‘All the people who disappeared, Cat Matlala dealings’ – Mr M has files on Sibiya, court hears

The bail application of suspended Deputy National Police Commissioner for Crime Detection Shadrack Sibiya took another turn on Tuesday as affidavits read in court revealed more information about Sibiya’s alleged dealings than expected.

On Wednesday, Sibiya returned to the Randburg Magistrate’s Court, where he continued with his bail application. The 59-year-old lieutenant-general is facing five charges: three counts of sexual grooming, one count of human trafficking and one count of rape.

The grooming allegations relate to a 16-year-old girl and are alleged to have taken place between July and August 2026 through electronic communications. The rape charge stems from a May 2026 incident when Sibiya allegedly sexually assaulted an 18-year-old woman at a Sandton hotel.

The state has also accused Sibiya of human trafficking in connection with alleged sexual exploitation involving three people.

He has, however, denied all the charges, claiming persecution.

Mr M’s intimidation claims against Sibiya

On Wednesday, the state attempted to put forward its version that Sibiya threatened Mr M, the father of the complainant, following his arrest.

The court played audio recordings of calls between Sibiya and Mr M.

In one, Sibiya tells Mr M: “Do you know how much I have supported you? I gave you money many times…R10 000, R4 000. I have given you my card to go and buy groceries, and I treated you like my little brother. But in turn, you were going around talking bad things about me. Then I saw you telling them to arrest me.

“You did me so many wrong things while I was walking along with you, not being impatient with you, being with you, hearing what you were saying about me, but not discussing those things with you. The easiest person to deal with is you. I can deal with you very quickly and easy, but I never.

“I was walking alongside you knowing very well what you were saying about me. But I never did that. I was giving you money, knowing what you had just said about me.”

The state argued that when Sibiya’s words to Mr M that he was the easiest person to deal with amounted to threats.

‘Context’

Although Sibiya’s defence attorney, advocate Estelle Killian, confirmed the conversation took place, she said a longer conversation took place before the recording began.

“Mr M called Sibiya wanting to go to his house. The applicant says he did not threaten Mr M. What he did say to him is that Mr M must know that he’s not the only one who can carry on threatening and intimidating people,” argued Killian.

“Mr M was also told the applicant knew what he was busy with. Mr M wanted to go to the applicant’s house, and he refused. This is the part that is not before the court or transcribed. The applicant further told Mr M that he doesn’t trust him. That even though he has supported him and his family in the past, he continued to talk bad things about him.

“The applicant told Mr M that there are things brought to his attention that can be used against Mr M: that he is a fraudster, that he is in possession of three ID cards and that he is not employed anywhere but manages to get financed for cars and houses.

“This is what he was saying: that, knowing this about you, you are the easiest person to deal with, because you yourself are not clean. It had nothing to do with this case but Mr M’s behaviour towards him.”

‘Incorrect claims’

However, the investigating officer, Sergeant Nokukhanya Ndlovu, who was being cross-examined, said Mr M felt threatened. She said the defence’s version that a longer conversation took place before the recording began was false.

“That is not how Mr M perceived it. He believed the threats against him would materialise based on their relationship and interactions.

“That is incorrect [that a longer conversation took place]; I was present during the entire conversation. Mr M felt differently from how the defence put it. He asked me to record because he felt the call might be an intimidation.”

Conversation between Sibiya’s wife and the apostle

The defence further read an affidavit deposed by Sibiya’s wife, Sizakhele Dlamini, as the state questioned its relevance in the matter before the court.

The defence proceeded with it, inadvertently revealing more about Sibiya’s alleged dealings than intended.

Dlamini admitted to knowing Mr M, and said she always knew him as her husband’s friend, not an employee or bodyguard.

“Any contention that Mr M was a client of Sibiya or employed as a protector or bodyguard is false and a fabrication. I believe it is an invention of Mr M’s own making,” she said in her affidavit.

“I don’t know what he does for a living, nor was I aware of him holding any particular form of employment. From what I have observed on social media, I understand him to be involved in various business or entrepreneurial activities.”

She said a man known only as the apostle from Shepherd Bushiri’s Enlightened Gathering Church called her and told her he had been in conversations with Mr M.

According to the apostle’s version, Mr M intended to withdraw the charges against Sibiya after watching him cry in court. He apparently had intentions to withdraw the charges and deal with the matter privately between the two families.

However, Mr M apparently could not withdraw the charges because Crime Intelligence boss Dumisani Khumalo and KZN police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi pressured him to provide more information about Sibiya.

Mr M approached the apostle to help him explain his actions to Sibiya’s family as they were apparently ignoring him. In response, Sibiya’s wife told the apostle to inform Mr M to continue with his case because she did not want it to appear as though the family was pressuring him to withdraw the charges.

Mr M’s ‘dirt on Sibiya’insurance’

Sibiya’s wife further told the court that Mr M contacted her directly to explain why he had laid charges against him.

During the call, Mr M told Sibiya’s wife how he met his daughter. Mr M asked Sibiya to collect his daughter on the way to a braai at his sister’s home. This is how Sibiya got Mr M’s daughter’s number. Mr M also told Sibiya’s wife about his alleged shenanigans with other women, including the family housekeeper.

Mr M said he decided to approach Sibiya’s wife directly because he was “disturbed” by the way Sibiya was presenting him in court.

“He told me he had been recording the applicant and keeping records of meetings that took place, which he witnessed himself,” said Sibiya’s wife.

He did this to protect himself.

Mr M’s dirt on Sibiya

The court further heard that Mr M has a “substantial” amount of information and documentation he can provide to the appropriate investigators “if necessary”.

He hoped matters wouldn’t reach this far, but if statements about him continue to be made that are “inaccurate”, he will respond “by providing the relevant evidence to the proper channels piece by piece”.

“He denies working with me; I’m not going to deny anything. I’m going to have to give them all the information pertaining to all the cases, all people who disappeared, all Cat Matlala involvement and all the senior officials and politicians, and I’m not going to deny anything.

“He was never clean, by the way, but I have to report everything I was doing with him and every meeting. I was taking pictures,” Mr M told Sibiya’s wife.

“Someone already has all these files on a USB; it’s only a matter of me dying in any format that the USB will be given to the right people. He keeps on punishing me; he used people who are my friends against me. Everything that was done in my car is on the USB. I wish he hadn’t gone that route; that’s my child, and I will do anything to fight for the rights of my child. I have like 300 voice recordings of him.”

This version contradicted the apostle’s version that Mr M wanted to withdraw charges.

Under pressure?

Sibiya’s wife’s affidavit further contradicted the apostle’s version that Mr M was being pressured by Khumalo and Mkhwanazi to press on with the case. She said Mr M did not sound like someone who would act under pressure.

“His conduct towards me was intimidating and concerning and inconsistent with the suggestion that he is someone who could easily be coerced or influenced by others. My interactions with him left me with the impression that he is forceful, calculating, and capable of applying pressure on others,” she said.

The case was postponed to 13 October.