No ruling yet in rhino horn case


Pretoria - The North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria will rule on Friday if the criminal trial of three alleged rhino horn racketeers will be postponed or if the State should be ordered to withdraw the 50 charges against them.

Prosecutor Hein van der Merwe asked Judge Nomande Mngqibisa-Thusi to postpone the trial of safari operators Clayton Fletcher of Bloemfontein, Gert Saaiman of Pretoria and Pretoria hunter Frans Andries van Deventer to April next year.

This was to give the State the opportunity to consult properly with the on/off key witness in its case, Van Deventer's brother Deon.

Deon van Deventer and his brother Nic were sentenced to respectively eight and three years effective imprisonments in terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, on condition that they became State witnesses against the three accused.

Both brothers thereafter refused to testify, but according to the State, Deon van Deventer had since changed his mind and was prepared to testify, although not at the moment as he feared for his safety in jail.

Deon van Deventer apparently made a statement in which he said his family was pressuring him and two private detectives had visited him in jail and offered him money not to testify.

Racketeering

Information also came to light that the same two men had offered a large sum of money to the former investigating officer to alter his evidence, resulting in a corruption docket being opened.

Van der Merwe said the State was in the process of arranging for Deon van Deventer, his former wife and children to be placed under witness protection.

Charges were earlier this week withdrawn against Kumaran Moodaly of Port Elizabeth, who would also become a State witness if the trial proceeded.

Van der Merwe described Deon van Deventer as the glue that held the mosaic of the State's case together as he was the only person who could give information from the first to the last incident.

He said without Deon van Deventer the State would not be able to prove racketeering charges against the three accused.

- SAPA

Cheers,

~ Alan

BTW, the home town of Clayton Fletcher is wrong. It is Vryburg in the North-West Province and not Bloemfontein.

He runs Sandhurst Hunting Safaris.

Sandhurst Safaris

Gert Saaiman no longer has a website. I suppose he is smarter than Out of Africa.

Cheers,

~ Alan

Thank you.

Rich

Rich.

My pleasure to spotlight these bastards for you.

They were due back in court today for a ruling on their postponement hearing.

However, with the news in the article above about the death threats and large bribes being offered... I hope the judge orders them all incarcerated for the duration, and for the trial to proceed forthwith.

Cheers,

~ Alan

Seems they dropped the charges
Rhino poaching case thrown out
JP du Plessis | 3 Hours Ago

The case against three suspected rhino poachers has been struck off the roll by the North Gauteng High Court.

The state applied for a postponement in the trial earlier this week but the court ruled that the state did not give sufficient reasons and any more postponements would be unfair to the accused.

Judge Nomonde Mngqibisa said the state’s appeal application is based on an uncooperative convicted criminal, who is also the prosecution’s star witness.

She said while she understands he is making it hard for the state to prepare for trial, the three accused - George Fletcher, Gerhardus Saaiman, Frans van Deventer - as well as their families, are living under the stigma of the charges which were levelled four years ago.

The judge said they are losing their social standing because of delays caused by a man in prison.

Mngqibisa said the court will not fail the accused and she struck the matter from the roll. The accused celebrated by throwing their hands in the air and hugging their loved ones and their lawyers, while state prosecutors sat in silence, shaking their heads.

You look a little foolish, Alan

No, Alan Bunn just demonstrated what a prize arsehole he is. Ha Ha Ha! What a dick. Oh my!

And, Bunn, in future, spare us your nifty cutting & pasting of other peoples reporting - especially regarding such matters you have absolutely NO knowledge of. The "bastards" (as you put it) just pissed on you battery - big time.

Get a life and try hard to be a little original ... otherwise get help.

Jhaney & Yama

Are you two guys nucking futs?

Why is the fact that 3 rhino poachers managed to get away with their crimes because disorganised lawyers (or worse) managed to stuff up the prosecution?

I reckon you two guys need to take a step back and re-evaluate whose side you should be on and then if you decide you're hunters you should be supporting Alan's attempts to bring poachers to justice at every opportunity.

Would the gentlemen above who take this news as cause for celebration kindly explain to rest precisely why?

Was there a victory for for the hunting fraternity that the rest of us missed?

It was a court case that never should have been. The SA govt is sterile and incapable of getting a hold on the very serious current rhino problem. Read the case material and you'll understand. The state officials got carried away and drummed up and charged people all over based on the ramblings of a guy caught red-handed in Natal - with no proof whatsoever. He is an 11-time convicted criminal on similar charges and has no credibility - and tried this to get out of jail sooner than his 10 years. That is why the whole house of cards imploded at last - because it could not be postponed any longer. It has been limping along for going 5 years and is was obvious that these charges were unfounded. What has happened to innocent until proven guilty guys? The victory for the hunting industry is that long standing outfitters labled as the bad guys are in fact not.

quote:

Was there a victory for for the hunting fraternity that the rest of us missed

The war against poaching syndicates will always be a tough one especially when the prosecutor and judge are for sale as the ruling obviously confirms.
Regrettably there is truth in the saying: " money talks and bullshit walks".
As for the two posters popping champagne at this 'great victory': Get a life!

Thank you Yama, is there a link to more information on this case?

I am an ardent supporter of the principle of innocent until proven guilty, I do realise however that on occasion the guilty get found innocent by a variety of means ranging from out and out perversion of the course of justice, through to the state prosecutor cocking something simple up.

If indeed the names of these three were plucked out of thin air as scapegoats, I could belive such a thing in consideration of the circumstances of the case; however if these three managed to buy or luck there way out of fair charges, I can also believe that in consideration of the circumstances of the case.

Therefore I thirst for more information, can you help?

Did you attend the court hearings? You are making this up Steve - and you also do not have adequate knowledge of anything other than the sensational material published in the newspapers and the internet. These fellows are not poachers (as you say) - but why fuck up a good story with the facts, huh?

Give the guys a break, they are not guilty of charges make in haste and in error - probably by an over-eager state proscecutor. How difficult is that to comprehend? The public wants blood, but we cannot just settle for any blood - and the state is incapable of getting a grip on the very serious rhino problem.

These fellows have been falsely charged, the court determined that - and not by reading the second hand "Alan Bunn cut&paste news" either. The media coverage of this 5 year saga has been so sensational and poor that it makes me want to support the media tribunal that the ANC government wants to introduce - and that is sad.

Which side am I on? Easy one. I'm on the side of justice. Someone gets accused, he has the right to a fair trial and a chance to defend himself. This has not happened in the case of theses lads. Why not? Because the state realized that the allegations were unfounded and they were hoping for a miracle I suppose.

The hunting industry does not carry a special status in terms of justice. We need to take it easy on the emotions and stick to the facts - the real facts - as that gives credibility. This does not come from a cyber-space lynch mob movement.

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
Why is the fact that 3 rhino poachers managed to get away with their crimes because disorganised lawyers (or worse) managed to stuff up the prosecution?

A prime example of a completely uninformed and judgemental statement. Irresponsible actually.

Would "I rest my case" be an appropriate reply?

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
The war against poaching syndicates will always be a tough one especially when the prosecutor and judge are for sale as the ruling obviously confirms.
Regrettably there is truth in the saying: " money talks and bullshit walks".
As for the two posters popping champagne at this 'great victory': Get a life!

quote:

Originally posted by yama900:
A prime example of a completely uninformed and judgemental statement. Irresponsible actually.

Would "I rest my case" be an appropriate reply?

quote:

Originally posted by fujotupu:
The war against poaching syndicates will always be a tough one especially when the prosecutor and judge are for sale as the ruling obviously confirms.
Regrettably there is truth in the saying: " money talks and bullshit walks".
As for the two posters popping champagne at this 'great victory': Get a life!

Perhaps after you've provided some sort of evidence of fit-up it might be, certainly.

I find it interesting that you have provided no proof to back up what you say. Isnt that exactly what you said Alan has done? I might add that he at least dosnt hide behind some screen name. If you want some credibility please let us know who you are as well as post the substantiating information you imply you have. If you are just standing up for a friend because you believe in them that is ok too but please say as much. This whole poaching thing is a dirty business. It taints all of us and emotions run high. Actuall facts are always good.

quote:

I find it interesting that you have provided no proof to back up what you say. Isnt that exactly what you said Alan has done? I might add that he at least dosnt hide behind some screen name. If you want some credibility please let us know who you are as well as post the substantiating information you imply you have. If you are just standing up for a friend because you believe in them that is ok too but please say as much. This whole poaching thing is a dirty business. It taints all of us and emotions run high. Actuall facts are always good.

Mike has hit the nail....tell us YAMA900 about your detailed sources as you appear extremely close to the case. Are you a SA counsel? student of the court? friend of the accused? an employee? As you have summarily dismissed all other data and viewpoints,you must be very close to these parties...or are you a clever troll looking for action?
Bob

Mike, Bob - No, not quite. Alan simply regurgitates other peoples "news" as a sort of self-appointed "cyber-cop of poaching" on AR. And you are right on the numbers when saying emotons run high, so unchecked fuelling of these emotions (anywhere) is the last thing anyone should do. Especially if it is simply not factually sound and correct.

I have poor comms at the place I'm staying and will be on safari for 10 or 14 days, so you'll have to hang in there a little.

I'll gladly give you detailed info. But then - on second thoughts - does it not normally work that the accuser needs to provide the proof when charging/blaming someone?

It does if you are backing up what you say with some kind of factual data. When you, I, or anyone wants to convince others of why we believe what we do it is necessary. Otherwise, you are trying to put out a fire with gasoline. Also, most of us here are known to each other so if you want credibility you should identify yourself.

I hit the enter key too quickly. I cant edit posts so I will just have to add to it. I will be patiennt for you to be able to put your information together and post it when you are able at the end of your safari. Please realize that this is about getting to the truth wherever that might be.

yama

quote:

I'll gladly give you detailed info. But then - on second thoughts - does it not normally work that the accuser needs to provide the proof when charging/blaming someone?

around here it works two ways, in that for us to belive your statements, you "cleverly" dodging the question, reflects poorly on whatever you say in this tread.

if you do have information regarding this that contradicts the news stated by alan, please post it, and try to refrain from personal attacks as well, as it makes what you say a bit more trustworthy.

best regards

peter

The following is a quote from the trial judge in the case in question. "The judge said cognisance had to be taken of the accused's right to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty and their right to a fair trial within a reasonable period." This says it all. It is not our job on AR to be the judge, jury and executioner, period
Jim

quote:

Originally posted by jhaney:
The following is a quote from the trial judge in the case in question. "The judge said cognisance had to be taken of the accused's right to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty and their right to a fair trial within a reasonable period." This says it all. It is not our job on AR to be the judge, jury and executioner, period
Jim

If you read the original piece in it's entirity though, it seems to be pretty evident that at least some of the case was still being investigated and in the light of recent arrests, I'd say it's fairly logical to assume that one might possibly be related to the other.

Whilst it looks to me as though the prosecution may well have stuffed things up (either deliberately or by accident) it strikes me that to celebrate the fact that the prosecution didn't get a chance to actually prosecute most certainly isn't a cause for celebration.

As for being Judge, Jury & Executioner, weren't you one of the two that was so keen and so quick to bury Alan who has actually done a great deal to bring this rash of rhino poaching and related corruption to the public's knowledge?

quote:

It has been limping along for going 5 years and is was obvious that these charges were unfounded

For a case to "limp" for 5 years suggests the crippling effect has been created "either deliberately or by accident" (Shakari quote) and if the charges were unfounded as you claim, any lawyer with balls would not have allowed the case to drag 5 years.

Had the accused been someone else without healthy financial backing, this case may have wound up differently and in a much shorter time frame and you have to admit that your friends must be pretty well off to be able to support their legal representatives for 5 years

So for the Judge to throw the case out on the grounds that the accused were denied "their right to a fair trial within a reasonable period" does indeed give reason to raise an eyebrow.

Very smart defense attorneys will do their best to delay "forever" a actual trial, especially if they have a weak defense....SA is just like the US. The prosecutor's office I am sure is just as understaffed as in any jurisdiction in the States.
Bob

When a lurker de-cloaks and comes out of the chute cussing and squealing like a stuck pig, a journalist knows that they are doing a good job!

If it wasn't for Kathi and I cutting and pasting news reports from our colleagues in the African media, the members of this forum would miss out on a lot of pertinent news from the Dark Continent. This little tantrum just encourages me to re-double my efforts.

Not only do I feel foolish, but actually chagrined that the witness, Deon van Deventer, feared for his safety in jail, wanted his former wife and children to be placed under witness protection, had his family pressuring him, and finally had two private detectives visit him in jail and offer him money not to testify!!!

I mean, damn, who would think all that would throw the case?

I got an email about a month ago saying Fletcher and Saaiman were bragging that the State was going to drop the charges against them. I wonder how they knew the judge was going to disallow continuation and drop the case? I didn't think much about it at the time, but maybe they were privy to some inside information that no one else knew about.

Also, got this email from someone who knows Fletcher well. With the report of their intimidation efforts, their confidence before the hearing on getting it suppressed, and this message, I appears to me that with this much smoke, there may be much fire. Everyone is free to make up their own mind about who is a bastard and who is not.

"His family has a long history with the law mostly regarding hunting and keeping of predators. His father was always busy with animal smuggling, mostly predators there was always old circus lions and tigers on the farm, and he had a market for everything from the heart, nails to the testicles. At one stage they had 4 lions in the top ten Rowland Ward, some of those I am sure were old circus lions."

"I believe he is not the sole owner of Sandhurst Safaris, the word was that an American client invested millions into the operation. When we did our PH course, he actually did not want to register as he was notified that the excuse of not knowing the law will not hold up in court after passing the exam, as the nature conservation law was one of the subjects you had to pass in order to get a license."

"There was always more predators hidden in cages on the farm. The problem is these guys always get a way out of it.
Hope this will help a little bit, will let you know if I get more."

Cheers,

~ Alan

Saaiman Hunting

Rich,

Sorry for the error in the previous post. I guess he isn't smarter than OoA, after all.

Cheers,

~ Alan

quote:

If it wasn't for Kathi and I cutting and pasting news reports from our colleagues in the African media, the members of this forum would miss out on a lot of pertinent news from the Dark Continent. This little tantrum just encourages me to re-double my efforts.

Alan...thank you for your efforts !!
Bob

where there is smoke there is normally a fire!!

from my side as well: thanks Alan and Kathi

From Africa Geographic, here is a good overall look at the alleged rhino poaching activities of Dawie Groenewald, Gert Saaiman, and Clayton Fletcher.

Additional information on Out of Africa's operation in Botswana under the name, Ethnic Conservation Services.


The second big bust

By Ian Michler

I have been away on safari over the last few weeks and come back to mixed news on the rhino poaching crisis. On the plus side is the huge bust by the police and other agencies of the Groenewalds and their accomplices. It was only going to be a matter of time before the authorities made the breakthrough and for this they need to be congratulated. There will no doubt be more arrests to follow and one hopes this is the next big step in the unravelling of the organized crime syndicates targeting South Africa’s wildlife.

As expected, the eleven arrested come from the hunting, game ranching and veterinary professions and all have extensive experience in these industries. Given the state of South Africa’s wildlife industry, I am surprised that so many are surprised that ranchers, vets and hunters are so involved. Who else has the knowledge, information and means at their disposal to run such effective wildlife crime syndicates? And the laws and attitudes that prevail are a perfect template for this sort of abuse.

Groenewald particularly is known to the world of hunting and conservation: his company, the notorious Out Of Africa Adventurous Safaris, has been banished from Zimbabwe for various illegal and unethical practices and has also been expelled from local hunting associations. Not as well known is the still unsettled case in Botswana against Ethnic Conservation Services, a South African registered company that is a front for Groenewald and Out of Africa. This company sub-leased NG49, a hunting concession alongside the Makgadikgadi Pans and then, according to community leaders and court papers, after conducting numerous hunts, it reneged on paying over US$200 000 of community concession fees and trophy fees to the Xhauxhwatubi Development Trust. More recently, Groenewald has spent time in a US jail for trying to illegally import a leopard trophy.

Not surprisingly though, the company continues to run a website and they still advertise hunting safaris into Botswana and Tanzania. With the shameful charge sheet they have accumulated, the respective authorities from these two countries should, at the very least, look to banish any representative of the company until such time that the courts can prove otherwise. They would also do well to take a look at who Out of Africa partners with in Botswana and Tanzania – and then ask some serious questions of them: it may very well lead to the discovery of further transgressions.

The case has been postponed to April 2011 when all eleven suspects will face fraud, corruption and various other charges of contravening the environmental and biodiversity acts. In the meantime, a string of high-profile lawyers and a war-chest of funds are likely to be mobilized.

And while talking of throwing money around, this leads to the not-so-good news and the case of another group of hunters on charges of racketeering and money laundering related to allegations of running a rhino poaching syndicate. The Fletcher and Saaiman case that many readers are now familiar with was temporarily removed from the court roll on Friday. This has come about after the States key witnesses, the two van Deventer brothers that I interviewed in Kroonstad prison, have suddenly changed their minds about testifying. One refuses to give evidence for the state and the other wants witness protection before he considers testifying.

I spent a full morning questioning these two and they were absolutely adamant about their story, so why the sudden turnaround? There is no doubt as to who benefits from this development and as a result, further charges, that of intimidation and defeating the ends of justice could very well be added to the charge sheet when the state re-opens the case.

And this development begs the question: are we seeing the beginning of Mafia-styled payoffs and/**or** threats in these rhino poaching cases where witnesses are placed under severe pressure not to testify?

Cheers,

~ Alan

Well, I put my request for or new guest to provide some backing for what he said. That was the 17th of Oct. It is now Nov 4 and we have yet to see any post. It makes me wonder if there is any evidence to substantiate his claims.

Relax Mike, Alan beat me to it ...

http://forums.accuratereloadin...1411043/m/1861035241

You need to spend even more time on AR, and I'm not a new member. Joined in 2006.

Well, Im not sure what your point was about spending more time on AR was. I suppose it was supposed to be some type of insult. Sorry, I didnt take it as such. As far as your being around since 2006 all I looked at was your status as "new member" and the fact that you had about 20 or so posts. I see Alan posted some more nnews on the topic. I however thought you were going to give us some information in support of these gentleman. Maybe I dont see it but I hardly see these press releases as a positive thing. It says there has been no aquital and can be pursued at any time. I was actually hoping for some information thst showed the other sides defense. I didnt expect a vitriolic response that was still without factual evidence or merit. Last we asked you to identify yourself and give some credibility to your statements. You have yet to do that as far as I know. So the question remains, who are you and what is your interest in this?

I know none of the people in this discussion, either posters or the accused. My observation is this: Why is there a market for illegal wildlife? Now, I know about the demand for body parts in Asia and the Mid-East, but HUNTERS? Perhaps I am naieve, but I ahve never, ever known a hunter that would be inclined to indulge in illegal or unethical preactices to obtain a trophy. Maybe I just travel in the wrong (Not sufficiently elevated) circles, but I do know a couple of publicized, well know, successful international hunters. Neither would be tempted to engage in any but fair chase. I myself have done 10 safaris to Africa, one Argali hunt in Kyrgystan, and countless hunts in Alaska, lower 48, etc. Who are these low-lifes who support OoA and its ilk? Just asking.

@Brice: 'Hunters' get in trouble with the law all the time trying to obtain a trophy. The money, time, and effort required is just too much for a lot of people, and they start looking for a short cut.

BTW, do you think, if these international hunter that you know had done anything illegal or unethical, that they would come out and admit it to you!?!? Yes, it appears you are incredibly naive, or perhaps disingenuous.

Who are the low-lifes that support OoA and its ilk? All of the SCI leadership who knew OoA was ripping off the rank and file SCI members, but continued to suppress the ethics committee hearings, and continued to let OoA exhibit at the big SCI convention in Reno as well as local chapter fund raisers.


Here is the full text and link to the news article on Clayton Fletcher and Gert Saaiman's case. It is hard for me to see how anyone can read this and decide that they were unfairly charged and let off because they were innocent. Pretty standard practice for alleged crime organizations to threaten witnesses or attempt to pay them off.


Pretoria - The High Court in Pretoria on Friday refused to postpone the criminal trial of three alleged rhino horn racketeers and ordered that the 50 charges against them be withdrawn for now.

Judge Nomonde Mngqibisa-Thusi dismissed an application by the state to postpone the trial of safari operators Clayton Fletcher of Bloemfontein, Gert Saaiman of Pretoria and Pretoria hunter Frans Andries van Deventer.

She struck the case off the roll and ordered that it may not be reinstituted without written instructions from the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The charges include racketeering, money laundering, theft and contraventions of the Aviation and Environmental Protection Act.

The judge said the sole reason for the postponement sought by the State related to consultations with the witness Deon van Deventer (Frans Van Deventer's brother) in order to persuade him to testify and prepare him for the trial.

Van Deventer and his older brother Nic were sentenced to eight and three years effective imprisonment respectively on charges relating to poaching in terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State.

The provision was that they became State witnesses against the three accused. Both brothers thereafter refused to testify.

According to the State, Deon van Deventer has since changed his mind and was prepared to testify, although not at the moment as he feared for his safety in jail.

According to a statement by the investigating officer, Van Deventer said he had been pressured by family and two unidentified men not to testify.

He was now only prepared to testify once he had been released on parole.

The same two men had allegedly also visited the former investigating officer in the case and tried to persuade him to adapt his evidence.

Van Deventer had, however, assured his family that he would not testify and that he was going to string the State along.

The judge said the State had made no submissions whatsoever about how it intended persuading Van Deventer to testify and the court was not convinced that he would in fact testify.

The State admitted it could not prove charges of racketeering and money laundering against the accused and that it had no case at all against Saaiman without Van Deventer's evidence.

The defence argued that the accused and their families had already suffered severely after they were arrested in 2006.

Their assets were seized, the personal lives affected and their capacity to earn an income severely curtailed.

The judge said cognisance had to be taken of the accused's right to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty and their right to a fair trial within a reasonable period.

She said it would be unfair to expect of the accused to continue suffering prejudice while the State tried to persuade Van Deventer to testify.

Fletcher's advocate said they were very happy about the ruling -- although not about the media coverage of the case.

They were satisfied that justice had prevailed.

National Prosecuting Authority spokesman Mthunzi Mhaga said the NPA did not see the ruling as a setback.

"This is not an acquittal. We have the right to reinstitute charges once we've resolved whatever challenges we have," he said.

It is not yet known if the accused will seek an order to set aside the State's confiscation of their assets.


Rhino case struck off roll: Fletcher, Saaiman, van Deventer

Cheers,

~ Alan

Alan..: it seems all the comments about your posting this, reminds me of an old saying we had in the green machine; "no good deed goes unpunished". Keep informing us!

May be we should remember "adqueen".

Who came on here and started defending Out of Africa, and then we found out that she was one of their employees.

Alan is posting using his own name.
It would be interesting if the other individual gives us his name and relationship to all this saga.

Doesn't the incoming President of SCI, Kevin Anderson, own a substantial part of Out of Africa?

One would think that he would step down as his Presidency would be a detriment to the ideals of SCI knowing what we know about his company.

Assuming of course, that SCI still has Ideals and is not the corrupt organization it appears to have become.

quote:

Originally posted by Gator1:
Doesn't the incoming President of SCI, Kevin Anderson, own a substantial part of Out of Africa?

One would think that he would step down as his Presidency would be a detriment to the ideals of SCI knowing what we know about his company.

Assuming of course, that SCI still has Ideals and is not the corrupt organization it appears to have become.

Well, SCI has had some shady characters as presidents in the past, so it will not surprise me if they stoop so low as to allow Kevin to be the next president.

What a crying shame that the biggest orgenization we have which is supposed to be defending our sport, is getting involved in such unsavoury companies as Out of Africa!

Someone at SCI need to get their heads out of the sand and do something positive now.

Otherwise they might never recover from this sad fiasco.

If Yama900 had kept his mouth shut, this thread would have gone off the front page in a couple of days and that would have been that.

But, since his outburst, it has gone on and on. Thanks, Yama900!

You are personally responsible for making several hundred more international big game hunters aware of the names of these (alleged) rhino poachers.


@Saeed & Gator1: Don't hold your breath that SCI will do anything about OoA, rhino poaching, or anything else for that matter. They can only hunker down and wait for this latest scandal to blow over.

It seems as if SCI has nothing but contempt for the membership that supports them... much like PETA and HSUS in that regard.

Cheers,

~ Alan