the police must be killed? As for him not being a hero, our opinions about him are irrelevant. The question is: Were the police justified in ganging up against an unarmed protestor and killing him? The argument that he was aggressive and posed a threat to the police is absurd.

If our armed police officers cannot subdue an unarmed man, they are pathetic.

The magistrate did concede, though, that the violence used to stop Tatane was disproportionate to his actions.

South Africa is extremely volatile. Communities and workers are restless. They want better service and better wages. We have seen an increase in the number of service-delivery protests and we are likely to witness more. Let’s not beat about the bush: the protestors often behave appallingly and leave chaos and destruction in their wake.

They show scant regard and respect for the rights of others and never account for their lawlessness. Those who organise these protests never take responsibility for the mayhem that ensues. Our police had better prepare and rise to the occasion. They have had plenty of opportunity to train for this. Killing rowdy protestors is not the answer.