Lawyers representing former president Nelson Mandela’s grandson, Mandla Mandela, who is on trial for allegedly assaulting a motorist, sought to poke holes in the testimony of two state witnesses today.
Advocate Colin Garvery dismissed the evidence of state witness, Lwandile Madala, as “prefabrication and untruth” aimed at discrediting Mandela.
This was because the witness’s version had “significant discrepancies” compared to those of two other state witnesses who testified previously.
Madala said he was a few hundred metres away when he saw the two men arguing.
Under cross-examination, Madala said he had heard Mandela say to complainant Mlamli Ngudle: “Are you insulting my mother?”, before the accused went to fetch a firearm in his black Toyota double cab, which was parked nearby.
“Mandla returned from his car with a gun in hand and forced out of his car, before stomping and kicking him as he lay on the floor.”
Madala said Ngudle suffered a cut on the left side of his head. Garvery disagreed and referred to a J88 form, which found that the complainant had only suffered abrasions on his forehead and only had dust on his face. This was inconsistent with someone whose head was banged against a rough concrete floor, he said.
Earlier, Pietermaritzburg-based neurosurgeon Dr Praneel Ramchandra, who removed a blood clot from Ngudle’s head about a month after the incident, had taken the stand. He testified that Ngudle had complained of “persistent headaches and dizziness”.
Garvey asked if this was not consistent with a head butting with a firearm. “Not always, it can vary from mild to severe,” said Ramchandra.
Garvey said what was contained in the medical report on the day of the alleged incident was different. Ramchandra replied he could not testify on the report made by somebody else.
- Get a copy of the Dispatch tomorrow for more on the story
Mandla Mandela's lawyer grills witnesses in court
Advocate Colin Garvery dismissed the evidence of state witness, Lwandile Madala, as “prefabrication and untruth” aimed at discrediting Mandela.
This was because the witness’s version had “significant discrepancies” compared to those of two other state witnesses who testified previously.
Madala said he was a few hundred metres away when he saw the two men arguing.
Under cross-examination, Madala said he had heard Mandela say to complainant Mlamli Ngudle: “Are you insulting my mother?”, before the accused went to fetch a firearm in his black Toyota double cab, which was parked nearby.
“Mandla returned from his car with a gun in hand and forced out of his car, before stomping and kicking him as he lay on the floor.”
Madala said Ngudle suffered a cut on the left side of his head. Garvery disagreed and referred to a J88 form, which found that the complainant had only suffered abrasions on his forehead and only had dust on his face. This was inconsistent with someone whose head was banged against a rough concrete floor, he said.
Earlier, Pietermaritzburg-based neurosurgeon Dr Praneel Ramchandra, who removed a blood clot from Ngudle’s head about a month after the incident, had taken the stand. He testified that Ngudle had complained of “persistent headaches and dizziness”.
Garvey asked if this was not consistent with a head butting with a firearm. “Not always, it can vary from mild to severe,” said Ramchandra.
Garvey said what was contained in the medical report on the day of the alleged incident was different. Ramchandra replied he could not testify on the report made by somebody else.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos