Pretoria - A witness to an alleged gang-related murder who experiences panic attacks every time she has to relive the ordeal when her partner was shot dead in front of her, will not have to face the 20 accused persons who are on trial.
The court has ordered that she may give her evidence behind closed doors.
The State turned to the Western Cape High Court to ask that the pregnant witness, who is terrified of the accused, testify behind closed doors through a closed-circuit television and that her identity should not be disclosed to the public.
While the accused all know her identity, the State said the woman is so terrified of them that she wouldn’t be able to adequately deliver her evidence while they sat a few metres away from her.
The 20 accused are facing a slew of 145 charges, including murder, which relates to the woman’s partner, who is said to have been a member of the 28 Gang himself. He was shot dead when the accused allegedly broke into the house where the couple lived.
In asking that the name of the witness be kept secret and that she may testify from an adjacent room to the courtroom, the State submitted the evidence of a clinical psychologist who assessed the witness.
The psychologist noted that the witness suffered from anxiety and that she experienced symptoms of a panic attack when she recounted the crime she witnessed. She also had symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and was visibly distressed by the events she had witnessed.
In her expert opinion, there was a possibility that this witness may experience further trauma if she testified in the presence of the accused. She recommended that the witnesses testify in camera.
Her sentiments were shared by the investigating officer, who said the pregnant witness was terrified and that this would have severe security implications and consequences for her and her minor children if made known.
While most of the accused did not object to the application, one accused insisted that she should appear in open court.
He said that he was entitled to a public hearing in an open court in terms of the Constitution.
He also said that he stands accused of charges of murder that he did not commit. Therefore, he had the right to see the witness present in court so that her demeanour could be observed when his legal representative cross-examined her. He also said that in any event he knew who she was, as he saw her statement.
Judge J D Lekhuleni said it was trite that trial proceedings should be held in open court unless there were compelling reasons to close the court doors for the public and the media.
“Undoubtedly, it would be detrimental to the principles of fairness and justice to force an adult witness who is afraid of the accused to testify in open court where she may experience anxiety while recounting what she saw during the commission of the alleged crime,” the judge said.
“To expose such a witness to aggressive cross-examination by the accused would not be in line with the proper administration of justice. In my view, such an approach would have a deleterious effect on the witness and expose her to secondary trauma,” the judge said.
He also considered the fact that her evidence may be lacking if she was forced to testify in open court due to her fear of the accused.
The judge said the protection of witnesses in certain cases was intended to ensure that the court obtained a full and candid account from the witness of the acts complained of.
The judge said, with the evolution of technology, it was expected that various criminal cases would be heard through a virtual platform in the near future.
Pretoria News