'Cat' Matlala Trial: Court To Continue Hearing Evidence On Co-Accused Musa Kekana's Arrest

The Johannesburg High Court is set to resume proceedings on Tuesday in the trial involving alleged underworld figure Vusimuzi "Cat" Matlala, with the focus remaining on a trial-within-a-trial examining whether evidence obtained during the arrest of co-accused Musa Kekana can be admitted.

Lead arresting officer Pimi Alfred Sekgobela is expected to continue giving evidence after beginning his testimony on Monday. His account centres on the circumstances surrounding Kekana's arrest, which took place hours after the fatal shooting of Vereeniging engineer Armand Swart.

Before proceedings adjourned on Monday, Sekgobela told the court that Kekana had been informed of his constitutional rights at the time of his arrest, including his right to remain silent.

State Seeks To Validate Evidence Obtained After Kekana's Arrest

Matlala and his four co-accused are facing a total of 25 charges, including attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder, fraud and money laundering.

The State is attempting to establish that statements allegedly made by Kekana during and after his arrest were lawfully obtained and are therefore admissible as evidence.

Sekgobela's testimony is intended to support the evidence previously presented by private security officer Christiaan Frederick Shepherd, who has already completed his testimony during the trial-within-a-trial.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: 'Cat' Matlala Trial Resumes As Musa Kekana's Defence Prepares To Cross-Examine State Witness

According to Sekgobela, he instructed Shepherd to monitor two vehicles allegedly connected to the killing of Swart after receiving information that they would return to a property in Kew.

He told the court Shepherd later informed him that a white Hyundai i20 had arrived at the address, driven by a man identified as Kekana, who was wearing a mustard-coloured top.

Defence Challenges Witness Identification Of Kekana

The defence continued to dispute the reliability of Shepherd's identification of Kekana.

During cross-examination, defence advocate Rian Gissing pointed out that neither of Shepherd's police statements included any description of the driver's face, physique or other identifying characteristics, despite his testimony in court that he recognised Kekana by his facial features, bulky build and mustard-coloured top.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Court Orders Cat Matlala Co-Accused To Remain In Trial As Bid To Skip Proceedings Fails

Gissing argued that the only reasonable conclusion was that Shepherd had identified the driver solely by the clothing he was wearing rather than by his appearance.

Shepherd dismissed that suggestion.

"Just because I didn't mention it doesn't mean that is not the case."

When questioned about the omission from his statements, Shepherd acknowledged:

"It's a mistake on my behalf that I did not include describing his face."

The defence also drew attention to differences in Shepherd's description of the clothing worn by the driver, noting that his evidence changed from referring to a shirt, then a long-sleeved top, before later describing it as a tracksuit top.

Kekana denies that he was driving the white Hyundai i20 and maintains that he was at his home when the incident occurred.