The Durban High Court listened on Wednesday as Siyanda Harrison Mhlongo, a former KwaMashu police constable on trial for serious charges, painted a dramatically different picture of the events that led to his arrest. He was not, he claimed, engaged in a shootout with police. He was an innocent man caught in a hail of unprovoked gunfire.
Mhlongo, along with Khayelihle Mthethwa and Mzwandile Mazibuko, faces charges of robbery and murder of police officers, as well as the attempted murder of Captain Deendayalan Govender, Warrant Officer Viresh Pandutoay, and Sergeant Ntokozo Ndlela. The charges stem from a shootout between the Hawks and the suspects on August 18, 2024, following a robbery at the Royal Wholesalers store in Richmond.
But Mhlongo’s testimony offered a different narrativeone in which he was simply retrieving his car from a friend and became an unwitting victim.
The Visit to Ntuzuma
According to Mhlongo, he was off-duty on the day in question and went to a house on Ngwenya Road in Ntuzuma to collect his car. He had lent it to a colleague and friend, Sergeant Mbhele, who had since died. Mbhele called him, reporting ignition problems. Mhlongo discovered the issue was a missing chip in the car key, which he later found.
When he entered the housewhat the State would later describe as a “safe house” for criminalshe found about 12 men conversing. He noted a tense atmosphere but accepted a cold drink before stepping outside. Mbhele followed after Mhlongo peeped inside.
Mhlongo asked Mbhele to call the driver of a vehicle blocking him, as he wanted to leave. While they were talking, he saw an unmarked white vehicle approaching with strong blue lights flashing. Looking down from the upper-level house, he saw the car’s windows lowered and a rifle pointed out.
Then, he claims, the shooting started.
The Hail of Bullets
“I stood up and raised both my hands, and said they should stop shooting because I am a police officer,” Mhlongo told the court. “At that moment, I realised that I had been shot in my hand.”
The police in the vehicle, he alleges, began shooting before they even got out. There was no warning, no command to surrender, no opportunity to comply.
Everyone in the house fled. Mbhele ran. The other men scattered. Mhlongo ran in a different direction, jumping a fence and dropping his service pistol in the process. He did not stop to retrieve it. He hid in a neighbour’s shack, bleeding from his wounded hand.
A neighbour later gave him a lift as people started pointing at the house. Eventually, a person named Sibiya picked him up and took him to Mount Edgecombe Hospital for treatment.
The Hospital Arrest
Mhlongo said police arrived at the hospital, and he was discharged and apprehended. But his ordeal, he claims, did not end there.
He alleged that police assaulted and suffocated him until he confessed to being at the Royal Wholesalers store in Richmond. “I had no choice,” he told the court.
He flatly denied any involvement in the Richmond robbery. “I got to know of Richmond because of this case. They offered me to be a Section 204 witness, but I declined because I don’t know anything about this case.”
A Section 204 witness is one who receives indemnity from prosecution in exchange for truthful testimony against co-accused. Mhlongo’s refusal to accept that offer, if true, suggests either remarkable innocence or remarkable loyaltyor a calculation that the offer was not genuine.
The State’s Case
The State’s version is fundamentally different. Prosecutors allege that on August 18, Mhlongo and Mbhele were in full police uniform. They entered the Royal Wholesalers store under the pretense of a legitimate raid before committing the robbery with their accomplices. This is not a case of mistaken identity or wrong-place-wrong-time; it is an allegation of police officers using their uniforms and authority to commit serious crime.
The State witness, Mzomuhle Dlamini, has already testified to seeing Mhlongo at Richmond. Mhlongo dismissed this testimony as a lie.
The Safe House Connection
Hawks Provincial Commander Lieutenant Colonel Deendayalan Govender previously informed the court that the house on Ngwenya Road is the residence of a known cash-in-transit heist suspect, identified only as Zungu. This is not an innocent gathering place; it is, in the State’s telling, a location associated with serious criminal activity.
Mhlongo’s presence there, in this context, is deeply incriminating. He claims he was retrieving his car from a friend. The State sees it differently: a police officer consorting with known criminals at a known criminal location.
The Credibility Question
The court must now weigh Mhlongo’s testimony against the State’s evidence. Several factors complicate his account:
First, his service pistol was dropped at the scene. A police officer who flees from police, leaving his weapon behind, faces obvious questions about his state of mind and his reasons for flight.
Second, the house was not an innocent location. Even if Mhlongo did not know its reputation, his presence thereespecially in the company of known criminalsundermines his claim of innocence.
Third, the Section 204 witness offer. If the State believed Mhlongo was a minor player or innocent, they would not have needed to offer him indemnity. The fact that they did suggests they see him as implicated.
But Mhlongo’s allegations of police misconduct must also be considered. If officers did indeed shoot without warning, if they did assault and suffocate him to extract a confession, those are serious breaches of procedure and law. They would taint any subsequent evidence.
The Broader Context
This case highlights the dangerous blurring of lines in South African policing. Police officers accused of using their positions to commit crime. Hawks units engaged in shootings at suspected criminal locations. Safe houses that are known to authorities but apparently not raided. A criminal justice system where suspects and police trade accusations of misconduct.
For Mhlongo, the stakes could not be higher. He faces charges that include murder and robbery. If convicted, he faces decades in prison. His testimony is an attempt to avoid that fateto place himself on the side of innocence rather than guilt.
For the Hawks, the allegations of unprovoked shooting and post-arrest assault are serious. If proven, they would damage the credibility of the entire operation and could affect the admissibility of evidence.
What Comes Next
The trial continues. Mhlongo will face cross-examination, where the State will probe the weaknesses in his account. The house on Ngwenya Road, the dropped pistol, the presence of known criminals, the refusal of Section 204 witness statusall will be scrutinised.
The State’s witnesses, including Dlamini and the Hawks officers involved, will have their testimony weighed against Mhlongo’s claims. The court will have to decide who is telling the truth.
For now, Mhlongo sits in the dock, a former police constable accused of serious crimes, telling a story of innocence and police brutality. The court will decide whether that story holds up against the evidence.
