Different versions and lengths of CCTV footage that captured the alleged assault of a police officer by Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema and MP Mbuyiseni Ndlozi, were at the centre of testimony given in the Randburg Magistrate's Court on Tuesday.  

The two politicians are on trial before Magistrate Lieland Poonsamy.

They are accused of assaulting police officer, Lieutenant Colonel Johannes Jacobus Venter, at Winnie Madikizela-Mandela's funeral at the Fourways Memorial Park on 14 April 2018.

Venter, who was attached to the Presidential Protection Services, previously testified that Malema and Ndlozi pushed him at the entrance when he tried stopping their vehicle from entering the premises. The officer testified that the politician's vehicle was not part of the main convoy, which included the hearse, family and other dignitaries. 

He said he had asked the politicians to walk inside the premises, but they refused, pushing him aside, and drove inside. 

Although the duo's lawyer, Laurens Hodes, put it to him that the two were accredited, the officer testified it was not "visible". 

News24 previously reported that the incident was caught on CCTV.

Giving testimony on Tuesday, Deon Klingbiel, who worked at the memorial park from 2007 to 2020, said he did not witness the incident, but was only told about it afterwards by another officer, Lieutenant Colonel James Bronkhorst, who was also from the Presidential Protection Services. Klingbiel's evidence on Tuesday delved into the surveillance cameras at the memorial park. 

The witness told the court there were two cameras at the entrance. 

Access to CCTV footage

Klingbiel said Bronkhorst had asked whether the incident was captured on camera and whether it was possible to access it. 

He said that, later that day, he went to the control room and downloaded the footage from the system to a hard drive before transferring it to a USB, which he gave to Bronkhorst.

Klingbiel testified that he also downloaded a copy in another USB which he kept with him at home. 

Previously, defence lawyers raised issues that there were two videos depicting the turn of events; one short and another longer, which was concerning. 

Klingbiel, who worked at the control room where the feed from the cameras went to, said the cameras at the gate were in good condition on the day, although they had previously not worked. He added: "Because it (footage) was sensitive information, I personally removed it [from USB] so that no-one else could download it."

Klingbiel told the court that Bronkhorst told him that he needed the footage for internal use and that the police would later officially contact him. 

"He (Bronkhorst) did say it was for internal use. He also informed me that the police would come to me at a later stage because the police will have their own investigation. 

"I then made a copy for myself and I kept the file with me away from the work premises." 

Klingbiel said he only downloaded a portion which showed the incidents at the gate.

Hand over footage 

The witness said that a few weeks later he was contacted by another police officer, requesting him to hand over the footage, which he did. 

The National Prosecuting Authority had also contacted him. 

But Hodes questioned the witness regarding the lengths of the different versions he handed to officials. 

The defence lawyer also questioned why Klingbiel had kept multiple copies for himself. 

Klingbiel answered that he downloaded and kept the footage for himself so that they were not lost. 

Copy

Hodes also questioned him on aspects he had not mentioned in three statements he made, especially not mentioning that he initially handed a copy of the incident to Bronkhorst. 

The lawyer also quizzed the witness on where he had kept the USB, and whether he thought they were safe. 

Klingbiel also denied he leaked the footage to the media. 

Testifying before the court and corroborating Klingbiel's testimony, Bronkhorst said he had requested a copy of the footage cut from five minutes prior the incident and five afterwards. 

Bronkhorst, who also worked at the Presidential Protective Services, said he had requested the footage for an internal investigation. 

"When Mr Klingbiel gave me the USB I had it in my possession until the Monday after the meeting took place. I then used it in the briefing to the head of the Presidential Protective Services on the incident. All the time I had the USB with me." 

The police officer said he was contacted by the investigating officer who requested the footage he had, but he also redirected the officer back to Klingbiel who had the original source. 

Bronkhorst told the court he had also given Venter a copy of the video recording. 

Asked why he had given Venter a copy of the footage, Bronkhorst said he had no specific reasons, but did so because he was "central" to the probe and incident. 

"As an acting section head, it was necessary to look at the video material. I viewed it (footage) multiple times so that I gave correct information when I brief my seniors." 

Hodes also asked Klingbiel whether, from the footage, he could see the vehicles of different dignitaries driving in. 

Asked whether, from viewing the footage, he thought Malema and Ndlozi's vehicle was part of the convoy, Bronkhorst replied that it "looked" like it was.

The trial continues.