‘Not possible’: Defence insists Senzo Meyiwa murder accused had no BlackBerry to call Kelly Khumalo

The defence in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial has contended that one of the five accused could not have communicated with singer Kelly Khumalo.

The cross-examination of retired cellphone data analyst Colonel Lambertus Steyn by the defence concluded at the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria on Monday.

Steyn, who previously testified just over a year ago, was recalled to clarify his evidence relating to the alleged communication between Khumalo and accused number five Fisokuhle Ntuli.

Ntuli allegedly called Khumalo on two occasions prior to Meyiwa’s murder on 26 October 2014.

The first call was made on 2 August 2014, followed by another on 15 October 2014.

The defence had raised concern about inconsistencies between Steyn and Vodacom forensic liaison supervisor Pinky Vythilingam’s evidence, accusing the state of fabricating a case.

Witness accused of manipulating evidence

During proceedings, Ntuli’s legal representative Advocate Zandile Mshololo argued that Khumalo – Meyiwa’s then-girlfriend – never received a call from a number belonging to her client.

Steyn previously told the court that Ntuli’s cellphone number, ending with 9202, was discovered on Khumalo’s mobile device.

But Mshololo maintained that the evidence was inconsistent, particularly concerning the timing of the calls.

“The reason why I am showing you these discrepancies is because I want to show you the level of fabrication that you have committed,” she told the witness.

The defence lawyer accused Steyn of tampering with the cellphone data.

ALSO READ: State witness insists Kelly Khumalo spoke to one of the accused before Meyiwa’s death

In response, the analyst defended himself, explaining that the information had been processed using a computerised program in the presence of state prosecutor George Baloyi.

“It does not matter if it was done with the Minister of Justice or Judge President, the point that I am making to you is that’s when you started manipulating this information and inserted the number that does not appeared on the Vodacom records,” Mshololo said.

Steyn clarified the data retrieved from the phones had nothing to do with the records from Vodacom.

“My lord, it’s clear to me that she wants to mislead me and the court. I stand by my point, I didn’t change anything on the information of these downloads.”

Watch the trial below:

The analyst also disagreed that Vodacom was the custodian of the call records.

“That’s one of the reasons why we always try to get hold of the cellphone handset to download what you can’t get from the Vodacom records.”

Data call in dispute

Steyn maintained that the first call Khumalo received was a data call, as she was using BlackBerry’s internet service.

It was heard in court that the second call made to Khumalo was a voice call via airtime.

Steyn explained on Monday that the first call was comparable to a WhatsApp call.

“If you are using BlackBerry Net, you are also using data. You are not using airtime.”

However, Mshololo argued that such a call could only be made to another BlackBerry user.

READ MORE: Calls between Kelly Khumalo and Senzo Meyiwa murder accused obtained unlawfully, says defence

She further pointed out that Ntuli did not have a BlackBerry mobile device at the time as he could not afford it.

“That’s according to you,” Steyn replied, adding that it can be correctly assumed that the accused had a BlackBerry.

“I’m telling you that was not possible. That is not true what you are testifying in this court. There was no way Ms Kelly Khumalo could have communicated via BlackBerry Net with someone who didn’t possess a Blackberry phone,” the advocate said.

“That’s your opinion,” the analyst responded.

Steyn stated that the call made to Khumalo’s number ending in 4358 demonstrated that “both parties must have used the same tool to make that transaction”.