Metro cops who shot at fleeing motorist 15 times were justified: high court

21 December 2022 - 12:41
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now
In dismissing the man's claim, the Pretoria high court said 'traffic offences can perhaps not be equated to a suspect fleeing after committing a murder, but drunken driving takes innocent people’s lives'.
In dismissing the man's claim, the Pretoria high court said 'traffic offences can perhaps not be equated to a suspect fleeing after committing a murder, but drunken driving takes innocent people’s lives'.
Image: 123RF/olegdudko

The Pretoria high court has dismissed a R2m damages claim by a drunk driver whose vehicle was shot at 15 times by Tshwane metro police when he evaded arrest. 

The incident happened in August 2017.

In court papers, Fhatuwani Ramahala explained events that led to the shooting.

He said he was asleep at his girlfriend's flat in Sunnyside, Pretoria, when he received a call from another girlfriend who asked him to pick her up at Menlyn Shopping Centre.

He tried to decline her request so as to not raise suspicion with the woman he was with by saying he was ill and had taken medication.

A doctor testified that Ramahala told him he could not fetch the girlfriend because he had epileptic fits the previous day and was feeling weak. She persisted, however, and at about midnight he arrived at the shopping mall. 

The evening ended with a car chase with metro police, during which his vehicle was shot at. Ramahala was arrested and detained at Brooklyn police station for drunk and reckless driving.

He then issued a summons seeking R2m from the police as compensation for shock, pain, suffering and assault or harassment.

The argument put forth by him and the police was whether the officers were justified in their actions, with Ramahala saying he fled when pulled over because he thought he was being hijacked.

Court papers indicated the officer involved only fired shots after three instructions to stop and alight were ignored by Ramahala. In doing so he almost ran over an officer and ignored red robots, endangering those in a vehicle who had right of way at an intersection.

He also made an illegal U-turn, nearly causing a collision, and drove in an oncoming lane, possibly endangering lives. The first shot hit one of his vehicle's tyre, but the run-flats prevented it from stopping. Another 12 shots were fired at the tyres.

Metro police testified that when pulling over Ramahala they noticed his eyes were bloodshot and he smelt of liquor.

Ramahala admitted taking alcohol, but said it was before 5pm that day. He said his eyes were red from sleeping.

Judge Sulet Potterill said in his evidence in chief Ramahala said he was not tested for alcohol, but during cross-examination recalled his blood was taken. It was pointed out that his blood alcohol level was 0,11g per 100ml, more than twice the legal limit.

“The plaintiff [Ramahala] thus committed continuous offences in the presence of the metro officers and they were entitled to attempt to arrest him [in terms] of the Criminal Procedure Act. To affect the arrest they may use such force as may be reasonably necessary and proportional in the circumstances to overcome resistance and prevent the suspect from fleeing,” said Potterill.

“Traffic offences can perhaps not be equated to a suspect fleeing after committing a murder, but drunken driving takes innocent people’s lives. A suspect cannot be rewarded for breaking the law. The actions of the metro police were lawful,” the judge said.

The claim was dismissed with costs on December 12.

TimesLIVE

Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.


subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now

Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.