OCCASIONS WHEN EVIDENCE WAS ESSENTIAL BUT ABSENT
Occasions On Which Evidence Was Necessary But Never Materialised
The consortium of landlords—particularly Keith and Inge Broad, Paula Disberry, and their appointed operational mastermind, Mr. de Swardt—made numerous allegations. These allegations were repeated and weaponised by Media24 and the two investigating officers, and, as a result, by SAPS as a body.
Having weaponised these allegations, they wasted no time deploying them for strategic advantage and personal gain. Thanks to SAPS and Media24, they did so with great success. The ultimate purpose was never conviction or even trial, but rather incarceration to secure that strategic advantage.
However, despite the certainty with which they presented these allegations—and the portrayal of their earnest conviction—they repeatedly failed to provide any evidence to substantiate them. This is despite numerous promises to do so.
Crucially, throughout the campaign, producing such evidence would have been highly beneficial to them. In fact, in many cases, it was necessary—sometimes even essential—to achieving their goals. In significant instances, it could have turned a loss into a win. In others, it was a procedural and legal requirement. Yet, none was ever produced.
FACT FILE
THE POSTPONED JUNE 2022 HEARING—A TACTIC TO AVOID SCRUTINY
By mid-2022, Keith Broad had repeatedly failed to secure an eviction order through civil litigation. He was due to present evidence in the High Court but abruptly postponed the June hearing until November. The timing was critical—by postponing, he effectively admitted he had no case. This wasn’t about preparing a stronger legal argument; it was about avoiding scrutiny and bypassing a process that required real evidence. The months that followed saw a shift from legal proceedings to SAPS involvement, fabricated criminal charges, and a strategy to ensure that when the case did reach court, I wouldn’t be able to defend myself.
THE FAILURE TO FIND OR PROVIDE EVIDENCE
Occasions When Evidence Was Necessary Yet Never Produced
The Documented Pattern Of Fabrications & Strategic Omissions
This table documents a pattern of fabrications and strategic omissions—a campaign where allegations were weaponized, yet actual evidence never materialized.
From eviction proceedings to arrests and malicious prosecutions, every opportunity to substantiate claims was met with silence or deception. Despite repeated promises that incriminating evidence existed, it was never presented at critical legal junctures—even when it was legally required or could have secured a victory for the accusers.
Why? Because the evidence never existed. The goal was never conviction or legal success but incarceration, reputation destruction, and civil advantages.
This systematic abuse of the legal process—aided by compliant investigators and media laundering—allowed fabricated narratives to gain credibility without scrutiny. Lies, once printed and repeated, became accepted as fact, while the truth was either suppressed or deliberately excluded.
Evidence: Non-Existent & Unnecessary
No evidence has been produced for two reasons:
-
It did not exist.
-
It was unnecessary.
No evidence exists because the allegations were a mix of fabrications, misrepresentations, and manipulation.
It was unnecessary because the goal was never conviction or trial but rather incarceration and ruin.
All that was needed was a minimal amount of what appeared to be evidence, combined with an accommodating investigating officer who could misrepresent it. Then, laundering those lies through Media24 would produce what appeared to be independent corroboration and substantiation of the allegations.
That alone was sufficient to secure an arrest and an objection to bail. On that basis, they were very successful. Lies about lies became the truth. Regurgitating and recycling fabrications gave them credibility.
FACT FILE
AUGUST 4, 2022 – SAPS FAILED TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE
On August 4, the Cape Town High Court heard the spoliation case concerning the illegal eviction and seizure of properties. If Broad had valid grounds for eviction, this was the moment to present contracts, financial records, or any justification. Instead, no evidence was produced. This wasn’t an oversight but a calculated move—the real objective was never to win legally but to remove me from the process entirely. The August 4 arrest was deliberately timed to coincide with the hearing, ensuring that I was in Pollsmoor Prison and unable to challenge them in court.
A System Open To Abuse
The evidentiary bar to effect an arrest or remand someone in prison is extremely low in South Africa. For example, in the UK, the evidence or docket must contain sufficient material to justify an arrest and a prosecution. It must provide the Crown Prosecution Service with enough confidence that it would result in a successful prosecution and conviction.
In South Africa, by contrast, the mere suspicion that the accused has committed a crime is often sufficient to arrest, charge, and detain them—with the case being built after the arrest, while the accused is already remanded in prison or on bail.
This system is inherently unfair and unjust. It appears, at the very least, to undermine the concept of innocent until proven guilty. In reality, it could be argued that it turns that concept on its head—creating a system where the accused is guilty until proven innocent.
The consequences of this are particularly dire if the accused is incarcerated—especially if bail is denied.
FACT FILE
AUGUST 9, 2022 – BAIL OBJECTION WITH NO EVIDENCE
At my first bail hearing after the August 4 arrest, SAPS was required to justify my detention with real evidence—proving financial misconduct, a flight risk, or material wrongdoing. They provided nothing. No financial records, no witness statements, no supporting documentation—just the word of an officer claiming guilt without proof. This wasn’t about securing a conviction; it was about delaying my release for as long as possible, knowing the case would never hold up under scrutiny.
A Defence System Set Up To Fail
Being remanded in custody leaves the accused almost entirely handicapped in mounting a defence. Having personally experienced remand in South Africa—particularly in Pollsmoor—the idea that a defendant can competently defend themselves in a bail application, let alone at trial, is absurd.
The accused is locked up, separated from their family, attorneys, and the evidence they need. Their life collapses. Their job and income are lost. Their sanity is tested daily. They are subjected to conditions unfit for animals—starving, likely beaten, scared—crammed into a cell with 40+ other men, in a space built for 15. They have no access to resources—no computers or phones to contact attorneys, no pen or paper to document their defence.
Attorney visits are nearly impossible for the accused to arrange themselves, forcing them to rely on a family support network to do so. Even then, attorneys struggle to schedule visits and are given only rushed, limited time to speak with their clients. These brief interactions are the accused’s only opportunity to point their legal team toward the evidence.
The inevitable result is a defence that falls far short of what would be possible were the accused not incarcerated.
When comparing the position of a defendant imprisoned in South Africa to the power, reach, and resources of the state, the idea of a level playing field or a fair trial is an impossibility.
THE FAILURE TO FIND OR PROVIDE EVIDENCE
Occasions Where Evidence Was Essential But Absent
A Timeline Of Legal Manipulation & Evidence Evasion
This table documents a critical sequence of events where evidence was promised but never materialized, despite its necessity in securing convictions, denying bail, or justifying legal actions.
From court appearances to investigations and civil proceedings, every instance reveals the intentional absence of proof—whether through false affidavits, fabricated accusations, or outright obstruction by key players.
Why was no real evidence ever presented? Because these legal maneuvers were never about truth or justice. They were designed purely for incarceration and strategic advantage—weaponizing the system to delay, manipulate, and silence opposition without accountability.
This timeline exposes the depth of the deception, showing how each fabricated claim relied not on proof, but on influence, manipulation, and a corrupt legal framework that allowed unverified allegations to carry weight
-2.jpg)
THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE
At my first bail hearing after the August 4 arrest, SAPS was required to justify my detention with real evidence—proving financial misconduct, a flight risk, or material wrongdoing.
They provided nothing. No financial records, no witness statements, no supporting documentation—just the word of an officer claiming guilt without proof. This wasn’t about securing a conviction; it was about delaying my release for as long as possible, knowing the case would never hold up under scrutiny.
THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE
By mid-2022, Keith Broad had repeatedly failed to secure an eviction order through civil litigation. He was due to present evidence in the High Court but abruptly postponed the June hearing until November.
The timing was critical—by postponing, he effectively admitted he had no case. This wasn’t about preparing a stronger legal argument; it was about avoiding scrutiny and bypassing a process that required real evidence. T
he months that followed saw a shift from legal proceedings to SAPS involvement, fabricated criminal charges, and a strategy to ensure that when the case did reach court, I wouldn’t be able to defend myself.
THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE
On August 4, the Cape Town High Court heard the spoliation case concerning the illegal eviction and seizure of properties. If Broad had valid grounds for eviction, this was the moment to present contracts, financial records, or any justification. Instead, no evidence was produced.
This wasn’t an oversight but a calculated move—the real objective was never to win legally but to remove me from the process entirely. The August 4 arrest was deliberately timed to coincide with the hearing, ensuring that I was in Pollsmoor Prison and unable to challenge them in court.
A System That Prioritises Detention Over Evidence
One subtle but significant difference in South Africa's legal system is that the strength or weakness of the state’s case is not relevant until a trial or bail application begins. Until that point, an accused person can be detained on the flimsiest of evidence—or even purely on the assertion of the investigating officer.
Once detained, their incarceration can be repeatedly extended at the investigating officer’s request for "further investigation." Such a system places an enormous amount of trust and power in the police—particularly in the investigating officer. Due to chronic under-resourcing, senior officers lack the time or capacity to cross-check arrests, case dockets, or prosecutions. There is no culture of oversight or accountability.
The result? A system wide open to abuse, corruption, and injustice. It is controlled by a police force with little to no self-regulation, overseen by a regulator with even fewer resources, and a track record of failing to investigate or prosecute. Convictions occur in less than 2% of the cases they pursue.
This unchecked authority grants the police—specifically the investigating officer—unrivalled power and an equally unrivalled opportunity for abuse.
FACT FILE
OCTOBER 2022 – PAULA DISBERRY'S FALSE ALLEGATIONS
After previous charges collapsed, Paula Disberry lodged new false allegations claiming I had stolen from and damaged 12 Hove Road. The pattern was identical: she made a claim, SAPS accepted it without evidence, and I was forced to defend yet another fabricated case. There was no forensic inspection, no independent witness statements, and no supporting records—just her word, taken at face value. This was part of a deliberate legal harassment campaign, where SAPS was used as a tool to keep me entangled in baseless cases.
The Absence of Checks and Balances
Where safeguards should have prevented such abuses, they were entirely absent.
-
No attempt was made to obtain an arrest warrant for the August arrest.
-
The attempt to secure a warrant for the December arrest was rejected twice by magistrates.
-
Two separate magistrates also denied requests for a seizure warrant.
Their workaround? An officer from Bellville Commercial signed off on a seizure warrant internally—bypassing the courts—on the false basis that the seizure was suddenly urgent, essential, and the only way to obtain evidence. The justification? That I was supposedly about to destroy evidence from events a full year prior—evidence I had never attempted to destroy before.
If they falsely claimed that evidence was unavailable immediately after the August arrest—despite having had eight months to obtain it—that may stretch credibility, but at least it offers an excuse. However, what cannot be explained is its total absence ever since.
Nor can they claim they withheld crucial evidence for a "more significant occasion" because, as each court appearance came and went—each new charge filed, each fresh attempt to incarcerate—they failed to produce it.
Instead, they achieved their goals based solely on the words of the investigating officers.
FACT FILE
DECEMBER 14, 2022 – SECOND ARREST, NO NEW EVIDENCE
On December 14, SAPS executed a second arrest—without a valid warrant. If this was a legitimate case, they should have presented solid evidence. Instead, they produced nothing new. No forensic records, no financial documents, and no supporting testimony—just recycled false claims from corrupt officers and private individuals. That same day, SAPS unlawfully raided and seized 16 Leirmans Road, violating a High Court interdict. This wasn’t law enforcement—it was a private vendetta carried out using state resources.
Where Is The Evidence That Was Promised?
One of the many questions no one seems to be asking is: Where is all the evidence that was promised?
Wouter de Swardt became adept at evading that question, repeatedly deflecting by suggesting the evidence was "well hidden"—alluding to so-called "secret bank accounts" or "hidden millions." Yet, as outlined in the chapter Watching and Investigating, vast resources were poured into surveillance and investigation. If the allegations had any validity, these efforts should have produced mountains of evidence.
So, what are we supposed to believe?
-
That they held the evidence back for some unknown reason?
-
That it is still secret?
-
That it is still "well hidden"?
-
That they suddenly decided they didn’t mind losing?
If this evidence exists, why was it never used?
FACT FILE
FEBRUARY 28, 2023 – DEADLINE TO FILE CHARGES, EMPTY CASE FILE
By February 28, a magistrate had ordered SAPS to formally confirm all charges and present supporting evidence. This was their opportunity to justify my arrest and detention—yet, when the deadline arrived, nothing was produced. The docket—which had been used to justify months of legal persecution—was practically empty. No financial analysis, no witness testimony, and no documentation supporting fraud or property damage allegations. The failure to present even basic evidence proved that the entire case was fabricated from the start.
The Unanswered Questions:
-
Why did KB never use it to reclaim the property?
-
Why was it never used in the August arrest?
-
Why was it never used to keep me in Pollsmoor for months or years in August 2022?
-
Why did PD never produce it in her civil court attempts?
-
Why did KB have to fabricate a statement in his protection order application?
-
Why was it never produced in relation to PD’s malicious prosecution in October 2022?
-
Why was it never used in the December arrest?
-
Why was it never produced during the initial bail application on 19 December 2022?
-
Why was it never used in attempts to keep me in Pollsmoor for months or years in December 2022?
-
Why was it never used or produced during three months of remand, before the bail application started, or in any of the four court appearances prior?
-
Crucially, why was it never produced before or during the bail application—when the prosecution service ultimately withdrew all charges?
-
Why was it never used to justify the bogus immigration charge?
-
Why was it never used in the five months of pretrial appearances?
-
Why was it never used when permission was granted to submit representations to the Senior Public Prosecutor?
-
And even more crucially, why was it never used or produced when the prosecution confirmed they were throwing out the charge?
The list goes on and on.
-
Why was it necessary to arrest and detain me based on lies—removing me from circulation at key moments in their civil campaign—if evidence actually existed?
-
Why was it necessary to ensure I was in prison when KB tried to steamroll his appeal through?
-
Why was it necessary for the investigating officer to lie at the initial bail application on 19 December 2022?
-
Why did the newspapers publish demonstrable lies about rent arrears, permission to rent, and damage—when actual evidence of real crimes would have been far more powerful?
-
Why was this evidence never given to online platforms to ensure our profiles were permanently removed, rather than relying on false claims that the villas did not exist or that we had no consent to rent them?
THE FAILURE TO FIND OR PROVIDE EVIDENCE
Occasions Where Evidence Was Essential But Absent
A Timeline Of Fabrications, False Promises & Failed Prosecutions
This table lays out a chronological record of how key events—from arrests to court hearings—were systematically devoid of actual evidence, despite repeated claims that incriminating proof existed.
Each entry reveals a pattern of deception:
• Arrests were executed without evidence, relying on outdated civil disputes.
• False claims justified bail objections, prolonging detention without cause.
• Media reports spread fabrications, reinforcing a narrative built on lies.
• Legal appeals omitted any verifiable proof, ensuring the truth was never examined.
Rather than presenting real evidence at critical points—when convictions, bail denials, or legal rulings depended on it—they relied instead on manipulation, obstruction, and fabricated claims.
This timeline exposes how every major legal action was backed by influence rather than substance, demonstrating the systemic corruption that enabled these abuses.
-3.jpg)
Lies, Fabrications, and the Perception of Truth
The methodology was simple:
-
Fabricate an allegation.
-
Make it extreme.
-
State it categorically, with absolute conviction.
-
Assure everyone that evidence exists and will be produced in the future.
This was done knowing that:
-
The damage would be done before the truth emerged.
-
People would move on.
-
It was highly unlikely that anyone would ever press them to deliver the evidence they promised.
And even if, some time later, someone did press them for this evidence, it would no longer matter—because the damage was already done, their goals had already been achieved, and I was already branded the villain while they remained the "victims."
FACT FILE
MARCH 13, 2023 – CHARGES WITHDRAWN INSTANTLY
On March 13, 2023, as my bail hearing was set to begin, the prosecution reviewed the case file. Within minutes, every charge was withdrawn. Not because of legal technicalities, but because there was no case to prosecute. The supposed "evidence" was nothing but empty files and false affidavits. If the allegations had been real, the case would have gone to trial. Instead, the entire prosecution collapsed on first review, confirming that every prior legal action was about detention, not conviction.
The Six-Month Postponement: A Strategic Delay
The decision to postpone the hearing by six months—from June to November 2022—was not incidental. It was a calculated move to pursue a cheaper and faster illegal alternative because they had no confidence in winning the June hearing.
Had the June hearing taken place, KB would have been asking the judge to evict a tenant who:
-
Was up to date with their rent.
-
Had paid nine months of rent in full and on time.
-
Had renovated the property.
-
Had 4.5 years remaining on a five-year lease—a tenure that was the fundamental prerequisite and justification for the contract itself.
Had they possessed any explosive evidence, they would have used it then.
FACT FILE
AUGUST 4, 2022: SAPS ENSURED NO EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED
The spoliation hearing at the Cape Town High Court was Broad’s chance to justify his self-help eviction. If there had been valid reasons for seizing the property, this was the moment to present financial records, rental arrears, or contractual breaches. Instead, no evidence was submitted—because none existed.
Rather than presenting a case, Broad’s real strategy was to remove me from the legal process entirely. The timing of my August 4 arrest was no accident—it was designed to keep me in Pollsmoor Prison on the day of the hearing, preventing me from challenging the unlawful seizure.
The Fiction of "Legal Technicalities"
Throughout this process, Mr. de Swardt repeatedly excused his fabrications and the complete failure of every criminal proceeding with a series of false justifications. I later heard he had begun circulating a new excuse—that my attorneys, Abrahams, had found some clever loophole or technicality that got me off the December charges.
This is utter nonsense. Abrahams was, at best, incompetent in almost every aspect of their representation (see the hundreds of pages detailing their failings). They did the absolute bare minimum needed to secure bail the first time—and virtually nothing the second. The charges were withdrawn in spite of them, not because of them.
The moment the prosecution service reviewed the charges, they were thrown out—not because of some procedural trick but because they had absolutely no merit.
THE FAILURE TO FIND OR PROVIDE EVIDENCE
Occasions Where Evidence Was Essential But Absent
A Legal Record Of Empty Claims & Systematic Obstruction
This table presents a damning timeline—a sequence of legal actions where evidence was either required, expected, or strategically withheld, yet never produced.
At every critical stage—from deadlines set by magistrates to bail hearings and formal submissions—the opportunity to present legitimate proof was either ignored or met with fabricated claims. Key figures, including Keith Broad and Wouter de Swardt, consistently relied on false allegations rather than providing verifiable documentation.
Even when new charges were introduced, such as the bogus immigration charge, no supporting evidence accompanied them—confirming that legal maneuvers were used purely to obstruct, intimidate, and prolong detention rather than to pursue justice.
Every failed attempt to produce meaningful evidence reinforces the systemic abuse of legal processes—where accusations were weaponized while the burden of proof was conveniently erased
A Docket in Name Only
The so-called docket—which neither I nor my attorneys were allowed to see for over a year and a half after the first arrest and six months after the second—was described by one attorney as:
"The slimmest docket I have ever seen in my career—even for the pettiest shoplifting charge." For charges of theft, malicious damage, and most especially fraud, it was so weak it was not worthy of being called a docket at all. Despite having a full year to add to it, SAPS, Mr. de Swardt, PD, PVW, KB, IB, DD, JS, MB, Bennett, and others failed to provide anything of substance.
Instead, the docket contained only:
-
Three affidavits obtained by Paula Disberry through misrepresentation.
-
Four demonstrably false affidavits from Sergeant Steven and his associates at Home Affairs.
Without those fraudulent statements, the docket was literally empty.
FACT FILE
DECEMBER 14, 2022: AN ARREST WITH NO WARRANT
On December 14, SAPS executed a second arrest—without a valid warrant. If this was a legitimate case, they should have presented solid evidence. Instead, they produced nothing new. No forensic records, no financial documents, and no supporting testimony—just recycled false claims from corrupt officers and private individuals. That same day, SAPS unlawfully raided and seized 16 Leirmans Road, violating a High Court interdict. This wasn’t law enforcement—it was a private vendetta carried out using state resources.
The Cover-Up: Withholding the Docket and the Charges
This is precisely why:
-
The Investigating Officer refused to provide the docket or even confirm the charges for the entire three months I was on remand in Pollsmoor.
-
The Magistrate, at my February 2nd court appearance, ordered the Investigating Officer to confirm the charges by February 28—which he failed to do.
-
It was only on the morning of the bail application that the prosecution and defense were finally given access to the docket.
-
Within an hour of seeing it, all charges were withdrawn.
This is also why Mr. de Swardt’s request for an arrest warrant was repeatedly rejected—until he finally found a friendly magistrate willing to accommodate him.
FACT FILE
FEBRUARY 28, 2023: DEADLINE TO FILE CHARGES, NOTHING WAS FILED
By February 28, 2023, SAPS was required to formally confirm all charges and provide supporting evidence. This was their chance to justify my arrest and detention—yet when the deadline arrived, they produced nothing.
The case docket, used to justify months of legal persecution, was practically empty. No financial analysis was included, no corroborating witness statements were available, and no supporting documentation for fraud or property damage allegations existed. This wasn’t a delay in the investigation—it was an admission that the case had been fabricated from the beginning.
No "Silver Bullet"—Just a Non-Existent Case
The idea that there was some silver bullet or legal loophole that caused the prosecution service to drop the charges is absurd. The notion that every attempt to remove or destroy me failed because of some mysterious legal trick is even more ridiculous.
The reality is far simpler:
-
Each attempt collapsed because they had no merit.
-
Each attempt collapsed because they had no evidence.
-
Each attempt collapsed the moment it was scrutinized by anyone other than the corrupt Investigating Officer.
THE RAID ON 16 LEIRMANS ROAD: PROPERTY GRAB DISGUISED AS A POLICE OPERATION
While I was illegally arrested on December 14, SAPS launched a coordinated raid on 16 Leirmans Road. Despite claiming it was for “evidence collection,” SAPS had no court order authorizing entry, did not follow legal seizure protocols, and handed control of the property to Broad without any due process.
If the property seizure was legal, there would have been a court order, legal oversight, and official documentation. The fact that none existed proves this was an orchestrated property grab.
MARCH 13, 2023: CHARGES COLLAPSE INSTANTLY
On March 13, 2023, just as my bail hearing was set to begin, the prosecution reviewed the case file. Within minutes, all charges were withdrawn. This wasn’t due to legal maneuvering—it was because the moment the prosecution saw the supposed "evidence," they realized it was empty.
Had the charges been legitimate, the case would have gone to trial. Instead, SAPS had nothing, and the instant withdrawal proved that every legal step leading up to this moment had been designed to keep me detained, not to prosecute a crime.
60+ Opportunities to Produce Evidence—And They Failed Every Time
There were over 60 occasions where evidence was needed, necessary, or essential—and they failed to produce it every single time.
The idea that this evidence exists but was somehow never used is beyond ludicrous.
With a complicit investigating officer, an accommodating senior officer, and a compliant, complicit, or deceived media group, actual evidence was never necessary.
Instead, the mere word of Wouter de Swardt was considered a satisfactory substitute.
"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst."
Aristotle