Cape Town - The trial of four alleged members of the 28s gang accused of robbing missing German tourist Nick Frischke was closed to the public yesterday amid concerns for State witnesses’ safety.
After days of delays, the trial of Ishaam Fischer, Melvin Geunantin, Vanroy Petersen and Carlo Geunantin finally got under way in the Wynberg Regional Court.
The group from Hangberg face a plethora of charges linked to the missing 22-year-old, and a spate of robberies they allegedly committed across Hout Bay.
Frischke vanished without a trace while hiking on the Hangberg trail between Hout Bay and Sandy Bay on February 15, 2023 while visiting Cape Town.
While Frischke has never been found, the State has slapped the group with various charges including robbery, housebreaking, firearm and ammunition-related charges and charges under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act.
According to the indictment, the group are members of the 28s gang and committed a spate of robberies.
On the day Frischke was robbed, the gang also pounced on another victim in Hout Bay and allegedly stole an iPhone 13 Pro Max, Huawei P40, black Louis Vuitton handbag, R11 267 cash, and other items.
Later in the day, the group allegedly robbed Frischke of a Redmi Note 8 Pro cellphone and his backpack containing other valuables.
Court documents reveal that Carlo and Fischer allegedly broke into the home of a 79-year-old man and stole a flatscreen TV the next day.
During the court proceedings, families of the accused filled the public gallery and were kept a close eye on by officers from the Public Order Police.
The four were asked to plead on each of the charges and maintained their innocence, pleading not guilty to all the charges, despite the State’s indictment revealing that some of them were in fact linked with DNA samples left at one of the crime scenes.
Carlo, who stands accused on several counts on his own, shocked the court with his pleas of not guilty despite the reports showing he was found in possession of a firearm, ammunition, Mandrax, as well as a stolen TV.
Addressing the court the State prosecutor made an application for the evidence of two State witnesses to be heard in camera. It is understood that the witnesses feared the families of the accused.
The defence did not oppose the application and tempers flared in the public gallery when the families were removed.
The case will be opened to the public after the first two State witnesses have completed giving their testimonies.