Second bail bid for man accused of wooing women, making off with money and goods

A man accused of wooing women, and then allegedly making off without paying back loans and taking household items, will remain behind bars until judgment in his new application for bail.

Dressed in tracksuit pants, a warm jacket and a handmade Covid-19 mask, Rudi Brits listened intently in the Stellenbosch Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday, passing notes to his lawyer, Janine Boltman, while she pulled out all the stops arguing for his release pending trial.

For now, he faces charges of the theft of two laptops and cellphones, but the State is expected to add other charges.

He is alleged to have borrowed money from the women and not paid it back, or made off with items from their homes.

Boltman said he was not a flight risk, and questioned why he still remained behind bars after his arrest last year.

She said the laptops he allegedly took were valued at R3 100, yet the people arrested in connection with millions of rand in the VBS matter were granted bail.

She added that Justice Minister Ronald Lamola had stated that, due to Covid-19, people arrested for “petty” crimes be released from holding cells.

Earlier this year, police spokesperson Sergeant Noloyiso Rwexana issued a statement requesting other people to come forward after allegations that Brits would befriend women on social media and then, after moving in, would borrow money and vanish, while also taking some of their household goods.

She said a total of 20 cases were being coordinated by Stellenbosch police acting station commander Colonel Deon Beneke, which related to theft and fraud complaints from 2010 until November 2019.

Brits was arrested by the Eastern Cape Flying Squad towards the end of 2019.

Magistrate Cyril Kroutz called for nursing practitioner Zoleka Ntsinde to testify after prison official Erlene Govender told the court of Brits’ claims of poor treatment.

During his new bail application, the court heard that Brits claimed he had hurt his ankle on 31 July when police handled him roughly, and that he was not being treated properly.

He also recently announced he was going on a hunger strike and, although did not specify why, Govender said during the previous sitting she had heard it was because he wanted to be transferred to Pollsmoor prison.

Ntsinde testified that, on intake last year, he had weighed 90kg.

When weighed again in June, he weighed 103kg.

She said his blood pressure was checked every day since he announced his hunger strike, and it was normal, and not high as claimed.

She said that when she examined him at the time of the alleged ankle incident, he approached her “trying to limp”.

He initially refused to take his sock off, but relented. She said ankle injuries had distinct markers, such as swelling, or displaced bones, but she found no evidence of this.

She testified that he was disruptive and showed no respect to women, saying things like: “You! Woman, listen…” to her, unlike other detainees who addressed her as “sister” or “mama”.

She denied giving him pain tablets for the ankle – but, at this, Brits handed his lawyer a small white plastic dispensary packet containing nine anti-inflammatory tablets as proof.

The court digressed into how medication was dispensed, whether all medication bags were handed over sealed, and how they were identified.

Studying the packet, Ntsinde said it was not her handwriting on the bag.

However, she said that she did sometimes keep HIV patients’ names off packets, or marked them as containing other medication to prevent them from being laughed at.

She said the dispensing register could show if Brits had indeed been given the tablets.

Brits’ lawyer said, at the time of his arrest, there was no warrant of arrest out for him. On his instruction, she also disputed the validity of a warrant apparently still active in the Bedfordview area of Gauteng.

She also submitted that the Covid-19 pandemic posed a risk to Brits’ health, given the number of detainees in the facility.

She proposed the address of a woman in Pringle Bay, who would be able to accommodate Brits for the duration of the case.

She questioned why Beneke, who was usually associated with high-profile cases, was investigating her client.

She also claimed he had apparently already expressed empathy with one of the complainants.

“There are already a few questions of conflict in this regard,” she submitted.

She said that if he indeed was receiving food from a “back door” at the prison, the principle of him not wanting to eat while in prison was still important.

Prosecutor Linda Gerber opposed his release, saying Brits had a history of leaving town when the heat was on.

She said he has not stated his reasons for the hunger strike – and, regarding Beneke, as a police officer, he was entitled to arrest Brits if he thought there was enough evidence.

“Colonel Beneke did his work according to the book,” submitted Gerber.

Judgment in the bail application was reserved to 19 August, and Brits was taken back into custody.

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.