Rosemary Ndlovu: The state wants to indict the former Tembisa policeman on all charges

Former police officer Rosemary Ndlovu appears in court. (Photo: Papi Morake/Gallo Images)

  • Rosemary Ndlovu’s trial is back in court for closing argument.
  • Ndlovu’s lawyer asked the court to dismiss the evidence because it was circumstantial.
  • However, the state argued that it presented a credible case that showed a similar pattern across all cases.

The prosecutor in the trial for the murder of former Tembisa police officer Rosemary Ndlovu asked the judge to convict her on all charges as the state presented a credible case in court.

Ndlovu was charged, among other things, with six counts of murder for allegedly hiring assassins to kill her family members for insurance purposes. Prosecutor Rihanna Williams said the court must prove her guilt on all charges.

“The state asks this esteemed court to conclude that the state has made a credible case that is not based solely on direct evidence — such as eyewitness testimony, documentary evidence of policies, expert evidence, mobile phone connectivity, and a video recording made on the way to the Gauteng Court,” Williams said in the Gauteng Court. High in Johannesburg that sat in Palm Ridge “Bushbachridge which contains a confession – but also circumstantial evidence”.

Read | Rosemary Ndlovu: More compelling evidence against ex-cop accused of multiple murders

Ndlovu allegedly orchestrated the murder of her boyfriend and five family members in order to profit from the life and funeral policies she obtained on their behalf.

On Thursday, both the state and the defense presented their closing arguments. Ndlovu’s lawyer argued, among other things, that the evidence presented by the state in court should be dismissed because it was “circumstantial”.

Certain inconsistencies

However, the state maintained that the only conclusion that could be drawn from the evidence was that the accused committed these crimes.

“I respectfully handed over this court [finds] Williams said the only reasonable conclusion that could be drawn from all the proven facts and circumstances and from the facts of common cause was that it was the accused who committed these crimes without a doubt.”

On the question of credibility, Williams said all the witnesses were apparently honest and reliable:

There are some inconsistencies in the state’s case, but none of the relative importance that would cause a court to reject witness evidence.

Speaking to News24 after the proceedings, a spokesperson for the National Prosecuting Authority, Vindi Majondwani, said the state had presented strong evidence that showed a pattern of crimes:

What can be drawn from the evidence is similar in all cases, a similar pattern or sequence of events occurred, and the only conclusion the court must make is that the accused is guilty of the crimes.

Judgment is reserved for October 22, 2021.

Did you know that you can listen to articles? Subscribe to News24 to access this exciting feature and more.

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: