Mbombela – A suspected ATM bomber's attempt to sue the police ministry for R3.2 million in damages has been thwarted after a Mpumalanga High Court judge found his evidence, and that of his girlfriend, to be contradictory and false. Senzo Gerald Mkhabela sought compensation for injuries he sustained and damage to his car during a police operation aimed at preventing an ATM bombing at Matsulu shopping centre in Mbombela in 2023.
Judge Thandi Nyambi dismissed Mkhabela's application after scrutinising the conflicting accounts presented to the court. Mkhabela claimed that he had stopped his car, a Renault Tiber, outside a guesthouse in the company of his girlfriend and a friend. He alleged that an unknown, armed individual wearing a balaclava knocked on his window, leading him to believe they were being hijacked. In a panic, Mkhabela claimed he sped off, at which point his car was shot at multiple times, immobilising it and causing the occupants to flee. He sustained a bullet wound during the incident.
However, the police presented a starkly different version of events. They testified that they were conducting an operation based on a tip-off regarding a planned ATM bombing. Mkhabela's vehicle matched the description of one of the cars allegedly being used by the would-be robbers. According to the police, Mkhabela and the occupants of another vehicle had been observed scouting the area near the shopping centre before stopping at the guesthouse.
The police claimed that as they approached Mkhabela's vehicle, identifying themselves as police officers in full uniform with clearly marked bulletproof vests, Mkhabela opened fire on them. "The gunshots came from the driver’s side of the motor vehicle. The [police] retaliated by shooting back into the vehicle in order to safeguard their safety and to immobilise the car in order to apprehend the suspects," the judgment stated.
Judge Nyambi ruled that the force used by the police was proportional to the threat posed by Mkhabela's actions, noting that the lives of the police officers, and potentially others, were in danger.
Crucially, Mkhabela's own testimony was inconsistent. He initially claimed that the police shot at him while he was still parking, but later stated that they shot at him as he was speeding away.
Adding to the inconsistencies, Mkhabela's girlfriend testified that he drove off after being instructed to do so by his friend, and that the car was shot at as they fled. However, Judge Nyambi noted that Mkhabela himself had not stated he was instructed to drive off, but rather that he panicked and drove off. "[Mkhabela] told the court that his friend said [the police] wanted to hijack them, so he panicked and drove off. He did not state that he was instructed by his friend to drive off, but that he drove off because he panicked," read the judgment.
These contradictions severely undermined Mkhabela's credibility. The court questioned which of his versions was accurate.
In dismissing Mkhabela's application, Judge Nyambi stated unequivocally that Mkhabela "did not tell the truth" and that his version of events was "accordingly rejected as false". The court accepted the police's account of the incident, concluding that they were justified in shooting Mkhabela on the day in question. The judge said the court had no reservations in accepting the police’s version of the events and successfully justified their shooting of Mkhabela on the day.
Follow Us on Twitter
