Hearing day 83

During a raid on 8 October 2025, police officers asked Sergeant Nkosi if Mr Matlala's Luxor card was in his possession; he explained it was not and wrote a statement accordingly.

“during your raid, they asked me whether if Mr Matlala's Luxor card was in my possession and then I explained to them that it was not. So, I felt like I must write the statement with that effect”

Sergeant Nkosi wrote the statement about the raid on his own initiative, not invited by the police officers who raided his house, though he acknowledges he was asked questions during the raid that led him to write it.

“I just wrote it... No... I can not say I volunteered. As I am asked... I am asked I need to put that down. I was asked to write it.”

The raid on Sergeant Nkosi's home took place on 8 October 2025.

“I think it was the 8th of October... 25”

During September 2022 deployment in Musina, Sergeant Nkosi worked with General Sibiya and was involved in arresting three suspects related to cash-in-transit and possession of unlicensed firearms and ammunition. The matter is pending in High Court and the accused remain in custody.

“During the said deployed, three suspects were arrested at Musina as per Musina CAS... It was a cash-in-transit charge and the possession of unlicensed firearm and ammunition. I then became closer with General Sibiya... I confirmed the matter is currently in High Court pending for trial and the accused persons are still in custody.”

General Sibiya asked Sergeant Nkosi in January 2024 to collect a complainant downstairs in the security area, who was Mr Matlala ('Cat Matlala'), known to Nkosi as a businessman and security industry figure.

“During the month of 2024, around January, while I was in the office of General Sibiya, I was told by him that he wants me to go and collect someone from downstairs in the security area... The said person was the complainant according to him... I found that it was someone I knew, as Mr Cat Matlala... I know Mr Matlala (Cat) as a businessman in the security industry”

Mr Matlala ('Cat') told Sergeant Nkosi to be loyal in his work because he can make things happen for his promotion, and that he had won a hospital tender giving him influence to visit the office frequently.

“Mr Cat sometimes when he is looking for General Sibiya, he would tell me that I must be loyal in my work because he can make things happen for me in terms of getting me promoted to the higher rank... He further told me that he has won a hospital tender, so that would make him come more often to the office to check everything is okay”

General Sibiya expressed concern over a prolonged lack of good relations with General Nhlanhla Mkhwanzi in KZN, a situation known to Minister Cele who failed to resolve it before retirement, and that the National Commissioner also attempted unsuccessfully to intervene.

“General Sibiya called me to tell me that I must come see him in his office ... He told me that he is worried that he and General Mkhwanazi are not getting along, and this has been happening for a long time, and even Minister Cele knew about it, and he did nothing to solve the problem until he went on pension. He further told me that the National Commissioner tried to solve it, but with no luck.”

Lieutenant General Mkhwanazi denies fighting with General Sibiya and suggests Sibiya should clarify his issue; investigations involving certain people keep bringing up Sibiya's name, possibly explaining Sibiya's desire to reconcile.

“Lieutenant General Mkhwanazi told me that he does not fight with General Sibiya, but General Sibiya must be the one telling me what is his problem, and further told me that there was an investigation on particular people, but General Sibiya's name keep on coming out ...”

The witness confirms having met more than once with General Mkhwanazi to try and make peace, as instructed by General Sibiya, due to General Sibiya's own non-disclosure of his problems and a history of peaceful, general conversations over the phone.

“I confirm that I met with General Mkhwanazi more than once. The reason was I was sent by General Sibiya to try to make peace. The reason he tasked me is to that because we talked a lot together with General Mkhwanazi on the phone, but we just talked on general or normal things.”

The witness was sent by Sthembiso Msibi, son of Jotham Msibi, to collect a jet ski from Mr Cat Matlala in Limpopo, who claimed it belonged to his late father Mr Mswazi; a week later Mr Matlala asked about a card and driver's license left in the jet ski's dashboard, which the witness had taken away but could not answer immediately due to busyness.

“I was asked by Sthembiso Msibi, the son of Jotham Msibi, to go and collect the jet ski ... from Mr Cat Matlala ... somewhere in Limpopo as he said jet ski belong to his late father Mr Mswazi ... he phoned me telling me he is looking for the card and the driver's licence that he left in the dash of the jet ski.”

Later the same week, Mr Matlala urgently needed a black card found in the jet ski and promised to meet Deputy President Paul Mashatile and then General Sibiya; the witness took pictures of the card and sent it to Mr Matlala's phone.

“He needs a card urgent as he was going to meet with the Deputy President, Paul Mashatile, then he met General Sibiya after that ... I took pictures of the said card ... I sent it to his phone.”

The witness confirms he did not know Mr Matlala as a criminal but only as a businessman and was surprised when informed by Mr Lekukela Mpho of a kidnapping where a child and mother were taken; Mr Lekukela was with his friend Mr Abby Lekale.

“I confirm that I did not know Mr Matlala as a criminal. I just know him as a business man. I was surprise when I received a call from Mr Lekukela Mpho ... he was with his friend, Mr Abby Lekale, whom they told me that there was a kidnapping that occurred where a child was taken and his mother.”

The witness interviewed victim Mr Abby who suspects Mr Matlala but does not want to make a formal statement; the witness informed Lieutenant General Sibiya, who was in Cape Town but arranged a team led by Brigadier Ramangwa to investigate the kidnapping; the operation was at Atteridgeville but victims were not found; arrests are imminent.

“I have interviewed the victim Mr Abby ... he told me that he suspects Mr Matlala but he did not want to make a statement ... I immediately contacted Lieutenant General Sibiya ... he was in Cape Town but will set up a team to investigate the matter ... head of investigation was Brigadier Ramangwa ... operation was conducted at Atteridgeville but the victims were not found ... arrests are imminent.”

Sergeant Nkosi cannot be sure if there are inaccuracies or omissions in his statement written on 8 October last year but believes what he wrote was to the best of his recollection and not intentionally deceitful.

“I cannot be sure of that but by the time I was writing this statement, this is what I remembered ... it might happen that maybe I might have omitted some important things but not deliberately because I was lying or maybe I wanted to shift something ... it was maybe an honest mistake if I have omitted.”

Sergeant Nkosi found a Luxor card and later informed Mr Matlala about its whereabouts, linking the urgency of needing the card to meetings with Deputy President Mashatile and General Sibiya.

“he needs the card urgent as he was going to meet Deputy President Mashatile and then meet General Sibiya after that. I then took pictures of the said card. It was black in colour, then sent to his phone.”

Sergeant Nkosi clarifies that he called Mr Matlala after finding the card, not the other way around as earlier stated, and that the call about the card was urgent because Mr Matlala wanted to use it in his meetings with the Deputy President and General Sibiya.

“I might have made a mistake when I say he called me. I called him when I found the card. ... The call that he made, it was a call now after I informed him that I found the card. So now the reason that he called me on this particular day is because he wanted to use that card. And then he further stated that he was going to meet with General Sibiya and Paul Mashatile.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that it was Mr Matlala who said the words about needing the card urgently for meetings with Deputy President Mashatile and General Sibiya.

“That is correct. ... That is his words.”

Sergeant Nkosi found a driver's license in the jetski that had been left by Mr Matlala.

“On my arrival, that is at Mr Matlala's farm, I was found by him at the gate. Then I took the jetski away. But later on that week, he phoned me telling me he is looking for the card and driver's license that he left in the dash of the jetski.”

Sergeant Nkosi admits he did not previously mention the driver's license found in the jetski because he did not think it was important or it may have been an error, focusing instead on the Luxor card.

“I did not mention it because I never thought it was important or maybe it was an error because now the main thing was Luxor card, but not that I did not mention the driver's license because it was not there.”

Sergeant Nkosi affirmatively agreed that a WhatsApp message showed he sent a picture of a card on 23 December 2024 following an urgent call from Mr Matlala, who needed the card urgently to see Deputy President Mashatile and General Sibiya.

“Well, the WhatsApp’s show that you sent this card, a picture of the card, on the 23rd of December 2024.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirmed the handwritten statement includes that Mr Matlala told him he needed the card urgently because he was going to meet the Deputy President.

“Just the statement that Mr Matlala told you he needed the card urgently as he was going to meet the Deputy President.”

Sergeant Nkosi admitted he omitted mentioning in his typed statement to the Commission the urgent call from Mr Matlala about needing the card to meet the Deputy President and General Sibiya.

“It could be a mistake on the statement or when the statement was written that I omitted that.”

Sergeant Nkosi stated that the omission of the urgent need for the card in his typed statement was a mistake or human error and not an attempt to lie or protect the Deputy President.

“Every body can make a mistake in writing and maybe I thought I have written it just by the way I was thinking and I did not put it in.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirmed that the pictures of the card were sent to Mr Matlala on 3 December and that Mr Matlala wanted the card urgently because he was meeting with the Deputy President and General Sibiya.

“He wanted the card urgently because he was going to meet with the Deputy President and then General Sibiya, so you took pictures of the card and sent them to him.”

Sergeant Nkosi gave multiple versions of the story concerning the card and jet ski, including that Mr Msibi's son asked him to collect the jet ski from Mr Matlala’s farm, and that Mr Matlala requested him to look for a card and driver's license in the jet ski's dash, which he could not deliver immediately due to being busy.

“The version in the handwritten statement is that in December 2024 or January 2025, Mr Msibi's son asked you to go and fetch the jet ski from Mr Matlala's farm. You collected the jet ski from Mr Matlala's farm. Later that week, Mr Matlala asked you to look for a card and a driver's license in the dash of the jet ski. You could not take it to him because you were busy.”

Sergeant Nkosi denied protecting the Deputy President by omitting mention of Mr Matlala’s urgent need for the card from his typed statement to the Commission.

“Is it not possible that you were trying to protect the Deputy President by not mentioning it? No.”

Sergeant Nkosi admitted to previously withdrawing money on behalf of Mr Matlala to pay for materials to refurbish a boat and jet ski of Mr Msibi.

“You have used the card previously to withdraw money on behalf of Mr Matlala to pay for materials to refurbish his boat and the jet ski of Mr Msibi that he was using and also to buy the jet ski's service kit.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirmed the withdrawal on behalf of Mr Matlala related to refurbishing a boat and jet ski prior to 23 December 2024.

“I confirm.”

Sergeant Nkosi admitted he did not mention withdrawals on the card to fix the boat and jet ski, nor that the card had long been at Mr Msibi's place of abode, in his handwritten statement.

“There was no mention of the fact that you had made withdrawals on the card to fix the boat and the jet ski. And there was no mention in the written statement that the card had long been at Mr Msibi's place of abode.”

Mr Matlala sent WhatsApp messages on 5 and 21 January 2025 requesting return of his card, complaining it had long been left at Mr Msibi's place of abode.

“If further avert that the plastic referred to on the WhatsApps messaged dated 5 January 2025 and 21 January 2025, he was requesting I return to him his card, averred above, as it was long left at Mr Msibi's place of abode.”

Sergeant Nkosi admitted he did not mention in his written statement two WhatsApp messages from Mr Matlala on 5 and 21 January referring to the card as 'plastic' and complaining it had been left long at Mr Msibi's place.

“There was no mention of these WhatsApp's in your written statement. There was no mention in your written statement of you…”

Sergeant Nkosi initially stated he found the card on his way back from collecting the jet ski from Mr Matlala's farm, but later changed his version to saying he found it at Hartebeespoort Dam, leading to contradictory evidence about the discovery circumstances of the card.

“I found it on my way back to collect the jet ski ... from Mr Matlala's farm ... you immediately changed your version and then you said, actually I found it at Hartebeespoort Dam ... there are a whole range of issues on which you have given fundamentally contradictory evidence in relation to this card.”

There are two contradictory versions about when the card was found: either in September 2024 or in December 2024.

“did you find the card in September or did you find the card in December? ... On some occasions you have said it was when you were fetching the jet ski which would have been September ... On other occasions you have said it was on the day that you sent the pictures to Mr Matlala ... which we know to be the 23rd of December ... So there are two different versions.”

Sergeant Nkosi claims that the contradictions arise from human error and denies changing his version deliberately.

“that it might have been a human error ... that is correct.”

Sergeant Nkosi admits he found the card in December 2024, but previously gave versions compatible with finding it in September 2024 within a week of returning from Mr Matlala's farm.

“When you found the card was it September or December? ... December ... why then did you twice give a version that could only be consistent with having found the card in September within a week of your return from Mr Matlala's farm ... that is repeated ...”

Sergeant Nkosi acknowledges that he called Mr Matlala first to inform him that he had found the card and that Mr Matlala only called him to follow up afterward.

“I phoned him first when I found the card. Then from there he made the follow ups ... That is correct.”

Sergeant Nkosi disputes that Mr Matlala called him first about the card as stated in his handwritten statement, claiming that it was a follow-up call after Nkosi informed Mr Matlala of finding the card.

“In your handwritten statement you say Mr Matlala phoned me ... But I phoned him first to let him know that I found the card ... That is a second error in this handwritten statement ...”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that he found the card in the jet ski on his way back from Mr Matlala's farm and disputes the version given.

“But that is not what I have said.”

Advocates suggest that the card found by Sergeant Nkosi was likely given by Mr Matlala to allow drawing cash, possibly as a bribe to General Sibiya, and that Sergeant Nkosi's contradictions aim to present an innocent explanation for possession of the card.

“My theory is that that card was given to you by Mr Matlala as a means allowing you to draw cash from Mr Matlala's accounts, in other words, essentially to pay a bribe either to you or to General Sibiya through you, and that the reason for all of these contradictions is that you are trying to work out a version that would plausibly explain your possession of the card in innocent terms.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that Mr Matlala had any reason to pay a so-called bribe via card to him and denies having anything or means to make or push Mr Matlala to pay bribe.

“My answer to that is false again. One, Mr Matlala had no reason to pay the so-called bribe to me via card. One, to elaborate on that, I did not have anything or means to make, nor to push Mr Matlala to pay bribe on me. I was not investigating him, I did not do him any things or any favours.”

Adv Chaskalson SC claims the Impala that Mr Matlala arranged to be delivered to General Sibiya's home was done so through arrangements made through Sergeant Nkosi, who forwarded messages to General Sibiya and communicated between Mr Matlala and General Sibiya.

“But the impala that Mr Matlala arranged to be delivered to General Sibiya's home are impalas in respect of which the delivery arrangements were made through you. Mr Matlala sent you messages, you forwarded them onto General Sibiya, you had calls with General Sibiya, you came back to Mr Matlala, and that is how the delivery was done. No contact between Mr Matlala and General Sibiya, but contact between Mr Matlala and you, and you and General Sibiya. Do you recall that?”

Sergeant Nkosi refuses to comment on the bribe issue and denies involvement.

“I would not even comment on the bribe issue and, no, no, no, no.”

Adv Chaskalson SC suggests that if the Impala car that Mr Matlala delivered to General Sibiya was a bribe, it was delivered through arrangements made through Sergeant Nkosi.

“If we assume that the impala that Mr Matlala delivered to General Sibiya were a bribe, that was a bribe that was delivered through arrangements that were made through you, is that not correct?”

Sergeant Nkosi distances himself from the suggestion that people communicate through him to avoid being seen communicating with each other.

“I distance myself from that statement you made that people do not want to be seen communicating with others, and then they communicate through me, no, no, no, no.”

Sergeant Nkosi recalls the described contacts between himself, Mr Matlala, and General Sibiya regarding the delivery of the Impala car.

“I recall that.”

Adv Chaskalson SC suggests a modus operandi where communication and transactions between Mr Matlala and General Sibiya are intermediated by Sergeant Nkosi to avoid direct contact.

“Now, and we saw in relation to Tshwane this modus operandi of people not wanting to be seen talking to each other or doing transactions with each other, with intermediating their communications through you. We saw that repeatedly with the CFO and General Dlamini.”

Cash withdrawals totaling R37,000 were made on the card allegedly found in the jet ski between 10 and 12 December 2024.

“If you add all of those up, you get to R37,000.00 in, on the 10th, 11th and 12th of December.”

Adv Chaskalson SC states that it is more likely Sergeant Nkosi had the card in his possession from September to December 2024 to explain the cash withdrawals, contrary to Sergeant Nkosi's claim that the card was in the jet ski dash during that period.

“If your version that the card was in the jet ski that you collected from Mr Matlala's farm in September is correct ... you had it in your possession not just on the 23rd of December, but over that entire period... and so those withdrawals would have to have been done by you.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that he made cash withdrawals on the card on 10, 11, and 12 December 2024 and says he does not know who made them.

“No. ... I would not know.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that he had the card with him on the 23rd December 2024 and that it was not the first time he came across the card, stating the card was on the jet ski in December and he used it with Mr Matlala's permission to buy boat seats, boat cover and a service kit.

“On that particular day that I had the card with me in December, it was not the first time coming across the card. But in December, the card was on the jet ski. And I also confirmed that, even in my statement I stated that there are things that I used with that card, with the permission of Mr Matlala, to buy the boat seats, boat cover, and a service kit for the jet ski and the boat.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that the card was with him on the 10th, 11th and 12th of December 2024 and says the card was with Mr Matlala on those dates.

“No, it was not with me. ... Yes.”

Sergeant Nkosi does not know how Mr Matlala could have used the card found in the jet ski dash to make cash withdrawals from 10 to 12 December 2024.

“I do not know.”

Adv Chaskalson SC argues it is implausible for Mr Matlala to have used the card in the jet ski dash to make withdrawals from 10 to 12 December 2024 and challenges Sergeant Nkosi to explain or prove how it could have happened.

“I put it to you that it is extremely improbable, if not impossible, for Mr Matlala to have used a card that was in the dash of the jet ski when you collected it in September, and that he was still looking for in December, to make withdrawals from 10 to 12 December? I mean, how? Give me, or show me, or give me a suggestion that suggests that this would be possible. How would it have happened?”

Sergeant Nkosi states money was withdrawn from the card on 10th and 12th December and that orders were made on 13th and 14th December; however, he cannot comment on what really happened.

“... there was money withdrawn, there was orders made on the 13th, 14th December, ministatements withdrawn from the card, and it was done through ... V Matlala, so I cannot comment on what really happened with that card.”

Mr Matlala initiated the request for the pictures of a card from Sergeant Nkosi, wanting leverage over him through possession of pictures of the card held by Nkosi.

“The request for the card is initiated by Mr Matlala. The request for the pictures of the card is initiated by Mr Matlala.”

Mr Matlala is trying to repair a vulnerable relationship with General Sibiya because General Sibiya has been implicated publicly in affidavits, and Matlala requests to show WhatsApp correspondence to General Sibiya to manage perception.

“Mr Matlala is trying to make things better with General Sibiya through you in relation to the fact that he has mentioned General Sibiya in affidavits which are now public ... His very next communication ... says: 'Please show him and you have shown that' ... He then forward the WhatsApp to General Sibiya ...”

Mr Matlala feels vulnerable in his relationship with General Sibiya and tries to gain leverage by asking Sgt Nkosi to send pictures of a credit card showing Nkosi holding it.

“Mr Matlala is feeling vulnerable in his relationship with General Sibiya and yourself because he has caused difficulty for General Sibiya by publicly disclosing part of that relationship ... He has said to you send pictures of that card back in front because he is wanting leverage over you. He is wanting to have a picture of you holding his credit card so that he has some leverage over you.”

Sergeant Nkosi does not know why Mr Matlala wanted the pictures of the card but suggests maybe he wanted to replace it or do something with it.

“According to me maybe he wanted to replace it or do something, but he wanted me to send that picture.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that Mr Matlala wanted him to hold the card but wants the card WhatsApp pictures from Nkosi.

“No, he does not ask for Sergeant Nkosi to hold the card, but wants the card WhatsApp'd from Sergeant Nkosi.”

ADV BALOY questions why Mr Matlala, who is head of security for Mr Msibi and not himself, would have Sergeant Nkosi deal with a card left in Mr Msibi’s jetski instead of retrieving it himself, implying suspicion about the involvement of Nkosi.

“Mr Matlala is head of security of Mr Msibi. The jetski belongs to Mr Msibi, and you say you took it back to Mr Msibi’s property. Why is that Mr Matlala would want you, who is not employed at Mr Msibi, to be the one that deals with this card that he left in the jetski?”

Sergeant Nkosi responds that at that time he was the suitable person to handle the card, not because he is working for Mr Msibi.

“I think it is a matter of, at that particular time I was the one suitable for it to be handled by me. Not that it was a matter of why do I have to handle it because I am not working for Mr Msibi.”

Sergeant Nkosi had possession of a card prior to 23 December 2024 and used it to buy a jet ski service kit before that date.

“in your statement you say, before this day you bought a service kit for the same jet ski using that card ... that was done before 23 December 2024”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms he must have had the card with him to buy the service kit transaction.

“I am reading this data but there is no way that I could have bought the service kit without that card”

Sergeant Nkosi had previously returned the card to Mr Matlala's office after using it.

“My man, I can drop it tomorrow, same place as last”

Sergeant Nkosi admits using the card on two occasions: to buy a battery and a service kit for the jet ski.

“I once used it to buy a battery and a service kit for the jetski”

Bank statements show various transactions on the card during January 2025 indicating someone had the card in possession and was using it.

“various expenses ... indicate someone had the card ... you have these purchases ... which suggests that whoever was in possession of the card in that period was using it”

Sergeant Nkosi accepts the bank statement indicates use of the card but denies he personally was the one using it.

“I accept what I see on the statement, but I do not accept that I am the one who was using it”

Sergeant Nkosi states he was not the one transferring money or making payments with the card, despite appearances on the bank statement.

“the card, they used to transfer money ... that was not me ... I do not even know these places ... It was not me”

Sergeant Nkosi denies physically needing the card to make payments, suggesting possible use of virtual cards or taps on phones.

“you know most in the phones you download cards ... there are possibilities he might have tapped ... he used the same card to tap it”

Sergeant Nkosi did not know the address of the estate relevant to the conversation until shown a Whatsapp message dated 19 December 2024.

“I said I did not know the address of the estate”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms knowing Mr Matlala's address when earlier he denied being sure of it.

“you knew Mr Matlala's address when you said earlier you are not sure”

Sergeant Nkosi assumed "our main guy" referred to General Sibiya in a chat with Mr Matlala.

“I assume maybe he was referring to General Sibiya”

Adv Khumalo challenged Sergeant Nkosi to identify clearly who "our main guy" was in a message from Mr Matlala, suggesting Nkosi knew who was being referred to.

“You must have known when he said to you, tell our main guy who he is referring to... The fact that you did not do that suggests to me that you know very clearly who he was referring to”

Sergeant Nkosi said he and Mr Matlala usually talk about or with General Sibiya, indicating General Sibiya's importance to their communication.

“Myself and Mr Matlala usually talk about or with General Sibiya. I assume it was General Sibiya”

Sergeant Nkosi suggested that General Sibiya might be Mr Matlala's "guy" rather than his own.

“He might have made a mistake to include me in our, because it is his guy, not mine”

Sergeant Nkosi accepted that General Sibiya could be considered both his and Mr Matlala's guy equally (50-50).

“He is my guy, and his guy. That means 50-50, he is our guy”

Sergeant Nkosi said he did not fully understand the meaning when Mr Matlala said "our guy" but believed it referred to General Sibiya.

“I do not know what Mr Matlala meant when he said our guy... But obviously he was referring to General Sibiya”

Sergeant Nkosi denied immediately calling General Sibiya after a phone call when police were at Mr Matlala’s house, but later admitted he did inform General Sibiya after informing other officers.

“I never said I immediately, I said I informed Brigadier Ramangwa and Colonel Mashabela, then I also informed General Sibiya”

Sergeant Nkosi stated that he informed Brigadier Ramangwa, Colonel Mashabela, and General Sibiya about police presence at Mr Matlala's house during an operation as per usual briefing protocols.

“It took it because when we are now briefed by General Sibiya... when you cannot get a hold of me, Nkosi will pass the message... I informed Brigadier Ramangwa and Colonel Mashabela, then I also informed General Sibiya”

Sergeant Nkosi confirmed that R385,000 in cash was found in a safe in his house during a police search on 8 October 2024.

“When there was a search of your house, the police officers found R385000 in cash in a safe in your house. Is that correct? - That is correct”

Sergeant Nkosi stated R5,175 of the cash was his and R380,000 belonged to his brother.

“You explained that R5175 was yours, and R380000 was your brother's. That is correct”

The R385,000 in cash found was the purchase price paid by Sergeant Nkosi's brother for the sale of a truck, with documentation including affidavits and sale agreements attached to his statement.

“The R385000 was the purchase price that had been paid to your brother for the sale of a truck... proof of purchase truck advert is attached as Annexure B... affidavit of the purchaser confirming the same is attached as Annexure E... sale agreement between seller and purchaser is attached as Annexure F”

Bheki Nkosi (Sergeant Nkosi's brother) owns Ngapeshere Construction and Projects, and sold his truck for R380,000 with all relevant documentation provided.

“He indicates that he is the owner of Ngapeshere Construction and Projects ... he sold his truck for a price of R380000 ... affidavit says he previously sold the truck to a man ... registration number”

The Sale Agreement between Abednico Nkosi and Hartley Ngoato was signed by Abednico Nkosi on 7 October 2025 and by Hartley Ngoato on 19 December 2025, so it could not have existed on 16 December 2025 when the affidavit was commissioned.

“that document called the Sale Agreement is signed by your brother on the 7th of October 2025. And by the purchaser, Mr Ngoato, on the 19th of December ... could not have existed when your affidavit was commissioned ... the affidavit was commissioned on the 16th of December”

Sergeant Nkosi admits there was no sale agreement in existence on 16 December 2025.

“No, no, there was not.”

The annexures to the affidavit were added later, after 9 December, and were not present with the original affidavit signed on 16 December 2025.

“The annexures came later, after 9 December.”

The Annexure F document showing the Sale Agreement was signed by the buyer on 19 December 2025 and could not have existed when the affidavit was signed on 16 December 2025.

“that annexure could not have existed when you signed your affidavit on the 16th of December, because it was only finalised on the 19th”

Sergeant Nkosi agrees the annexures referred to in paragraph 17 came later than the affidavit itself.

“Yes, I agree because I remember getting the letter with that effect, that they are outstanding.”

The Sale Agreement document attached as Annexure F was present but unsigned at the time the affidavit was submitted.

“It was there but it was not signed.”

Abednico Nkosi's affidavit states he sold his truck for R380,000 and does not mention R400,000.

“He says that he sold his truck for an amount of R380000 ... He says nothing about R400000.”

Abednico Nkosi stated in paragraph 4 of his affidavit that he sold his truck for R380,000 and mentioned the previous registration as DWJ.

“He says ... in paragraph 4, I aver further that I previously sold my truck to wit MAN with registration number KN33RNGP to Mr Hartley Ngoato ... for an amount of R380000 ... the previous registration was DWJ.”

Both Abednico Nkosi and Hartley Ngoato knew the real purchase price was R400,000 but Abednico's affidavit states an amount of R380,000 with a balance of R20,000 outstanding.

“Both your brother and Mr Ngoato knew that the real purchase price was R400000 ... that Mr Ngoato paid an amount of R380000 and there is a balance of R20000.”

Attorney Hartley Ngoato drafted the Sale Agreement with Abednico Nkosi regarding the truck sale, which is unusual as one party is an attorney.

“... it is a sale agreement between your brother and Mr Ngoato who is an attorney ... Attorneys are used to drafting agreements of sale.”

The agreement of sale drafted by an attorney usually includes clauses designed to protect the clients' interests and may not be immediately apparent or understandable to a layperson or legally untrained person.

“when one sees an agreement of sale drafted by an attorney, it usually includes a whole range of clauses that are designed to protect the clients' interests and may not – and their meaning may not be immediately apparent to a lay person. And their meaning may not be immediately apparent to a legally untrained person.”

Sergeant Nkosi has not seen an agreement of sale drafted by an attorney.

“No.”

Attorneys drafting agreements of sale typically include clauses to protect their clients' interests.

“Attorneys are used to including clauses in an agreement of sale that are designed to protect the interests of their clients.”

Sergeant Nkosi partly agrees with the proposition but will not go into details about the agreement of sale as he was not present during the sale.

“I partly agree, but I will not go into details on the agreement of sale. I was not present when the sale of agreement was made between my brother and Mr Ngoato, but it appears that there will be a payment made in due course.”

Sergeant Nkosi was not present when the sale agreement was made between his brother and Mr Ngoato but agrees that payment appears to be made in due course.

“I was not present when the sale of agreement was made between my brother and Mr Ngoato, but it appears that there will be a payment made in due course.”

The agreement of sale signed by Sergeant Nkosi's brother does not have provisions dealing with ownership and risk of the truck until the full purchase price is paid.

“It does not have provisions dealing with ownership and risk of the truck until the final purchase price is paid, the full purchase price is paid.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that his brother was paid on 7 October 2025 for the truck.

“Was your brother paid on 7 October 2025? That is correct.”

The contract for the sale of the truck is dated 7 October 2025 with Sergeant Nkosi's brother's signature on it.

“The contract is dated – your brother's signature is dated 7 October 2025.”

The very next day after the payment, a raid occurred and the money was found and seized.

“And it was just an incredible stroke of misfortune that the very next day you were raided and the money was found and seized.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that the raid and seizure of money happened as described.

“That is how it happened.”

The presence of R380,000 in cash in the safe appears to be explained by documentation created to explain the money and not the actual sale.

“Because what this looks to me from the outside is an attempt to explain the presence of R380 000 in cash in your safe. There are so many anomalies.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that the documents explaining the money were created after the event to explain the money.

“No, I deny.”

The seller's affidavit does not mention the purchase price as R400,000 but rather as R380,000, suggesting that Sergeant Nkosi's brother is allegedly owed the extra R20,000.

“The seller's affidavit does not mention that the purchase price is 40000 as opposed to 38000. Your brother is the one who is ostensibly owed the extra 20000. Your brother would be owed the extra 20000.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms the brother is owed the extra R20,000.

“That is correct.”

Sergeant Nkosi notes that the extra R20,000 was not mentioned in his brother's affidavit but was mentioned in the sales document.

“But he mentioned it on the sales document.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies that the documents explaining the R380,000 were put together in a hurry after the event and did not exist at the time.

“No, I deny that. It is not like that.”

Sergeant Nkosi does not know if the extra R20,000 has been paid yet.

“I do not know. I have not heard about it.”

Sergeant Nkosi says the photo of a truck was included in the statement bundle as proof to show what he was talking about regarding the documents.

“It was just a proof to show that what am I talking about.”

There are two different registration numbers shown in exhibits related to the truck, causing difficulty in accepting that the truck shown is the subject of the sale.

“Without an explanation why we have two different registration numbers, I am unable, speaking for myself, to accept that this is the truck that, in fact, is the subject of the sale.”

There is an anomaly regarding two different registration numbers in affidavits and agreements related to the sale of a truck.

“you have those two different registration numbers ... in paragraph 4 of Bheki's affidavit ... is KN33 RNGP ... in the agreement itself ... the registration number is a different registration number”

Bheki's affidavit states he owns a company and sold the truck on behalf of that company called Ngaphesheya, but the sale agreement does not mention Ngaphesheya and states Bheki sold the truck himself.

“this is Bheki's affidavit, he says he owns a company and on behalf of that company, Ngaphesheya, he sold that truck ... in the agreement at page 15, there is absolutely no mention of Ngaphesheya ... it is Bheki who is selling the truck, his truck”

Mr Ngaphesheya is owned by Bheki and the truck was used by the company called Ngaphesheya, which Bheki directs.

“Ngaphesheya is owned by Bheki ... he is the sole director of that company”

The documents do not reflect a legitimate sale from Ngaphesheya to Mr Ngoato, making them suspect and possibly crafted to explain cash possession.

“these documents do not reflect a sale by your brother's company to Mr Ngoato and therefore ... make their validity or their purpose to be suspect”

Sergeant Nkosi did not consider the cash payment suspicious because he knew the parties involved and trusted their business reputations.

“Knowing my brother and knowing Mr Ngoato, that they are both business people, I did not see any problem”

Mr Ngoato paid Sergeant Nkosi's brother in cash for the truck, an unusual transaction involving a large amount of cash (R380,000).

“why he had been paid in cash ... Mr Ngoato had paid him in cash ... It is such a huge sum of money in cash, R380000”

Sergeant Nkosi did not inquire about the cash payment or request proof, trusting both business people's integrity.

“I did not see any problem on the issue of that money at that time ... I did not ask him for a receipt”

Mr Ngoato conducts various businesses including auctions involving animals, pubs, and boat clubs, which explained his capability to produce the cash.

“I know that he ran auctions in terms of the animals. He ran pubs. He ran boat clubs”

Sergeant Nkosi's brother only showed a sale agreement signed by himself but not signed by Mr Ngoato, and no receipt was obtained for the cash payment.

“my brother only showed me ... some kind of sale agreement ... signed solely by him ... Mr Ngoato did not sign ... No receipt was requested for the money paid”

Sergeant Nkosi did not mention the cash transaction in his initial handwritten statement because he was not informed whether the money would be confiscated or not at the time of writing.

“this money was not mentioned because ... it was never mentioned to me that they were going to confiscate that money”

The cash money was confiscated on the same day but Sergeant Nkosi did not make a further statement explaining the source of the money afterwards.

“the money was confiscated on the same day ... I did not make a further statement explaining the source of those funds”

Sergeant Nkosi did not give a statement to the police explaining the source of funds shortly after receiving the money but waited to be asked by the Commission in December 2024.

“After the money was taken or maybe two days after or three days after or five days after, why did you not give a statement to the police explaining the source of those funds and how they came into your possession ? Why do you wait until you are asked by the Commission in December 2024 ?”

Sergeant Nkosi was interested in getting his brother's money back and was phoning every day looking for that money.

“I was . You can ask them . I was phoning each and every day looking for that money.”

Sergeant Nkosi was waiting for the people who confiscated the money to follow up on where they took the money instead of providing an explanation sooner.

“The reason that I did not explain at that particular time, I was waiting for the people who confiscated such money to come and make a follow-up of where they took that money as I've verbally explained to them .”

None of the annexures provided state that cash changed hands between Mr. Ngoato and Sergeant Nkosi's brother; there is no evidence of EFT or other payment form.

“And then do you accept that nowhere in any of the annexures you provided to us does anybody say that cash exchanged between Mr Ngoato and your brother ? In other words , there was no EFT transaction or there was no payment in another form . Nobody in any of these documents is saying that the purchase price was paid in hard cash . Do you accept that ?”

Advocate Khumalo SC points out that Mr. Ngoato does not say he gave Sergeant Nkosi cash, only his elder brother was given cash by Mr. Ngoato.

“He says he gave : “ I handed the purchase money averred to my elder brother . ””

Sergeant Nkosi claims to have explained that the money in his possession was legitimately obtained and is not proceeds of crime.

“I did . I did .”

Sergeant Nkosi states that his brother's statement annexure says he gave him cash to pay for the purchase.

“But in my brother 's statement , Annexure B , page 7 , it states that he gave me cash .”

Sergeant Nkosi testifies that even if Mr. Ngoato does not explicitly state he gave cash, he mentioned cash, which does not disprove cash was given.

“Even if he does not state that he gave him cash , but here he mentioned cash . So it does not necessarily mean that Mr Ngoato did not give him cash .”

Advocate Khumalo SC argues that Mr. Ngoato's statement does not explicitly say he gave cash to Sergeant Nkosi, suggesting the money could have been obtained from someone else.

“Your brother does not say Mr Ngoato gave him cash . Do you accept that ?”

Sergeant Nkosi maintains that cash was handed to him, not necessarily directly by Mr. Ngoato.

“But the issue here , Chair, no sorry, I mentioned Chair by mistake , Honourable , is that cash was handed to me .”

Sergeant Nkosi affidavit states the money was accumulated from the sale of a truck his brother sold and intended to purchase another truck for his company, but does not say he was given physical cash to store.

“You simply say : “ I aver further that the averred money was accumulated from the truck my brother sold , and that he was intending to purchase another truck for his company. ””

Advocate Khumalo SC suggests the transaction appears contrived, made up and fictitious to hide a bigger issue.

“It appears to me that this is a contrived transaction put together to hide something even bigger than what we are looking at . ... I can not think of a simpler word than contrived . It is made up . It is a fictitious transaction . ... It appears to me that this is a made-up sale transaction . It does not look like a real sale transaction to me .”

Advocate Khumalo SC asserts that the affidavit does not explain how or when the physical cash was given or that it was in possession, which is insufficient when explaining a large sum of money to the Commission.

“You do not say when , as in the date when you were given cash , how it came to you , what you did with it , how it came about that it was in your possession . You just say in passing that these are proceeds of a sale of a truck my brother wanted to buy another truck . That is really all you say . And in circumstances where you are called before a Commission of Inquiry to explain the source of such a large sum of money in your possession , this is not satisfactory .”

Sergeant Nkosi disputes that the transaction was contrived and insists it was a valid transaction.

“No , I dispute what the Commissioner is saying . ... A valid transaction .”

Sergeant Nkosi does not know if the truck was ever delivered to Mr. Ngoato but thinks it was.

“I would not know , but I thinks so .”

Sergeant Nkosi states that after Mr. Ngoato paid money, he did not take the truck immediately.

“What I know , after Mr Ngoato paid money , he did not take the cash .”

Sergeant Nkosi states that at the time he deposed to the affidavit, the truck was still with his brother.

“At the time that you deposed to the affidavit , where was the truck ?”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms the truck was still with his brother when he deposed to the affidavit.

“It was still with my brother , if I am not mistaken .”

Sergeant Nkosi admits he does not know when Mr. Ngoato took the truck after payment and is not sure if it was still with his brother on 16 December 2025 when he deposed to the affidavit.

“I am not sure .”

Sergeant Nkosi states the truck was still with Mr. Ngoato on 16 December 2025, but then admits he is not sure.

“It was with Mr Ngoato , I believe so , ... I am not sure .”

Sergeant Nkosi paid R500 in cash on 6 November 2024 to Natasha SABC for information.

“On the 6th of November 2024 you sent R 500 in cash with the reference miss you .”

Sergeant Nkosi admits he is not sure where the truck was on 16 December 2025.

“I do not know.”

Sergeant Nkosi initially said he did not pay Natasha SABC for information but later clarified he did pay R500.

“Firstly , I would like to rectify the statement that I said I did not pay Natasha . I said I do not quite remember.”

Sergeant Nkosi accepted that he made a payment of R500 to Natasha SABC for information about Musa Khawula's phone number.

“Do you want to confirm that that was a payment made to Natasha SABC? ... I accept.”

Sergeant Nkosi stated he needed to check and come back to confirm the exact nature of the R500 payment token of appreciation.

“I think I was going to be in a better position to answer that if you gave me this before, but I will check it. Maybe we can park it, then we will check it, then I will come back to it.”

Sergeant Nkosi described the payment of R500 to Natasha as a token of appreciation for providing Musa Khawula's number.

“And do you accept that that R500 was, in your words, at the top of 1344, a token of appreciation for giving you Musa Khawula's number?”

Mr Ngoato highlighted that Sergeant Nkosi requested to reflect on the payment response due to its serious incriminating implications.

“He needs to reflect on that first because there is a serious incrimination in that answer.”

The chat logs between Sergeant Nkosi and Natasha show a payment of R500 made to Natasha with instructions on how to withdraw cash, implying a corrupt transaction involving exchange of information about Musa Khawula.

“That conversation culminates in Sergeant Nkosi eventually saying: 'Hey, Natasha. I have just sent you R500 to withdraw the cash from any Absa. Remember to select Cash Send withdrawal when you go to withdraw the cash.'”

Sergeant Nkosi initially denied paying Natasha for the information but later accepted he had paid her R500 after being presented with chats and a bank statement from 6 November 2024.

“I asked: 'Did you pay her for this information?' Sergeant Nkosi says: 'No.' ... I say: 'Are you sure about that answer?' He says: 'I am sure about that answer.' ... But I will not stop you if you want to put in an affidavit ...”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms purchasing Harley-Davidson items in December 2023 for Mr Molefe and explains the delay in returning due to mule realization and their relationship with Harley-Davidson as a regular customer.

“The date of that invoice on page 6 is 20 December 2023 ... Yes ... these items on this invoice were items that you purchased at Harley-Davidson for Mr Molefe ... I think Mr Molefe only realised when he was supposed to wear those particular apparels after 11 months ... I would know that Harley-Davidson would replace those things because I am their regular customer, and they know me.”

Sergeant Nkosi states he collected Harley-Davidson items to return to the store for Molfe, who is his mentee in bike riding, but Molfe only tried on the riding equipment 11 months later.

“Soon my way back from court , I passed by Mr Katiso Molefe's place of abode and collected bikes, gloves, helmet, shield, and T-shirt, which were to be returned to Harley-Davidson as they were smaller or could not fit him ... I think Mr Molefe only realised when he was supposed to wear those particular apparels after 11 months ... he never tried on the helmet and the gloves that Sergeant Nkosi had bought for him in December 2023 for another 11 months.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms he was mentoring Mr Molefe when Molefe started buying bikes, which was around 2022 to 2023.

“When he started to buy those bikes ... That is correct ... I cannot remember vividly the exact date and month, but I think it could be there by 2022 to 2023.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms Mr Molefe's first bike was a Can-Am three wheeler, not an ordinary two-wheel motorbike.

“So, was the first bike that Mr Molefe ever rode one of those Can-Am three wheelers? ... According to me, yes.”

Sergeant Nkosi states he was mentoring Mr Molefe in bike riding since at least October 2021 and that Molfe was practicing on another bike before his own arrived in South Africa, which was around 2022 to 2023.

“You were mentoring him from 2021 and he was riding from October 2021 at least ... When I started to pay for the bikes, they were not yet in South Africa, they were still in Canada ... I think it could be there by 2022 to 2023 ... before Mr Molefe's bike arrived in South Africa, he was practicing with one of Mr Msibi.”

Sergeant Nkosi states Mr Molefe did not try on Harley-Davidson equipment delivered in December 2023 when it was delivered.

“When you delivered this equipment in December 2023, did Mr Molefe not try it on in your presence? No.”

Mr Molefe did not use any of the equipment bought for him from December 2023 to November 2024.

“through months of mentoring Mr Molefe on the bike from December 2023 to November 2024, he did not use any of the equipment you bought for him”

Mr Molefe tried on the one-year-old equipment around November 2024 and said it did not fit.

“he tried on the one-year-old equipment and said it did not fit”

Sergeant Nkosi did not return the equipment to Harley-Davidson as intended.

“I did not go. I did not return them”

Sergeant Nkosi passed by Mr Molefe's place and collected bike, gloves, helmet, shield, and T-shirts which were to be returned to Harley-Davidson, but did not go specifically for that purpose and did not actually return them to Harley-Davidson.

“I passed by Mr Katiso Molefe's place of abode and collected bike, gloves, helmet, shield and T-shirt which were to be returned to Harley-Davidson ... I did not go to him specifically for that, but that was just a pass-by ... but I did not take them to Harley-Davidson”

Sergeant Nkosi's written statement about returning items to Harley-Davidson can be interpreted irregularly or misleadingly regarding his actual actions.

“Maybe what I am saying there in my statement can be an irregularity in understanding English between me and Mr Chaskalson”

Sergeant Nkosi intended to take the equipment back to Harley-Davidson but changed his mind and did not do so.

“that was my intention to do so ... But your intention changed at some stage ... Correct”

Sergeant Nkosi states that his statement was about passing by Mr Molefe's to take the items to Harley-Davidson, but in reality he did not actually take them to Harley-Davidson because he never reached it before going home.

“I said I passed by Mr Molefe to take those things to Harley-Davidson ... but there was no way I got to Mr Molefe on the past four, Harley-Davidson is closing at four, and then I will take it even to, this is what I put my statement”

Sergeant Nkosi admits that he did not take gloves, helmet, and T-shirts back to Harley-Davidson, and that the bag in the video does not look like it contains those items but something with a sharp rectangular shape inside it.

“it is not gloves, helmets, and T-shirts in there ... there is a fairly sharp rectangular shape that is inside that bag”

Sergeant Nkosi claims the video showing orange shoes but he was wearing black sneakers and blue jeans at the time, suggesting the video may have been altered.

“Because of the sneaker that I was wearing, they were black, but there they are orange ... I am showing the Commission that there are many things that are deceiving there ... the colours are not the same”

Sergeant Nkosi asserts that many things seen at the scene, such as sneakers and jeans, were misleading and not as shown in evidence, stating that there was nothing square in fashion as portrayed.

“I am just bringing it to the Commission that a lot of things are misleading there, starting with the sneakers and the jeans. So even that what Mr Chaskalson sees there is not what it showed there when I was there. There was nothing that is square in that fashion.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that the bag he carried on that day was white, not pink or red, and its size was more or less the same as depicted on the screen.

“No, the bag was white. ... More or less, yes.”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms the external appearance of the bag from a distance would generally look like the image seen on the screen, depending on viewing angle and quality.

“Yes, it would depend as to you see it ... It depends on the quality of the angle from which you are looking at it.”

Sergeant Nkosi asserts that the contents of the bag included a helmet, clarifying that it was a helmet but not the helmet itself as seen externally.

“It is a helmet. ... Yes, Commissioner.”

Sergeant Nkosi admits he does not know where the items from the bag are now and speculates he sold them and replaced them.

“I do not know. I do not know. But to be very honest with you, I guess I sold it somewhere and got another one to ...”

Sergeant Nkosi identifies items numbers 2, 3, 4 and 5 as those Mr Molefe wanted to return according to a referenced invoice.

“That would be item number 2, 3, 4 and 5.”

Sergeant Nkosi states that only one of two screens originally bought was intended for return by Mr Molefe.

“Only one of them.”

Sergeant Nkosi clarifies that the item 'helmet Killian Mod D' on page 6 of the invoice is just a screen image, not the actual helmet.

“That is the screen, not the helmet itself? ... That is correct.”

Sergeant Nkosi denies paying Natasha for information, stating he gave her money as a token of appreciation simply because he knows her, not for information.

“I think now I have got to clarify the matter of paying Natasha for the information. I did not pay Natasha for information. I just gave her money because I know her.”

Sergeant Nkosi explains the phrase 'Where can I send token of appreciation?' referred just to saying thank you, not a monetary payment.

“Just a thank you ... It was not about money. ... Just thank you for talking to her, that I have spoken to her.”

Sergeant Nkosi states he did not pay Natasha for information as he already had everything about Musa Khawula and did not need to pay her for information.

“That information was never paid. As you see there in paragraph 4, Commissioner said: “I have everything about him... “”

Sergeant Nkosi refuses to disclose what the token of appreciation was for on grounds of not wanting to upset the Commissioner and saying it was just to say thank you for talking to Natasha.

“I do not want to upset the Commissioner. ... Just thank you for talking to her, Commissioner. That I have spoken to her.”

Sergeant Nkosi explained that he thought he might have said thank you in the phone number they were communicating with, and denied that the token of appreciation was related to Mr. Musa Khawula's number.

“when I say – I thought maybe I said thank you in this telephone number that we were communicating with, and she did not have them. Then I said, where can I send the token of appreciation?”

Sergeant Nkosi did not acknowledge receiving the number Mr. Musa Khawula had sent to her and was silent despite her messages at specific times on 22 October 2024.

“she sends you the number at 6:41:27 PM on the 22nd of October 2024, and you are silent. You do not even acknowledge the fact that she has sent this to you”

Sergeant Nkosi asked "Where can I send token of appreciation?" implying he wanted to show appreciation for receiving Mr. Musa Khawula's number, but later denied this when questioned.

“a couple of chats later you say: “Where can I send token of appreciation?””

Sergeant Nkosi denied that the "token of appreciation" was linked to Mr. Musa Khawula's number and admitted he might have wanted to show appreciation for something else.

“Maybe it might have been something else, but has has got nothing to do with the appreciation of this thing.”

Sergeant Nkosi shared information with a journalist named Natasha, including Mr. Khawula's details and a warrant of arrest, so she could call the nearest police to effect an arrest if she saw Mr. Khawula around.

“I think shared it just to assure this one that she must not worry, I have got everything that I wanted, I do not need her to give me that information, the way. Maybe if she sees him around where she have fun, she would call the nearest police office, officers to come and effect arrest.”

Sergeant Nkosi stated that he was driving a state vehicle on 27 November 2024 when he was at Mr. Molefe's house, but denied using state vehicles for private errands.

“When you were at Mr Molefe's house on the 27th of November 2024, you were driving a state vehicle, correct? That is correct. ... We do not use state vehicles to do errands, but it was on my way.”

Sergeant Nkosi denied having any discussion with General Sibiya or Mr. Matlala about impalas and stated he only passed a message and PIN supplied by Mr. Matlala without further involvement.

“I did not have any discussion with him. I did not have a discussion with Mr Matlala about impalas. ... I only saw goats and the cows. ... No.”

Sergeant Nkosi is not a friend of Mr Matlala, but his boss.

“He is not my friend. He is my boss.”