Mxolisi Lindie, Gugulethu
I am sharing my experience of helping the police investigate a burglary at my parents' home to show the importance of community involvement in resolving crime, the workload confronting police and the questions about police competence.
While the incident took place in May 2022 and was reported at Gugulethu SAPS the same month, the manner of the investigation and the time it took to close the case docket highlight problems facing the police service.
Items stolen from my parents' backyard tool shed included two empty gas cylinders, one office chair, garden tools and a two-plate gas stove.
I thought the investigation would be completed in a short space of time, but, to my surprise, it took more than six months.
After the case was reported, a case number was sent by text message.
When I called a police captain on May 19 2002 for an update, he referred me to a lieutenant colonel who gave me the name of the investigating officer.
The police forensic team managed to visit the crime scene more than two weeks after the incident, and for nearly eight weeks from June to August 2022, I made numerous requests to the detective for progress on the investigation and copied his superior through text messages sent to their cellphones.
From my own neighbourhood enquiries, I was able to provide the detective with a detailed description of a suspect, including his name and address, and I repeatedly asked the detective to question him. I also sent digital images of the crime scene for inclusion in the docket.
The investigating officer visited the suspect's house in August of 2022, but I believe the suspect denied any knowledge of the crime.
From September to November 2022, I made numerous calls and left messages for the investigating officer regarding feedback, but most times he was at court, on leave, in meetings or otherwise engaged.
I escalated matters and wrote to the Gugulethu station commander, the area commander of detectives and the office of the provincial SAPS commissioner during late October / early November.
During the first or second week of December, I got correspondence from the area commander that the state prosecutor had decided to drop the case due to lack of evidence.
I accepted the prosecutor’s decision and regarded the matter as closed.
Upon reflection, this reveals the burden faced by the police in executing their duties and the period it takes to conclude an investigation. In this instance, it took about seven months to close the case docket. I believe it could have taken longer had I not followed up.
Also apparent is the lack of communication between junior officers and their superiors in what could be regarded as lowly listed cases on the docket registry of crime investigators.
On some of my feedback queries, I copied the superior in my correspondence and also left telephone messages for him.
The failure to provide regular updates to the complainant due to the unavailability of the investigating officer was a discernible concern.
When I escalated the perceived delays in addressing my queries, the blurred or broken line of communication between the junior officer and his superior added more frustration in getting responses.
The sum total of my observations seems to be indicative of a police service overwhelmed by a heavy workload, poor lines of communication within the investigating unit and a lack of resources in handling the burden of case dockets.
• Provincial police spokesman Colonel Andrè Traut responds: Kindly be advised that it is pity that the complainant waited two years to voice a dissatisfaction with our service, as this matter could have been addressed and rectified a long time ago.
• Colonel Traut encouraged Mr Lindie to approach the Gugulethu police station’s management to lodge a formal complaint so that the allegations can be investigated.