State prosecutor Advocate Lawrence Gcaba has revealed that investigators are actively pursuing leads regarding additional funds related to the AKA murder case. This development may lead to further arrests in the ongoing investigation.
The focus of attention is the sum of R800,000, which was deposited by Mfundo Gcaba into Mziwethemba Gwabeni’s bank account one day after the tragic shooting of rapper Kiernan ‘AKA’ Forbes on Florida Road in Durban.
The Gcaba family has stated that the money in question was purely for business purposes. On the other hand, Gwabeni, who stands accused of being the mastermind behind the murder, vehemently denies any involvement in AKA’s killing.
In February of last year, Lindokuhle Thabani Mkhwanazi, Siyanda Eddie Myeza, Lindani Ndimande, Mziwethemba Gwabeni, and Lindokuhle Ndimande were arrested in connection with the murder. Two additional suspects, Siyabonga and Malusi Ndimande, are currently in the process of being extradited from Eswatini.
The High Court in Durban recently heard closing arguments for bail. Advocate Gcaba dismissed some of the defence’s arguments made on Thursday, particularly the claim that certain charges against the accused were duplicated.
The defence argued that this duplication of charges demonstrated the weakness of the state’s case. However, Advocate Gcaba refuted this assertion, stating that there is evidence supporting multiple charges at this stage of the proceedings. He clarified that the choice of charges is not for the court to determine, but rather whether there is prima facie evidence to support each charge.
The defence also challenged the money-laundering charges against Gwabeni, contending that the transactions did not violate the Prevention of Organized Crime Act of 1998 (POCA). In response, Advocate Gcaba argued that the defence’s approach to money laundering was too general. He explained that a closer examination of the sections of POCA reveals crucial distinctions.
Regarding the possession of firearms, the defence argued that an accused cannot be found guilty of unlawful possession if the firearm in question is not recovered. However, the state countered by asserting that it could argue for shared possession of the firearm since all the accused were involved in the crime.
The state presented evidence of two firearms used in the incident, one of which has been recovered. The second firearm, responsible for the second victim’s death, has not been found, and the person alleged to be carrying it does not possess a license for that firearm. The state argued that these facts demonstrate that both firearms were unlawfully possessed.
The state further revealed that there was an arrangement for individuals to collect the “tools” used in the murder. CCTV footage reportedly shows the firing of these tools, resulting in the deaths of the two victims.
The evidence suggests that the tools were returned to the person who initially distributed them and subsequently found in the possession of one of the accused. The state argued that this evidence proves joint possession and supports the charges against the accused.
Addressing the accusation that the state intentionally delayed the proceedings, Advocate Gcaba refuted the claim, stating that extensive investigations were conducted before the arrests. He explained that the decision to arrest was made when the investigation reached an advanced stage.
The state emphasised that they are still actively following the money and are at an advanced stage of the investigation, which may lead to the arrest of additional individuals. The state also clarified that during their investigation, they found no evidence supporting the payment of R800,000 to the fourth accused.
Statements from individuals who were not previously accused have been introduced during the bail application stage, as new information can emerge throughout the investigation process.
To ensure the proceedings are not delayed, the state took the necessary time to conduct a thorough investigation, with the exception of the R800,000 payment. The amount of evidence and analysis conducted thus far demonstrates the state’s commitment to a comprehensive investigation.
