Lieutenant Colonel Jacobs

Mr. Raphesu explained the claims about improper procedure were discussed in a conversation between Advocate Johnson and Honourable Mr. Sauls in relation to affidavits filed by Colonel Phillips and Lieutenant General Jacobs.

“It was a conversation between Advocate Johnson and Honourable Mr Sauls, if I remember, but it was in relation to the affidavit that was filed by Colonel Phillips and Lieutenant General Jacobs.”

General Jacobs reported to the office of the Minister of Police on the progress of the matter every 10 working days.

“I was informed by General Jacobs that he was reporting to the office of the Minister of Police on the progress of the matter every 10 working days.”

Advocate Johnson instructed to change the letter request from Major General Khumalo to Lieutenant General Jacobs and to shred the initial letter as it was never sent to Khumalo.

“I had to change the letter request from Major General Khumalo to Lieutenant General Jacobs. I sent Advocate Johnson a WhatsApp message... Her response was that I must shred the letter because it was not going to Lieutenant General Jacobs. She said she had written to Divisional Commissioner Detective Services, Lieutenant General Sentumule.”

Advocate Johnson refused to send the letter to Lieutenant General Jacobs and instead told to shred the letter, claiming it had been redirected to Divisional Commissioner Sentumule.

“Not going to Jacobs. She said shred the letter. I wrote to Div Com on Friday. She will revert today.”

The process of requesting and collecting dockets was complicated by internal office commotion and changes in official letter addressees, resulting in Advocate Johnson instructing shredding and changing letters instead of sending original requests to Major General Khumalo or Lieutenant General Jacobs.

“There was a lot of commotion on that day... I had to change the letter request from Major General Khumalo to Lieutenant General Jacobs... Her response was that I must shred the letter because it was not going to Lieutenant General Jacobs. She said she had written to Divisional Commissioner Detective Services, Lieutenant General Sentumule... Advocate Johnson told me to ask Mr Raphesu to call Colonel Phillips and ask if Lieutenant General Sentumule had asked Colonel Phillips to hand the dockets over.”

Advocate Johnson signed off on a Section 28 summons following a complaint by Mr Adams that requested irrelevant documents, including lists of Divisional Crime Intelligence heads, performance assessments of Major Generals, advertisements, audio recordings, interview records, and documents General Jacobs refused to return.

“you signed off on a summons that asked for a litany of documents that had no bearing on the complaint, including a list of all Provincial Heads and Section Heads who were stationed in Division Crime Intelligence, the performance assessment of all Major Generals for that year, the advertisements for that position, audio recordings and interviews. Then you want documentary records that General Jacobs refused to return.”

There is a report by Lieutenant General Jacobs annexed to MK 15 at page 275 correlating Orlando and Cape Town dockets, identifying specific docket numbers in Cape Town.

“We have the report by General Jacobs... annexed to MK 15, page 275. ...this is the report by Lieutenant General Jacobs. ... it sets out a useful table. And that correlates the Cape Town dockets with the Orlando dockets. ... three Cape Town dockets, 1650, 1651, and 1653, referred to in blocks.”

General Khumalo informed investigators the dockets were not with him, leading to follow-up inquiry which found the dockets with the Inspectorate where General Jacobs was the Head.

“He had informed the investigators that the dockets were not with him ... the dockets were with the Inspectorate, which is why I then wrote ... to Lieutenant General Senthumule as the national custodian of the dockets”

IDAC worked through the usual channels to request dockets via the Divisional Commissioner of Detectives and not directly to Lieutenant General Jacobs.

“I worked through the channel that we do when we request dockets , which would have been the Divisional Commissioner , Detectives .”

ADV JOHNSON stated at the ad hoc committee it was the first time he saw General Jacobs' report and it had not been made available to IDAC before.

“I do believe I indicated to the adhoc that at the adhoc this was the first time I saw this report of General Jacobs. It had not been made available to IDAC before.”

Advocate Johnson stated he first saw General Jacobs' report at the adhoc committee and that it had not been made available to IDAC before.

“I do believe I indicated to the adhoc that at the adhoc this was the first time I saw this report of General Jacobs. It had not been made available to IDAC before .”

The docket cases opened in Gauteng were no longer with Adam but with the Inspectorate headed by General Jacobs, as informed by investigators Rapetsu or Perumal.

“that the dockets were no longer with him, and that the dockets were with the Inspectorate ... that we are referring to in terms of where General Jacobs was the Head”

Warrant Officer Mpangase does not recall exactly if the SAP 13 register entries were made on the 22nd but acknowledges if written it should be correct; the reason for returning on the 23rd was to take the exhibits into forensic exhibit bags per Jacob's instruction.

“Do you ever recall that Jacobs said we need to go back there to take the exhibit and put them into the bags forensics exhibit bags . That is the reason why we went back on the 23rd .”

Warrant Officer Mpangase entered exhibits into the Port Shepstone SAP 13 register and immediately booked them out of that register on instructions from Colonel Jacobs, even though this process made little sense.

“You enter the exhibits in the Port Shepstone SAP 13 register and you immediately book them out of that register. That was per Jacob's instructions. ... It does not make sense.”

A report by Lieutenant General Jacobs, dated 30 July 2025, records the chronology of events known to the Inspectorate from the moment the docket issues arose in Cape Town.

“MK 15 is a report by Lieutenant General Jacobs ... This report you will see is dated the 30th of July 2025 ... this report records everything ... that transpired from the moment they ... became aware of the issues referenced in section 27, particularly the dockets opened in Cape Town.”

Annexure MK15 is a report by Lieutenant-General Jacobs dated 30 July 2025, containing a series of annexures referenced in the report.

“Annexure MK15 is actually a report of Lieutenant-General Jacobs, as I had indicated, dated 30 July 2025. And you were able to establish that attached to that report are a series of annexures that he references in his report.”

In 2018, General Jacobs informed Captain McLean and retired Colonel Roelofse about an incident involving Major General Feroz Khan and Advocate Andrea Johnson.

“We were approached by, actually, General Jacobs, who informed us about the Colonel, who had information regarding an incident that took place in 2018 relating to Major General Khan and Advocate Johnson.”

Draft questions to the Minister of Police inquire about any relationship with convicted druglord Timmy Marimuthu and alleged discussions involving Crime Intelligence and removal of General Jacobs as Head of Crime Intelligence.

“Questions to Minister of Police ... Do you have any relationship with convicted draglord Timmy Marimuthu ... discussed Crime Intelligence matters ... removal of General Jacobs as Head of Crime Intelligence?”

General Khan says the journalist who wrote the articles accusing top cops of corruption is a good friend of Jacobs and Veary.

“General Khan says the following in response: “Morning, this journalist is a good friend of Jacobs and Veary.””

Colonel Jacobs was Acting Provincial Commander during the process to place Warrant Officer Sander at Supply Chain Management until investigation is finalized.

“Colonel Jacobs was the Acting Provincial Commander ... I placed him at Supply Chain Management until the investigation is finalized”

Brigadier Nyuswa admits oversight for not checking the storage capacity in Durban when Jacobs said there was no storage in Isipingo

“Commissioner, I will say it is an oversight on my side. I trusted the Colonel, and I did not follow that.”

The container with serial number BEAU5955535 was inspected by Lieutenant-Colonel Jacobs and others; the seal was intact but broken by an employee of the depot in the presence of management, DPCI members, Captain Duma of CIORS, and depot security members.

“The container with serial number BEAU5955535 was placed down for inspection and the shipping document were handed over to Lieutenant Colonel Jacobs. The doors of the container were inspected by Lieutenant Colonel Jacobs. The seal was intact with seal number, that. The seal was broken by an employee of the depot in the presence of the management of the depot, DPCI members, Captain Duma of CIORS members and depot security members.”

Lieutenant-Colonel Jacobs informed Brigadier Nyuswa about the unavailability of storage space at Isipingo SAPS, and the exhibit was to be kept at Port Shepstone Organized Crime Unit walk-in safe.

“Lieutenant Colonel Jacobs indicated that he has informed Brigadier Nyuswa about the issue of unavailability of storage at Isipingo SAPS. After some time, Lieutenant Jacob informed us that the exhibit will be kept at Port Shepstone Organized Crime Unit walk-in safe.”

Lieutenant Colonel Sibiya confirms with hindsight that the prescripts were flouted, but at the time of the operation (22 June) he did not see anything wrong with Colonel Jacobs' decision.

“Now, with the experience that I have now, I can say, yes, they were flouted. But then when this thing was happening on the 22nd, I did not see anything wrong with the decision that was made by Colonel Jacobs.”

ADV Khumalo SC suggests senior colleagues deliberately chose an inexperienced person to handle photos so there would be no questioning of them, implying improper conduct by Colonel Jacobs.

“...the impression I get ... is that they deliberately chose somebody who is clueless... so that you would not question them even when they are doing something improper.”

ADV Sikhakhane suggests LT-Col Sibiya was put in a situation deliberately so he was unable to question Colonel Jacobs when handling the samples.

“...with hindsight, do you not think that you were being put into a situation deliberately so that you are unable to question ... Colonel Jacobs?”

Colonel Jacobs initially said the container could have been moved to another spot in the depot for proper search without impediments, but LT-COLSIBIYA later questioned the availability of such space.

“Colonel Jacobs said ... the container could be moved to another spot within the depot ... But you say it could not”

The seven bricks of drugs were never brought to FSL; only a small amount for sampling was brought in July 2021 to determine if it was cocaine.

“the seven bricks were never brought to FSL. This relates only to the one bag that Colonel Jacobs speaks about. It was a small amount for sampling... It was the small bag that they brought for sampling to see whether it is Cocaine. That was in July of 2021.”

The sample taken to FSL on 5 July 2021 was a small exhibit bag containing minute amounts from various bricks for analysis confirmation of cocaine.

“On 5 July 2021, I took the sample to the FSL Amanzimtoti for analysis... it involved taking samples from a few bricks and placing a minute amount of powder into a small exhibit bag... This would then be conveyed to the FSL for analysis.”

Colonel Jacobs states that due to no space at FSL to forward all exhibits, samples were taken from bricks and placed in a small bag to be conveyed to FSL for analysis.

“Since the FSL had no space for us to forward all the exhibits, the next logical step to take was to forward samples to confirm indeed that if what we had was Cocaine. I called Colonel Khuzwayo, who is the Head of Chemistry at the FSL Amanzimtoti and sought guidance in this regard. It involved taking samples from a few bricks and placing a minute amount of powder into a small exhibit bag meant to accommodate these samples. This would then be conveyed to the FSL for analysis.”

Lt-Col Sebola kept in contact with Colonel Jacobs, who took over SANEB, but they did not engage extensively; he only contacted an analyst to check communications between Mashaba and Jolene or others in that company.

“I kept in contact with Colonel Jacobs... with him we did not engage, but I was only contacting the analyst to say... if maybe you have tracks of any communication between Mashaba and Jolene or somebody there.”

A meeting was held on 3 December with Forensics where Colonel Steyn and others requested to physically see the exhibits but the consignment could not be found and Forensics indicated there was a problem.

“the first meeting we had with the people at Forensics in an effort to try and address this tasking that I received... they went and looked for it, but they could not find the whole consignment and they returned to us and they said to us, well, there is now a problem”