Warrant Officer Pienaar

The affidavit in a docket had been tampered with, defeating the ends of justice.

“we first found that the affidavit had been tampered with. We found defeating the ends of justice”

Major-General Pienaar did not conduct a proper investigation in a particular case as she stated she was not an investigating officer and left it there, causing the disciplinary process to fall away.

“There was no proper investigation done by General Pienaar on that particular case. So the disciplinary often that fell away”

Investigation revealed a crime related to the docket and the investigator questioned Major General Pienaar who failed to provide satisfactory answers.

“I found that the disciplinary report was not done properly... I interviewed Major General Pienaar and she did not come through with those questions”

General Pienaar did not conduct a proper investigation according to the inquiry.

“General Pienaar did not conduct a proper investigation”

There is no complaint against General Pienaar regarding the investigation of the case.

“There is no complaint against General Pienaar. There is no complaint against investigating officers in that case”

The referral to IDAC concerns the abuse of Crime Intelligence monies and is limited in scope, not allowing investigation into other aspects of General Pienaar's conduct.

“the referral sent to you is limited... It was not an opportunity for you to go fish for other things that Pienaar did or did not do right”

Break-in incidents since 2011 include theft of a vacuum cleaner, breaking through an asbestos roof, entering a garage and stealing a vehicle battery, breaking side windows and destroying an alarm, and breaking into Warrant Officer Pienaar's office in January 2020.

“The first one is 27 of December 2011... They stole our vacuum cleaner... Through the roof... In 2014, 8th of June, they broke into the garage... In 2018, 8th December, they broke in on one of the side windows... Completely destroyed our alarm... In 2020, 20th January, they broke through the window of Warrant Officer Pienaar, into his office.”

Warrant Officer Pienaar was likely unaware of what was stored in the safe in his office.

“If he is not aware of what is in the safe, in as much as it is a problem, according to him, it may well have been firearms in the safe or water, I do not know what could have been, and I do not know what the explanation that Colonel Prinsloo would have given to other members when the firearms were moved to the other safe.”

Warrant Officer Pienaar thought the firearms were still in the safe, but they had actually been moved.

“Warrant Officer Pienaar would have thought that the firearms was in there. Because the firearms stay in that safe.”

Lt-Col Prinsloo states that Warrant Officer Pienaar was not present when the exhibits were brought in, contradicting Major General Senona's testimony that Pienaar was present.

“Pienaar was not there when the exhibits came.”

The burglars mistakenly broke into the last window in the passage thinking it was the last window to enter the passage, but it was Warrant Officer Pienaar's locked office.

“They broke into the last window... meanwhile they broke into Pienaar's office... It is somebody that mistaken himself there, that was there.”