The Unraveling Cross-Examination: A Breakdown of Guabini’s Torture Case
Cross-examination is supposed to challenge a witness’s credibility.

It’s the moment when the reliability of the evidence presented is tested.

It aims to discredit the witness or, at the very least, show inconsistencies in their testimony that can lead to doubt.

This is the essence of cross-examination: to create in the mind of the court that the witness’s testimony should be discarded because of unreliability or a lack of truthfulness.

So, when Baloi took to the task of cross-examining Guabini, the expectation was that he would challenge the details surrounding Guabini’s torture.

Instead, Baloi missed the mark entirely.

The Flawed Cross-Examination
Advocate Baloi’s approach to questioning Guabini should have focused on the core issue at hand — the brutal assaults and the potential for torture.

Guabini, who had suffered horrific abuse, had clearly testified to being kicked and stepped on, to the extent that he rolled about 5 meters like a barrel.

This was no ordinary case of an angry suspect in a heated moment.

This was about systematic mistreatment at the hands of law enforcement officers.

But instead of confronting these serious allegations, Baloi fixated on irrelevant aspects, like the police occurrence books.

For those who are unfamiliar with this concept, the police occurrence book is a record maintained by police officers, outlining events and actions taken.

However, what does it have to do with the abuse Guabini suffered? What relevance does it have to the core issue of torture at the hands of the police?
Baloi’s continued focus on these occurrence books was an unforced error.

He started quoting entries that, according to him, stated Guabini had made no complaints when he was taken to court by Sergeant Muani.

This was, quite frankly, an absurd line of questioning.

The occurrence books belong to the police, not to Guabini, who was the victim in this case.

How could Guabini possibly have control over the contents of those records?
Misleading Focus and Irregularities in Testimony
The issue with Baloi’s approach wasn’t just the focus on irrelevant details.

It was also in how he failed to address the heart of the case—how Guabini was subjected to brutality and how his confessions, possibly obtained under duress, should be questioned.

The truth is, at no point did Baloi challenge Guabini on the core of his testimony.

Baloi’s relentless references to the occurrence books made the defense seem directionless and desperate, not a proper challenge to the witness’s testimony.

One of the most troubling aspects of this cross-examination was that, when Baloi pushed the occurrence book issue, the defense failed to object.

At this moment, they should have stood up and addressed the irregularity.

Guabini had no involvement in the making of these entries, yet Baloi insisted on reading out what was recorded in the book as though it could discredit Guabini’s claims.

The more Baloi attempted to distract from the torture, the more he exposed the weaknesses in his own case.

He couldn’t challenge Guabini’s version of events directly, so he resorted to irrelevant tangents about police documentation that had no bearing on the core allegations.

This kind of cross-examination only serves to create confusion and distract from the matter at hand.

The Significance of Guabini’s Testimony
Guabini’s testimony was one of bravery.

Despite the trauma he endured, he remained firm in his recounting of the events.

His persistence and courage in speaking up about police abuse should have been the focal point of the defense’s cross-examination.

Instead, Baloi wasted his time and the court’s with meaningless references to occurrences in the police logbooks.

Furthermore, Baloi had an opportunity to delve into why Guabini’s confessions and statements about the incident were so critical.

He could have called attention to the methods used by officers to force such confessions, and how these confessions might have been fabricated.

But instead, he got sidetracked, wasting a key opportunity to weaken the case.

A Missed Opportunity for Justice
In a courtroom, where the stakes are so high, especially in a case with so much public attention, each moment matters.

Instead of addressing the allegations of police brutality head-on, Baloi played into a game of distraction that left many in the courtroom questioning his effectiveness as a cross-examiner.

Guabini had already made it clear in his direct testimony that he was tortured.

His story was consistent, backed by physical injuries and clear testimony about the events.

But instead of confronting these facts, Baloi chose to waste time on irrelevant issues, showing his inability to present a solid defense.

The Bigger Picture
What we saw here goes beyond a single case of ineffective cross-examination.

It’s a symptom of deeper issues within the justice system.

When officers, like the ones accused in this case, use their power to manipulate records, intimidate witnesses, and deflect from their own misdeeds, the entire system comes into question.

The failure to address the core issue—the police brutality—is not just an error in the legal process; it’s an indication of the larger problem within the institution.

The systematic corruption, the lack of accountability, and the culture of intimidation that pervades law enforcement in South Africa have made cases like these more frequent and more dangerous.

Reform Is the Only Solution
As South Africans watch cases like this unfold, they are left to wonder: How many more victims are out there, whose cases were manipulated or outright ignored by a police system so broken it can’t even hold its own officers accountable? The truth is, this case is not an isolated incident.

It is part of a disturbing trend within the SAPS, where internal corruption continues to thrive, and where victims are left with no recourse.

The bigger question is whether the justice system, including law enforcement, can be reformed or whether it will remain a shadow of its potential.

South Africa’s criminal justice system is in crisis, and the events surrounding Guabini’s case only reinforce the urgent need for reform.

The integrity of the system can no longer be taken for granted, and meaningful steps toward accountability must be taken.