The accused person in the Dros rape case has refused to hand over his mobile phone to the police and decided not to be co-operative with the state case.

It was the accused’s second court appearance since his arrest last weekend. He has not yet pleaded.

Standing in the dock, the accused, who had a shaven head and stitches on the right side of his neck and his earlobe, listened intently as his attorney argued against the State’s application.

“My instructions from the accused [are] that he does not want to help the State regarding this issue at this stage. At a later [stage] this issue might be considered,” the attorney, Riaan du Plessis, said.

READ: Protests expected as alleged ‘Dros rapist’ appears in court

Du Plessis argued that the accused had a right against self-incrimination and that, if the State wanted the cellphone, they would have to bring a formal application.

Assault

It was also placed on record that police assaulted him at the Silverton police station where he had been detained after his arrest.

“[The] accused was forced by police to do push-ups and then he was kicked by police officers and then kicked on the left eye,” Du Plessis claimed.

The accused also claimed that police officers used belts and their open hands to beat him and that people who held him before his arrest at the restaurant, used a broken bottle to stab him.

News24 previously reported that the accused was at the restaurant where he allegedly followed the child to a bathroom and raped her.

A video, taken moments after the alleged incident, surfaced and it showed a man covered in blood and patrons lashing out at him.

In the video, he was asked what he was doing and responded that there was nothing wrong with him mentally and that he was there to use the bathroom to relieve himself.

Earlier on Tuesday, the court granted a media application for permission to photograph the accused before and after court proceedings, despite the defence’s argument that it could be detrimental to his bail application and would ignite racial tensions.

State advocate Sanet Jacobson asked for a postponement for further investigation because forensic evidence was still outstanding.

The accused has not yet brought a bail application and the case was postponed to November 1.

News24 has taken a decision not to identify the accused until he has pleaded in court as stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Act.

According to section 154(2b) of the Criminal Procedure Act: (b) No person shall at any stage before the appearance of an accused in a court upon any charge referred to in section 153(3) or at any stage after s

Sharing is caring!