Isipingo police station

The exhibits found in the investigation were to be stored at Isipingo police station, a decision communicated by Colonel Jacob to Warrant Officer Mpangase and Warrant Officer Sibiya.

“that we were going to put the drugs in Isipingo ' s police station”

The exhibits did not go to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) but to Port Shepstone, yet Warrant Officer Mpangase did not correct the incorrect SAP register entry at Isipingo, which falsely stated they were going to FSL for analysis.

“...the exhibits did not go to FSL for analysis. They went to Port Shepstone from Isipingo... Why did you not correct the SAP register in Isipingo?...”

Advocate Baloyi asserts Warrant Officer Mpangase was responsible for the inquiry file after moving from Isipingo Police Station to Port Shepstone and questions why there was no SAP 13 clerk or entries to record the exhibits' movement at Port Shepstone on the 22nd.

“You were responsible for the inquiry file at that point, when you moved from Isipingo Police Station to Port Shepstone. Why did you not arrange for an SAP 13 clerk from Port Shepstone on the 22nd itself to come and enter these exhibits, or record the movement of these exhibits ?”

Warrant Officer Mpangase did not put exhibits back into the SAP13 register after booking them out, instead they were transported to and stored at Port Shepstone DPCI vault.

“we had already recorded them in SAP13 in Isipingo. And then at that time they were being transported to Port Shepstone”

There is no record of the exhibits in any SAP 13 from 25 June until they were stolen, which means it is unknown how many exhibits were in SAPS possession at the time they were stolen and their condition then is unknown.

“because there is no record of how many are in SAPS’ possession at that time, we have no way of knowing that the original number that was booked in on the 2nd at Isipingo Police Station, taken out, booked in at Port Shepstone Police Station, the 3.1 up to 3.34, we have no way of knowing that they were still complete on the day that they were stolen, by the time they were stolen. There is no way of knowing, because you never made any record anywhere after the 24th of June.”

MAJ-GEN SENONA testified that drugs were seized at Isipingo police station and that Isipingo members booked the exhibits at SAPS Isipingo, but Isipingo did not have storage facilities; seizure could be recorded in SAP 13.

“there were drugs seized there ... it is a police station called Isipingo ... members went to Isipingo to book the exhibits ... members that Isipingo said they do not have storage facility but seizure can be written into the SAP 13”

When the exhibits were seized, they were booked at Isipingo police station and booked out immediately, which Maj-Gen Senona considers compliance with the SAP13 requirements at the relevant police station.

“When the exhibits were seized, they were booked at Isipingo. They were booked at Isipingo and booked out immediately. So, for me, that is compliance at the relevant police station.”

Lieutenant Colonel Jacob encountered a problem when the Isipingo police station would not allow the exhibit to be stored, and after exhausting all avenues, Brigadier Nyuswa contacted the Forensic Science Laboratory to find storage space.

“Lieutenant Colonel Jacob called me and told me the team encountered a problem at Isipingo who would not allow the exhibit to be stored at Isipingo police station . He also told me that he had exhausted all avenues. I told him I will try to find spaces somewhere, and I will call him back. I contacted Brigadier Maluleka and Colonel Khuzwayo of the Forensic Science Laboratory... I asked her if FSL had the space to store the exhibit, and she said they did not.”

Brigadier Nyuswa confirms that the first call he received from Colonel Jacob was early in the morning and that Colonel Jacob was at the crime scene reporting the discovery.

“The first call I received from Colonel Jacob to me, because I was not there, he was at the crime scene reporting the discovery.”

Colonel Jacob complained to Brigadier Nyuswa that they were not allowed to hand in the exhibit at the Isipingo police station due to safety concerns and lack of storage space.

“that they were not allowing him to hand in the exhibit, because there was safety concern... and also they did not have storage for the amount of exhibit that they were having.”

Brigadier Nyuswa confirms that he and another senior member of the DPCI went to Isipingo police station before going to Port Shepstone, explaining the delay.

“But we went to Isipingo, Commissioners. That is why we were delayed to get to Port Shepstone.”

Brigadier Nyuswa acknowledges that exhibits were taken out of bags at Isipingo and finger-printed bricks were not known to him at the time of arrival at Port Shepstone.

“At that stage, you did not know that they had already unpacked the drugs. They had piled it up at the Isipingo police station. Fingerprints were on the bricks. None of that you were aware of.”

Brigadier Nyuswa states the reason exhibits were not put into exhibit bags at Isipingo was due to insufficient supply of exhibit bags at that station.

“The reason was that Isipingo did not have sufficient or exhibit bags.”

The speaker denies participating in any scheme to store exhibits in unsafe storage and make them vulnerable to theft, asserting he was following lawful instructions and that decisions creating vulnerability were made by senior management, not by him.

“I deny this serious allegation in the strongest possible term. I was not part of any scheme , nor did I engage in any process designed to make the exhibit vulnerable to the theft. My conduct was at all times bona fide authentic. I was following the lawful instruction of a senior. The decision which Major General Flynn retrospectively identified as created vulnerability were not my decision. These include the decision not to process the crime at the depot , the decision not to call the LCRC , the decision not to store the exhibit at the police station of jurisdiction , namely Isipingo , and the decision to transport the exhibit to the DPCI premises in Port Shepstone was the senior management decision.”

Lieutenant Colonel Sibiya admits that he participated in handling the bags of suspected cocaine at variance with the prescripts he was aware of, including loading them onto the ORS vehicle, driving following the vehicle, and assisting with offloading and counting the bags at Isipingo Police Station.

“Did you not handle the bags, for example? Yes, I did. You handled the bags. Yes. And even after the loading, you loaded them onto the ORS vehicle, did you not? I did. And you drove following the ORS vehicle? Yes, I did. And on arrival at the Isipingo Police Station, you also assisted with the offloading of the bags? Yes, I did, Chair. You also assisted with the counting of the bags? Yes. Correct? Correct, Chair. All of this being done at variance with or not in accordance with the prescripts of which you were aware?”

There was an omission in earlier statements regarding the reason why exhibits were not kept at Isipingo police station; this omission required clarification.

“I think, Chair, it is an omission. That is why we tender oral evidence to clarify all other evidence or explain or elaborate more.”

Colonel Jacob states he did not close the container or instruct moving it to a proper place despite recognizing the quantity, due to safety concerns, distance to Isipingo, and lack of adequate exhibit bags.

“I am maintained by those reasons ... the safety of that area , the fact that Isipingo was four kilometres away , the fact that we had no exhibit bags or no adequate exhibit bags for it”

According to Colonel Jacob, Maydon Wharf police station has its own exhibits to attend to, similar to Isipingo police station; securing appropriate storage space is difficult because stations do not want to give up SAP13 exhibit room space.

“Maydon Wharf has their own exhibits to see , to attend to ... those stations know that the lab takes a long while to house those exhibits ... but no station wants to give away the SAP13 space”

It was problematic that the decision to move to Isipingo Police Station was not recorded in the diary of Warrant Officer Mpangase.

“But it is not in the diary of Warrant Officer Mpangase ... He merely says, we opened, we found this, it was decided we go to Isipingo. That is problematic.”

Colonel Jacob admitted police at Isipingo did not store seized drugs but refused to accept seized exhibits when asked.

“I maintain ... that Warrant Officer Perumal did not want to keep those exhibits ... Perumal explicitly refused to store those exhibits ...”

Colonel Jacob states that despite the SOP, police stations like Maydon Wharf do not accept exhibits seized outside their precinct, such as Isipingo or Umbilo exhibits.

“we have never ever stored exhibits from Isipingo at Maydon Wharf for Umbilo ... Police jurisdictions are police jurisdictions ...”

The enquiry file was registered at Isipingo Police Station by Warrant Officer Mpangase who booked in exhibits and also a DPCI enquiry number.

“We know that at Isipingo Police Station, when Warrant Officer Mpangase booked in the exhibits, he also booked in a DPCI enquiry number, right?”

Colonel Jacob confirms that he originally decided the exhibits would be stored at Isipingo Police Station where he was in charge.

“You made the original decision that these exhibits will go to Isipingo Police Station. That was your decision. You were in charge at that time.”

At Isipingo Police Station, Warrant Officer Perumal did not have the required size evidence bags when evidence was brought in.

“Warrant Officer Perumal did not have the required size bags... He had no bags.”

Colonel Jacob confirmed he arrived at Isipingo police station, went inside to find the Exhibit Clerk, and while he was inside members started offloading the exhibits resulting in loss of sight of unbagged exhibits.

“You arrived at Isipingo police station. You went into the police station to find the Exhibit Clerk. In your statement, you also say that when you got there, the members started offloading while you went into find the Exhibit Clerk, right? Yes. So there is a window where you lost sight of these exhibits that are not bagged.”

LT-Colduma and others only found out the exact number of bricks at Isipingo Police Station during counting, not at the scene.

“And you found, you, and I am asking you, you in particular, you only found out when you got to Isipingo Police Station that …”

There was an incident at Isipingo Police Station involving the exhibit clerk Warrant Officer Peramal where exhibits of a bust in February 2020 were not stored properly which influenced the decision on 2 June 2021 regarding cocaine that was not stored at Isipingo.

“His statement deals with a previous incident at Isipingo Police Station with the same exhibit clerk, Warrant Officer Peramal, and why the exhibits of his bust that occurred in February 2020 were also not stored or why the exhibit registrar was reluctant to accept those exhibits, which is an aspect which Colonel Jacob relies upon for the decision-making that was made on the 2nd of June 2021 regarding the cocaine that was not stored at Isipingo.”

The exhibit of suspected cocaine was not stored at Isipingo Police Station on 2 June 2021, a decision influenced by the exhibit registrar's reluctance and previous incidents.

“why the exhibits of his bust that occurred in February 2020 were also not stored or why the exhibit registrar was reluctant to accept those exhibits, which is an aspect which Colonel Jacob relies upon for the decision-making that was made on the 2nd of June 2021 regarding the cocaine that was not stored at Isipingo.”

Colonel Jacob believed statements made before the Madlanga Commission about an operation in 2020 were incorrect and required rebuttal; therefore, Warrant Officer Sander was asked to provide a statement to corroborate the existence of an issue at Isipingo Police Station.

“The Colonel was of the opinion that statements made before the Madlanga Commission were incorrect ... he needed to further explain ... corroborate the fact that there was an issue at Isipingo Police Station”

Despite the request, Warrant Officer Sander states that the version he was required to support about the 2022 incident at Isipingo Police Station actually makes the situation look worse, but he complied with the request to provide a supporting statement.

“I am still of the opinion that it does not support him. It actually makes it look worse. But ... that is what has been requested of me. I have complied.”

After seizure, drugs are bagged, photographed by LCRC, and booked into SAPS SAP13 relevant to the area, specifically Isipingo Police Station.

“WA R R A N T O F F I C E R S A N D E R”

Isipingo police station did not have a dedicated safe space in its SAP 13 room for exhibits, including drugs, so the armory space was used to store Mandrax tablets.

“They said they did not have safe space in their SAP13 room... they showed me the armoury, but it did have weapons and articles and I said, please let me move the stuff for you... we then literally manhandled all the gun racks and the rifles and everything into the area and that gave us space to store the Mandrax tablets inside there.”

Isipingo police station has no dedicated storage specifically for drugs, only a general exhibits storage room with various types of evidence mixed together.

“Page 150 of 201 is no such thing as a dedicated storage for drugs at a police station. It is a general exhibits storage room.”

Guns and armoury items at Isipingo remain stored in the same room; they were only pushed aside to make space for drug exhibits.

“those guns did not leave that room. We just moved them and pushed them to the side to make space so we could put our drugs inside there.”

Isipingo police station has dedicated exhibit rooms, but lacks specific rooms for chemicals, flammables, hazardous materials, and narcotic substances.

“There are dedicated exhibit rooms... There is no specific room to deal with chemicals, flammables substances, hazardous materials and narcotic substances.”

Warrant Officer Sander received a phone call instructing him to book out exhibits the next day for analysis, but he was not told by the police station; it was from senior management.

“I received a phone call... I cannot tell you who called me, but it would not have been the station... It would have been from my management, someone senior. The station said their drugs need to go to the lab, people are sick. And I went there myself.”

The SAP 13(g) transfer document is a required, separate document completed by SAP 13 officials whenever exhibits are transferred from one police station to another or between SAP 13 stores.

““ T h e t r a n s f e r d o c u m e n t , S A P 1 3 ( g ) i s c o m p l e t e d b y t h e S A P 1 3 o f f i c i a l i n a l l i n s t a n c e s w h e r e e x h i b i t s a r e t r a n s f e r r e d f r o m o n e p o l i c e s t a t i o n t o a n o t h e r o r b e t w e e n S A P 1 3 s t o r e s .””

Both the transferring station (Isipingo Police Station) and the receiving station (Port Shepstone Police Station) are required to complete the transfer documents according to sub 3 and sub 5 of the SAP 13 regulations.

“s u b 3 r e g u l a t e s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f o r a t r a n s f e r d o c u m e n t b y t h e t r a n s f e r r i n g s t a t i o n . ... s u b 5 r e g u l a t e s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r a t r a n s f e r d o c u m e n t b y t h e r e c e i v i n g s t a t i o n ... In our instance, in this particular case, that would be Isipingo Police Station ... and receiving station ... Port Shepstone Police Station”

There was non-compliance with the transfer of exhibits from Isipingo to Port Shepstone Police Station as per SAP 13 requirements.

“T h e r e w a s n o n - c o m p l i a n c e”

The transfer of exhibits from Isipingo Police Station to Port Shepstone offices occurred on 22 June 2022.

“t h e y w e r e s t o r e d o n t h e 2 2 n d o f J u n e 2 0 2 2”

The exhibits were not described properly at the crime scene but were instead taken to Isipingo Police Station where they were entered into the SAP 13 register.

“at the crime scene if conditions permit ... s per the directive ... It is supposed to be packaged correctly at the crime scene and then entered in the SAP 13 register at the crime scene. ... So we know that it did not happen at the crime scene. Instead, they were taken to the Isipingo Police Station and that picture we looked at where the exhibits, as they were at the Isipingo Police Station, that is the time they were entered into the SAP 13. Am I correct?”

Crime exhibits at Isipingo were not placed in evidence bags and sealed, as required for proper crime scene management and chain of custody.

“if they omitted to do it at the crime scene, ... even here, it was not done, Commissioners”

The exhibits at Isipingo police station were already contaminated unless the colleagues handling them wore gloves, and they were not properly photographed, sealed in exhibit seal bags, or entered into the SAP 13 register, causing risk during transport to Port Shepstone.

“the exhibits were already contaminated, unless the colleagues had gloves on ... could still have been photographed properly by LCRC, as well as properly sealed ... and entered into the SAP 13 register ... any thing can happen along the way”

If the exhibits had been properly handled at the crime scene, they would have been sealed and entered into the SAP 13 register at Isipingo police station, but this did not happen.

“at least we know from, and if the crime scene had been properly handled, then the exhibits... would have then been entered into the SAP 13 at Isipingo”

An entry in the SAP 13 register dated 2021-06-22 stating 'items taken for analysis' is a false entry as the exhibits were never taken for analysis on that date and instead were moved from Isipingo to Port Shepstone and never submitted for analysis.

“this entry is a false entry, because the exhibits was never taken for analysis on that date. It is completely misleading. Of course, the exhibits went from Isipingo to Port Shepstone and was never submitted for analysis as depicted here”

Warrant Officer Mpangase assumed full responsibility for exhibits when he booked them out from Isipingo Police Station and the items were taken out for analysis, not transferred to another police station.

“No, it does not remain under the custodianship or commando of the Isipingo Station Commander. Mpangase assumed full responsibility for the exhibits when he booked it out.”

Exhibits taken out from Isipingo Police Station were supposed to be stored at a Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and no other police station or place.

“The only place it can be will be at a different police station. But in terms of this entry, it is supposed to be at the Forensic Science Laboratory. And at no other place.”

Port Shepstone Police Station maintains the position assumed by Isipingo Police Station that exhibits are powders suspected to be cocaine, but it does not deal with exhibits as definitely cocaine.

“Port Shepstone Police Station does not deal with the exhibits as definitely Cocaine, but, you know, maintains the position assumed by Isipingo as well that it is powders suspected to be Cocaine.”

The suspected cocaine was conveyed by Colonel Jacob, Warrant Officer Mpangase, KGSibiya, and Sergeants Govender and Mkhize to Isipingo Police Station for detailed counting.

“The officers decided to convey the suspected cocaine to the Isipingo Police Station for a detailed count. According to the officers, the crime scene was becoming busy with warehouse staff. Colonel Jacob, Warrant Officer Mpangase, KGSibiya, and Sergeants Govender and Mkhize loaded the canvas bags into a marked police vehicle.”

Isipingo Police Station was not considered suitable for storing the exhibits because it is a smaller station in a high-risk area; Warrant Officer Perumal was never asked to store exhibits there.

“According to Colonel Jacob, Isipingo was not considered because it is well known that Isipingo is a smaller police station and is in a high-risk area . And Warrant Officer Perumal was never asked if there was capacity to store the exhibits at Isipingo .”

Colonel Jacob stated he never engaged Warrant Officer Perumal about storage capacity at Isipingo and considered Isipingo a small police station in a high-risk area lacking capacity for exhibits storage.

“Colonel Jacob says that he was, Warrant Officer Perumal was never asked if there was capacity to store the exhibits at Isipingo... Isipingo was not considered, because it is well known that Isipingo is a smaller police station and is in a high-risk area. So, on Colonel Jacob's own version, he never engaged with Warrant Officer Perumal about whether there was capacity or not.”

Warrant Officer Perumal did not state there was no capacity to store the drugs at Isipingo, and no such statement exists in the docket.

“There is no such statement”

Concern about Isipingo police station's capacity and risk profile for storing seized cocaine was not clarified as to why drugs were not stored at a closer police station to Isipingo.

“If the concerns regarding Isipingo's capacity and risk profile were considerations in the decision to store the seized cocaine elsewhere, it is unclear why the cocaine was not stored at the police station closer to Isipingo”