Court hears why Khekhe can’t express remorse for Bozwana’s killing

Controversial taxi boss Vusi “Khekhe” Mathibela says he cannot express remorse or insight for a crime he did not commit.

Khekhe still denies any involvement in the killing of North West businessman Wandile Bozwana in 2015, or the attempted murder of his business partner Mpho Baloyi.

This was revealed in the Pretoria high court where pre-sentencing reports of Mamelodi businessman and co-accused Bonginkosi Paul Khumalo were presented on Wednesday. 

The pre-sentencing reports for two of the other accused, Sipho Patrick Hudla and Robert Mutapa, were also presented this week.

Khekhe and his co-accused were convicted on June 23 of murdering Bozwana and attempting to murder Baloyi on the Garsfontein off-ramp in Tshwane in October 2015.

A probation officer, who may not be identified as per the court order, said Khekhe refers to the prison as torture for the soul and mind.

Khekhe was detained in the Kgosi Mampuru prison as a normal inmate in 2016 but was later moved to the C-max section.

Khekhe said his detention has been a traumatic experience. According to the report, the C-max prison has mentally, physically and emotionally destroyed his heart, body and mind.

“It is alleged that he is being kept in a single cell. He has no radio, TV or interaction with other inmates. Isolation — locked up for 23 hours per day. They are allowed to shower for minutes per day,” read the report.

The probation officer said Khekhe’s SAPS 69 (record of previous convictions) was not made available to her during the investigation and was told by him that he was a first-time offender.

In the report, Khekhe said he started working in the taxi business after he had left school. After being given two taxis by his grandmother, he was able to start his own business at 17. His business consists of about 50 taxis.

He also bought shares in a restaurant in Johannesburg. However, his shares have been sold after his arrest.

His security company has been handed over to a person who has been appointed to manage the business for him.

According to the report, he has employed many people but the business requires his presence to ensure ongoing success.

“Some of the people employed by him had to be let go as the companies were scaling down and families lost income and financial stability.”

In the evaluation, she said the sentence option should ensure the accused will not repeat this type of offence and that others will be deterred by the sentences imposed by the courts.

She did not make a recommendation pertaining to a sentence in her report.

When the probation officer was probed by state prosecutor, advocate Jennifer Cronje, on why she didn’t recommend a sentence, she said it was due to the fact that the court had a minimum sentence prescribed.

However, Cronje argued that it was evident that her recommendations to the court was that direct imprisonment was the only suitable sentence.

She said she has never disputed that.

Further, Cronje said there was nothing in the probation officer’s report about the victims in the community to make the report objective.

“There is nothing in these reports that indicates that they are neutral and objective. I put it to you that these reports are one-sided and are focused only on the accused,” she said.

However, the probation officer said she was told to compile a probation report on the accused’s personal circumstances through interviews and people close to them.

Cronje also accused her of doing a poor copy-and-paste job on her report.

“You were paid to draft these reports. These reports are in effect word-for-word the same, except where you add personal stuff,” Cronje said.

The probation officer was adamant that each report was compiled based on each personal experience.

In the report of accused No 1, Hudla, Cronje highlighted more than 15 pages that she said were a copy-and-paste job.

The matter was rolled over to Thursday.

TimesLIVE