A suspected cable thief who was let off the hook after the state did not succeed wit their case, lost his claim for damages against the SAPS. Court said police had sufficient reasons for suspecting him of the crime when they had arrested him
Image: File
An alleged cable thief who was apparently caught red-handed by the police and arrested, only to be later cleared on technical grounds by the court, sued the SAPS for damages, but the court dismissed his claim.
A judge sitting in the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, said the fact that he was let off the hook does not detract from the reasonableness of the suspicion that he had in fact committed the crime.
Ramathafeng Mphamo claimed damages from the police ministry for what he deemed his unlawful arrest.
The court was told that on December 24, 2022, a private security officer received a call from his control centre, advising him that two suspicious-looking individuals were standing next to and in a trench that had been dug along the side of the road.
He was requested to go and investigate, and on his arrival, he found the plaintiff and another person – one was standing next to the trench while the other was in it. One was in possession of a hacksaw. They were clearly tampering with the underground cable, which had been partially exposed by the trench and had been cut on one side, the court was told.
On his inquiry as to what they were doing, the one in the trench replied that they were “hustling for money.” He arrested them and called the police. The police detained the pair at Mondeor Police Station, where they were held.
They were released six months later after facing charges of tampering with essential infrastructure and after standing trial in the Johannesburg Magistrates Court. By then, they had been prosecuted, and the trial proceeded to the close of the State’s case. At that point, they were discharged in terms of section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act and acquitted.
Mphamo testified he was on his way home from work in Glenvista, where he had done some plumbing work. He was carrying a rucksack on his back, which contained a hacksaw, which, according to him, is one of his tools of the trade.
On his way home, he met his co-accused at the trench with the exposed cable, and he asked for a cigarette. He then continued his walk home, and at some distance away, a private security officer in his security vehicle pulled up alongside him. The security officer, out of the blue, told him that there had been an incident in Silver Avenue and that the plaintiff had to accompany him to the scene.
Upon their arrival at the scene, he was handcuffed by security officers and ordered to get into the trench. The security officers, apparently for no reason at all, accused him of being one of the persons who had cut the copper cable, which he could see in the ditch and that it had been tampered with. He denied that he had cut the cable and explained that he was coming from his workplace and was on his way home from work. The security officers were not interested in his explanation, he said.
He said he was detained under harrowing conditions, and although he was granted R10,000 bail, he could not afford it. The fact that the court had discharged him showed that the State never had a case against him, Mphamo argued.
The SAPS, however, maintained that he was reasonably suspected of tampering with essential infrastructure. In turning down his claim, the court found his detention was not unlawful as he was granted bail. There is also no evidence to support a conclusion that the police, when arresting the plaintiff, acted unreasonably and without reasonably suspecting that he had committed an offence, the court found.