GQEBERHA – What was supposed to be the murder case of slain Nelson Mandela Bay State prosecutor Tracy Brown on 31 July turned into a case of kidnapping, extortion and other serious organised crime at the Gqeberha Regional Court today, 28 September.

The matter began with two suspects arrested for the murder of Brown, namely Simthembile Xungu and Ayabulela Busakwe, before more suspects were arrested and added to the list of suspects. The matter now has six suspects, namely Simthembile Xungu, Ayabulela Busakwe, David Mthembu, Buhle Mbini, Andile Mathumbu and the newly added police officer, Xolani Busakwe.

According to Hawks spokesperson Warrant Officer Ndiphiwe Mhlakuvana, Xolani Busakwe was a police officer (42) attached to the Cyber Crimes component of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), commonly known as the Hawks, at SAPS Head Office in Pretoria.

“The arrest forms part of an intensive investigation conducted by the Eastern Cape DPCI into two separate kidnapping incidents in which victims were allegedly abducted by armed assailants, followed by ransom demands made to their families.”

Two kidnapping victims

The two kidnapping victims, Lindsay Knowlden and Theresa Minnie, were abducted in Gqeberha and Kariega respectively.

Knowlden was kidnapped on Saturday, 21 June 2025, when she arrived at her place of work, the Fresh Produce Market in Markman. Her husband was allegedly pistol-whipped by four armed men before Knowlden was forcibly removed from their vehicle and abducted.

A ransom demand was subsequently allegedly made to her family before she was released unharmed a few days later.

Minnie and her husband were allegedly attacked by four armed men at their residence on Monday, 11 August 2025, before she was forcibly removed from her vehicle and abducted.

Defence seeks access to devices

During the court appearance, the defence for Xungu and Busakwe, Sibongiseni Zimema, argued that the defence saw the docket, including the counts against the accused, and said, “We want to know what links the accused [Busakwe] to the commission of the crime in question,” with the answer to that not yet made public in court.

Zimema added that not knowing what the link is between the recently added Busakwe and the matter in question negatively impacts the defence’s ability to prepare and defend the accused adequately.

Zimema also made an application to the presiding magistrate, Thabisa Mpimpilashe, to compel the State to provide the accused, Busakwe, a SAPS Cyber Crimes official, with access to his work laptop. “The laptop has been with the police for quite some time,” he alleged, although Busakwe was arrested four working days ago, on 22 September.

During the application, he claimed that the provision of the laptop does not affect the case. “We just want access to give a clear account of dates,” as his work laptop allegedly has a record of the days he had to issue subpoenas in his work capacity. “He doesn’t need the laptop for the whole day. Even 30 minutes so that he can access the dates,” he said.

The State indicated that the devices had been handed to the Cyber Crimes department for data extraction. The State objected to the application as it alleged that the devices are still being examined. “Once this process is complete, then the defence can have access to the devices. We will prioritise the matter, but the investigating officer cannot give a timeframe as to when the extraction will be complete,” said the State prosecutor.

After this application, Zimema introduced a second one to compel the State to provide the accused police officer with his cellphone, which is allegedly in the custody of SAPS, as he claimed, for the same reason.

We just want access to give a clear account of dates.

The State objected to this, claiming that the devices are being held as evidence.

To accommodate Zimema’s request, the presiding magistrate, Mpimpilashe, suggested that the defence be given access to the devices to get the dates that they need and whatever Zimema needs to prepare for the bail application. One of the conditions would be that it be done under the supervision of the investigating officer or a State representative. The State conceded to this, but raised concerns about allowing the defence access.

“The accused cannot work on the laptop himself; there will have to be someone next to him, directing him on what to do. Reason being, the accused was working for the Cyber Crimes unit in Pretoria. There is a fear that evidence will be deleted from the laptop,” argued the State. “If the defence is willing to sit next to the investigating officer and direct him, the State will allow the application.”

In response, Zimema found the conditions under which the application was granted to be unacceptable. “That cannot be allowed. We cannot in a constitutional democracy have police officers watching us like hawks,” he said.

Zimema added that the State did not argue that having the devices in their possession for the purposes for which they intend to keep them would harm their investigation.

In Mpimpilashe’s verdict on the application to have the evidence in the possession of the defence and the accused, she said she was unable to grant permission to access the devices because the defence refused to cooperate with the State in her suggestion of having a member of the State present while the defence found the dates they were looking for.

Postponement

The matter was postponed until 12 October for the bail application of police officer Busakwe. The other five accused will return to court to join Busakwe on the stand on 20 October. All accused remain in custody.

ALSO READ: Police officer appears with co-accused in kidnapping case