Man acquitted after KZN High Court overturns 15-year fraud sentence.
A KwaZulu-Natal High Court has overturned a man's 15-year prison sentence for fraud involving more than R709,000, finding that the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he participated in an email interception scam targeting a farmer.
The Pietermaritzburg High Court upheld Bongani Archibold Jele's appeal against his conviction and sentence, replacing the fraud conviction with a verdict of not guilty.
Jele was convicted by the Ixopo Regional Court in November 2022 after more than R709,000 intended for a timber supplier was deposited into a bank account registered in his name.
The regional court sentenced him to 15 years' imprisonment, the minimum sentence applicable to the offence.
However, Judges Thoba Poyo-Dlwati and George Mossop found that the prosecution had failed to establish that Jele was involved in the fraudulent scheme, despite the money having been deposited into his bank account.
Farmer loses more than R709,000 in email interception scam
The case arose after farmer David Stone, who intended to establish kiwi fruit farming on his property in the Donnybrook district between Ixopo and Bulwer, approached Treated Timber Products (TTP) to purchase timber poles for a shade-net structure.
Stone accepted a quotation from the company and received an invoice for R709,333.41 on April 22, 2021.
He paid the amount the following day and emailed proof of payment to TTP.
However, on May 6, a company representative contacted him to inform him that the payment had not reflected in TTP's bank account.
Stone subsequently discovered that the account number into which he had transferred the money differed from the supplier's banking details.
According to the explanation presented in court, fraudsters had intercepted email communications between Stone and TTP, altered the bank account details on the invoice and redirected the payment into a fraudulent account.
The fraudsters allegedly also intercepted Stone's proof of payment and altered the account details reflected in the correspondence to make it appear that the payment had been made to TTP.
Money deposited into Jele's bank account
The State relied on evidence from First National Bank (FNB), which confirmed that the account into which the money was deposited belonged to Jele.
An FNB quality assurance manager testified that Jele had opened the account in March 2021 and that the bank's fingerprint verification procedures confirmed his identity.
The bank records showed that R709,327.32 was deposited into the account on April 24, 2021.
The transaction was recorded as “Magtape Credit Treated Timber Products”.
Jele admitted opening the account but told the court that he had handed it over to two individuals, identified as Ma-Africa and Sheppard, after being persuaded to sell it for R500.
He claimed Sheppard was a foreign national who could not lawfully open a bank account in South Africa.
Jele also explained that he had changed the cellphone number linked to the account and obtained a replacement bank card after becoming concerned that he could get into trouble for allowing strangers to use an account registered in his name.
He said he subsequently handed the replacement card to Sheppard.
High Court finds bank account ownership insufficient
In overturning the conviction, Judge Mossop found that the regional court had failed to properly consider Jele's version before concluding that he had participated in the fraud.
The High Court said the State had effectively relied on the fact that the money was deposited into an account bearing Jele's name as proof of his guilt.
However, the judges found that this was insufficient to establish his involvement in the scheme.
“There was no evidence, or even a suggestion, that the appellant was the person who made the misrepresentation relied upon by the State,” the judgment stated.
The court said there was no evidence that Jele had the knowledge, ability or opportunity to intercept communications between Stone and TTP.
It also found that investigators had failed to establish who controlled the cellphone number subsequently linked to Jele's bank account, despite having the ability to investigate the matter.
The judges further questioned discrepancies in the evidence, including the difference between the amount Stone said he paid and the amount deposited into Jele's account.
The court also noted that the bank statement described the payment as coming from TTP rather than directly from Stone, an anomaly the State had failed to explain.
During the appeal, the State conceded that Jele's fraud conviction could not stand.
It considered whether he could instead be convicted of theft but ultimately concluded that the evidence was insufficient to justify such a conviction.
The High Court agreed, finding that Jele's version was reasonably possibly true and that the State had failed to disprove it.