'Groenewald likely to commit another crime if granted bail'

Piet Groenewald, one of the men accused of assaulting an employee and setting a dog on him, is likely to commit another offence. 

This was one the reasons given by magistrate Bogi Mashele as he denied Groenewald bail at the Groblersdal magistrate’s court in Limpopo yesterday. .

Groenewald and his stepson Stephan Greef are charged with assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm following an alleged attack on their employee Veneruru Kavari on January 17. Handing down bail judgement, Mashele said granting them bail would not be in the interest of justice. 

Groenewald completed serving his parole in March 2022 for a 1990 double murder and an attempted murder when he was arrested for allegedly assaulting Kavari.

In 2005, Groenewald’s 20 year sentence was reduced through amnesty by six months. He eventually received parole in 2010. 

“It’s been less than two years since the accused [Groenewald]  finished his parole and he has now committed another offence. The likelihood of the accused [Groenewald] committing a schedule 1 office is there,” said Mashele. 

The state had earlier argued that Groenewald was a flight risk.

Prosecutor adv Faith Raselomane said granting bail to the two men would undermine public order.

Raselomane told the court that the community was “outraged” and that the state had to acquire the services of public order policing to maintain calm.

Kavari was allegedly assaulted after being accused of being drunk on the job.

Raselomane said a witness had  also been intimidated by two men who were driving a security company vehicle.

Groenwald’s lawyer adv Johan van Wyk had also relied on the amnesty his client received in 2005 to persuade the court that his client was a changed man and that his previous conviction should not be considered. 

However, Mashele said amnesty did not automatically remove a previous conviction.

“Getting amnesty does not mean that the previous conviction is wiped off. It can’t be. This court comes to the conclusion that it would not be in the interest of justice that the two be released on bail.”

But adv Van Wyk said there was no proof that a witness had been intimidated by two people from the security company, arguing that his client should be released on bail.

Raselomane said Groenewald was once circulated as a wanted man after he fled the country while facing a murder charge in 1990. “At some point the applicant was circulated as a wanted person. Applicant 1 (Greef) has a murder case that was provisionally withdrawn, pending the ballistic report. I humbly request this court to consider the degree of violence in all these matters and the matter that is before the court today,” she said.

Earlier she told the court it took cops almost 12 years to re-arrest Groenewald. “I am humbly requesting this court not to take the risk that the court did in 1990 by releasing the applicant (Groenewald). If he is released, he has the means to flee.”

“There is evidence he ran away from his murder trial. Should he be release on bail the applicant may evade trial again,” she said.

Adv van Wyk, for the accused, said his clients were not a flight risk.

He said there was “no evidence before court that the [Groenewald] was absconding, and the court cannot make an inference that he absconded”.

Van Wyk said: “This is one of the most extraordinary applications in the history of SA. However, this simple case escalated to a politically blown up matter.

“This is probably the first time in the legal history of SA where a simple application for bail against a single charge of a dog bite was covered by the media and attended by two cabinet ministers (Ronald Lamola and Bheki Cele).

“The political interference in this matter started when the EFF made a racial incident of the matter. In response thereto, rightwing whites arranged a protest action in opposition of the EFF march that was organised. When supporters of the ANC heard about the action at the court, they decided to join the ‘uproar’ outside the court.”

But magistrate Mashele said he would not be commenting on the issue of politicians attending the court case.

“I won’t comment because they were not invited by the court. They came here as a part of the public,” he said.

In denying both the accused bail, Mashele took into consideration that the two lived together and committed the offence, which is depicted on video, together.

After his judgment, Groenewald and his son were seen embracing family members who attended the case. Outside court, scores of ANC and EFF supporters broke into a song after hearing about the verdict.

Chabalalaj@sowetan.co.za