All entities
other

Crime Intelligence Officer

Referred to as: Crime Intelligence officer · Crime Intelligence Officer

View in network
5 claims
4 hearing days
9 linked entities

Picture

No picture yet. Upload one or paste an image URL.

Most often named alongside

Day 13306 Jul 2026

Open hearing day →
high
political interference
90% conf.

Crime Intelligence officer is using police resources to help Carnilinx target a competitor, Protobac, under the guise of law enforcement.

Crime Intelligence officer whose job is to police illicit tobacco market who is complementing a player in the tobacco market for essentially doing the work of Crime Intelligence in relation to a competitor of his...the Crime Intelligence resources are being used to enable Carnilinx to take out a competitor or to raid a competitor in the name of the law.
ADV CHASKALSON SCDay 133 · 06 Jul 2026
YouTube 6:10:17

Day 13203 Jul 2026

Open hearing day →
high
corruption
95% conf.

The inquiry is focused on whether a SAPS Crime Intelligence officer acted as a conduit for private, commercial, or criminal interests and compromised law enforcement structures.

It is directed at whether a SAPS officer, a Crime Intelligence officer, a senior member of the service was a conduit for private, commercial or criminal interests and whether they were able to gain access or influence or corrupt or compromise law enforcement structures.
YouTube 25:48

Day 12017 Jun 2026

Open hearing day →
unrated
police conduct
95% conf.

Colonel Jacob, Warrant Officer Mpangase, and Warrant Officer Sibiya are the only three people from the same unit involved in leaving the crime scene with the exhibits.

we know that we had Colonel Jacob, Mpangase, who we know was specifically requested by the Crime Intelligence Officer , and they rope in Warrant Officer Sibiya. So it is the three of them, all from the same unit
ADV SEGEELS-NCUBEDay 120 · 17 Jun 2026
YouTube 2:34:35
unrated
police conduct
90% conf.

Brigadier Nyuswa accepts that the evidence chain was compromised because exhibits were not placed in bags immediately at the crime scene, but explains that this is a practical reality often due to operational constraints, and asserts that the risks of wrongdoing are minimal when a small, specifically selected, connected team is involved rather than unrelated multiple teams.

chain of evidence is already compromised when they leave ... Sometimes it is practically not possible ... Most cases, when these incidents are occurring, there is multiple people ... The chances of anyone doing something wrong are very minimal ... except in cases where they are all acting in concert ... You have got a team of specifically selected people ... Two of them say they were selected by the Crime Intelligence Officer ... So your reasoning that it is unlikely that anyone would do anything inappropriate when there are multiple players does not apply in this case ... I concede
YouTube 2:32:55

Day 10814 May 2026

Open hearing day →