Lombard case: Minor testifies of fatal night

PALM RIDGE – The case of Owein Lombard, an Alberton resident who was fatally shot on June 9, 2012, has resumed in the Palm Ridge Magistrate’s court in the past week. The fatal road rage incident took place on the intersection of Michelle Avenue and Blue Crane Drive.

The court proceedings took place from September 15 to 17. The accused, Michael Sinequan, has pleaded not guilty to murder charges.

It was a tiring three days for the family and friends of Owein Lombard as the case appeared in court this past week.

There was an eyewitness who testified in court. A minor and a family member of Owein also gave testimony.

The accused, Michael Sinequan, who was a resident of Brackendowns at the time of the shooting, has since moved to Kwazulu Natal.

The eyewitness, Richard Yiunam, testified in court that he and a friend were in a vehicle on the corner of Michelle Avenue and Johan van der Merwe Avenue on the evening Owein was shot and killed.

He was busy typing a message on his phone when he heard the gunshots. He looked up and saw Owein, swaying before he fell to the ground.

A minor, and family member of Owein, testified about a normal family get together before an event that would have a big impact on his life.

According to his testimony his mother, Tersia, woke him up at about 23:00 in the evening and told him that it was time to go home. He fell asleep in front of the television, while his family members were socialising outside.

He got into the dubblecab bakkie with his younger brother, his sister and her friend, and his mother. As Owein was driving home, he and his sister’s friend was still awake and chatting and playing around with her phone.

He further testified that he became aware of a dark bakkie driving behind them, because there were bright lights from behind. The bakkie then continued to drive next to them, keeping the same pace as they were doing.

At this stage he explains that Owein started swearing and showing rude signs to the other bakkie. The dark bakkie all the while keeping the same pace as they were. If they were driving faster the other car would also drive faster.

According to the minor, Owein started to slow down because they were close to the slipway, but when they wanted to turn the dark bakkie was in front of them and they were not able to take the slipway. He further explained how Owein got out of the car and walked to the dark bakkie.

On Tuesday the minor was able to use a board as a visual depiction of the scene. The state explained that this would help the minor to visually depict the events he saw happening on that evening.

With the help of the board the minor was able to show how he remembered the two bakkies were stationed and where Owein was when he was shot.

According to him, he was able to see the whole scene, because he was leaning over the middle console of their bakkie.

He further explained that he could see Owein making a punching action into the bakkie. Shortly afterwards he heard two shots and saw the bakkie reversing and driving away.

He screamed to wake his mother who was sleeping in the car and then phoned his father.

Speaking for the defence, Advocate Myburgh pointed out that the minor had made two different statements after the event and that these two statements have discrepancies.

When the minor was asked why there were two statements taken, he explained that he felt he was able to describe in more detail in his second statement because he was calm and not as emotional when the first statement was taken.

He pointed out that when asked if Owein was drinking the evening of that he could not recall. They also had a problem with what the minor stated he saw because of how the two bakkies were positioned on the scene.

According to the defence his sight would have been blocked by the bakkie that Michael was driving.

The minor defended himself throughout saying that he only knows what he saw.

The proceedings were emotional and tiring for the 15 year old as he had to take a few moments every once in a while to compose himself. This was also the case for his mother Tersia who left the court room when she got emotional during the case.

At the end of the third day the defence then went ahead and explained to the minor how the accused remembered the evening.

Adv. Myburgh tells how his defendant and his wife wanted to have something to eat and decided to go out for supper. Unfortunately they did not find a suitable place that they wanted to dine and decided to head back home.

At this stage they saw a white bakkie driving recklessly on the road, and Mrs Sinequan made a comment that the driver was probably intoxicated.

The white double cab bakkie would be driving slow and then speed up and drive slow again, and Mr Sinequan would have to drive accordingly.

When they were close to the slipway he had to take to get to his home in Brackendowns, he overtook the white double cab bakkie that Owein was driving. He indicated that he had to go left. As the accused accelerated so did Owein.

He indicated that he was going left and as he took the turn, the two bakkies almost collided. It was at this stage that both bakkies had to brake.

Adv. Myburgh related how his client was repeatedly hit by Owein, how he tried to open the door, and as he was leaning to the left he pressed against his firearm. He then remembered he took it with him because of the high crime rate in the area.

He took out his firearm, shooting in the direction that the attack was coming from.

The accused said he did not know if any of the shots hit the attacker, he just wanted to get away.

Adv. Myburgh explained the accused’s action as a fight-or-flight reaction.

The accused has not yet presented his testimony in court. It has only been his lawyers who explained these details to the minor who was testifying.

The next witnesses will appear between February 23 and March 3, 2015.