Cops must pay R300 000 for arresting wrong man

THE police must pay R300 000 in damages to Rodney Pilusa for falsely accusing him of being among people who robbed a shoe store in Joburg.

An employee at the shop claimed to have recognised two of the three robbers as staff who made deliveries from time to time.

When she was given pictures of alleged perpetrators, she identified one man as one of the robbers.

The man’s address was written on the back of the picture, obtained from the human resources department.

The police rushed to the address where they found Pilusa. They showed him the picture and told him he was the man in it. The more Pilusa said it was not him in the picture, the more police said it was him.

Pilusa wanted to fetch his ID in his bedroom to prove he was not the man, but the police would have none of this. They arrested him and locked him up for 47 days before they acknowledged it was a case of mistaken identity.

Pilusa turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, where he claimed damages from the police for unlawful arrest and detention.

Pilusa’s ordeal started on July 29, 2013, when robbers took money, cellphones and shoes from the store.

Armed with the picture, which Judge Jody Kollapen noted was not of good quality and dark, the police were satisfied they had their man.

Judge Kollapen said even at that early stage, the picture – the only evidence against Pilusa – had already been called into question.

Pilusa told the high court he wanted to fetch his ID during his arrest from his cupboard, but was not allowed to. The police, on the other hand, maintained he was unable to produce his ID document.

Pilusa, who knew the man in the picture, offered to take the police to his house, but they also refused this. It later emerged that the man had previously occupied a room at the same premises as Pilusa, but had since moved.

Judge Kollapen said this would explain why Pilusa’s address was written on the back of his picture. Pilusa’s lawyer also made written representations to the station commander of the Joburg Central police station, setting out the circumstances of mistaken identity.

He also supplied him with the address where the wanted man lived as well as his cellphone number. This was never followed up.

Asked about this in court, the arresting officer said he was happy he had the correct person. It was up to Pilusa to prove it was not him.

He also claimed Pilusa eventually agreed it was him in the picture. The case was eventually discharged in January 2014 due to a lack of evidence.

Judge Kollapen said it was illogical that Pilusa would have agreed that it was him in the picture. He also questioned how the officer could have been sure he had the right man, if he acknowledged in court that the picture was unclear.

“The clear impression one gets from the arresting officer was that he held the view from the onset that the plaintiff (Pilusa) was (the man sought) – a view he continued to hold even during the trial. This, while everything pointed to the contrary,” the judge said.

The judge said: “The conduct of the police was of concern, especially their refusal in following up the claims of mistaken identity.”

Judge Kollapen said R300 000 was fair compensation given that Pilusa was locked up for 47 days.