PremiumPREMIUM

Cape Town high court overturns law enforcement officer’s double murder conviction

A Cape Town law enforcement officer has been cleared of a double murder conviction after shooting undercover cop in January 2020

Const Thando Sigcu was shot dead in the Cape Town city centre in January 2020.
Const Thando Sigcu was shot dead in the Cape Town city centre in January 2020. (Facebook)

A Cape Town law enforcement officer, jailed for double murder after shooting an undercover policeman tackling a suspected drug dealer, is a free man after the high court overturned his convictions.

Morne Horn successfully appealed his conviction and 10-year prison sentence, which was overturned on Tuesday by the high court in Cape Town.

Horn shot and killed Const Thandimfundo Sigcu, who was stationed at the Cape Town central police station, and Bongani Jack in January 2020. Sigcu was, at the time, trying to arrest Jack in the city centre, for allegedly dealing in drugs. 

Horn and another law enforcement officer, unaware of the circumstances, intervened in what they believed was an assault. Sigcu, wearing plain clothes, drew his firearm and Horn fired two shots, he argued, in self-defence. Sigcu was killed and a wounded Jack died later in hospital.

The Hawks investigated the case and the high court sentenced Horne to 10 years' imprisonment for Sigcu’s murder and seven for Jack’s murder — the sentences to run concurrently.

Horn pleaded not guilty and argued that he shot Sigcu in self-defence. He said he was driving into Adderley Street when his colleague informed him that he had seen a man assaulting someone and they went to check. He said someone told them that the man had a firearm. Horn said they called for assistance.

“As we drove, I saw two male persons on the sidewalk on the corner of Heerengracht Street and Hertzog Boulevard outside the Standard Bank building. The one man, who I now know was Sigcu, was assaulting the other man who I now know was Jack,” Horn said in an affidavit.

He said they went towards the two men and that “my intention was to stop the assault”.

“As we approached, my colleague shouted at Sigcu to put his hands in the air. Sigcu stopped the assault and began to draw a pistol from his left hip. My colleague immediately shouted at Sigcu to put the firearm down. I also shouted at him to put the firearm down. He did not adhere to the warnings and pointed the firearm directly at us. I believed that he was on the point to shoot us and fired two shots at him.”

Horn said Sigcu then fell.

“He still had the firearm in his left hand and I ran towards him and kicked the firearm out of his hand. Sigcu was dressed in plain clothes and we had no idea that he was a police officer,” he said.

“I aver that I fired the two shots at Sigcu in self-defence. There was no doubt in my mind when he pointed the firearm at my colleague and myself that our lives were in danger. I submit that there was no other means for me to avoid the danger but to shoot the assaulter. I consequently submit that I did not act unlawfully.

“With regard to the gunshot suffered by Jack, I submit that I did not have the intention to shoot Jack, I fired the two shots at Sigcu. My attention was fixed on the assaulter and the firearm in his hand.”

Horn added: “Should it be found that, objectively viewed, I did not act in self-defence and thus unlawfully, I respectfully submit that I was at all times relevant hereto under the firm impression that I was allowed to shoot Sigcu in self-defence and that I accordingly lack mens rea in the form of knowledge of unlawfulness with regard to the killing of Sigcu and Jack.”

Horn argued that the eyewitnesses’ “evidence was untrustworthy, unreliable and not adequately evaluated”. He said the court “failed to give sufficient weight to the serious contradictions of the eyewitnesses on material issues in dispute”. He argued that CCTV footage and an audio recording, objectively viewed, supported his version of self-defence.

A full bench of the high court in Cape Town ruled that “there is no other reasonable inference to draw but that Sigcu has pointed the firearm at Horn and his colleague in a threatening manner. 

“The two shots fired were also not a disproportionate response to neutralise the imminent threat that Sigcu posed at the time. The state simply failed to discharge its onus on both counts and the convictions cannot stand,” the judgment reads.

“It follows that the appeal against conviction must succeed.”


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

Comment icon

Related Articles