Student’s family could sue cops

The family of a young student killed in an accident in which a drunk driving charge against a motorist has been negated because of an expired blood alcohol kit, could have a strong case against the police.

This week in a Uitenhage court, magistrate John Montgomery acquitted Amos Sinyanya, 30, of Motherwell, on a charge of drunk driving – and the alternative of driving under the influence – after the court heard the blood alcohol collection kit used in the case had expired.

This charge, and others, stems from a fatal accident in which Nelson Mandela University student Jamie Baartzes, 19, was killed on the M4 freeway near the Russell Road turnoff in March 2016.

Sinyanya is accused of causing the accident after allegedly driving on the wrong side of the freeway when his BMW collided head-on with Baartzes’s Chevrolet Spark.

But Sinyanya was acquitted on the drunk driving charge because the blood alcohol collection kit, supplied by the police, had expired two weeks before the accident happened.

Attorney Paul Roelofse Jnr said the SAPS could be held liable for the use of an expired kit as the officer involved could be charged with neglecting his or her duties.

“The family can hold the police accountable . . . if they can prove damages [due to police negligence] they will have a case against the police,” he said.

Roelofse said the acquittal on the drunk driving charge would have an impact on the harshness of any sentence Sinyanya received should he be found guilty on the other two charges of culpable homicide and reckless and negligent driving.

“It would absolutely have a direct impact on the severity of the sentences imposed on the other charges,” Roelofse said.

Police spokeswoman Colonel Priscilla Naidu said the case was still sub judice and she was unable to comment.

“Any details relating to the incident cannot be revealed until the finalisation of the criminal case.”

The blood alcohol collection kit used by the SAPS has the expiration date clearly indicated on the box containing the kit. Both the needle used and the tube used to store the blood further indicate expiration dates.

NMU criminal and procedural law lecturer Desiree David said although there was not much literature on the relevance of an expired needle being used, it was in fact the rubber seal of the vial which collects the blood that could be compromised.

“Protocols and procedures as required in the various fields exist to ensure and maintain the integrity of the tests and the correctness and reliability of the results.

“The fact remains that expired equipment was used, and should the state have wanted to argue that the test was reliable even though it was past the expiry date, then the burden rested on the state to present its expert witness to testify to that fact,” David said.

Dr Emmanuel Mungazi, of Livingstone Hospital, where Sinyanya was taken to have his blood drawn, testified in the trial that he was not sure what effect an expired needle would have on the blood test result.

Baartzes’s traumatised mother, Chantal Uren, said she was devastated by the drunk driving charge outcome because of a technicality.

“I feel as her mother I still have a responsibility towards Jamie to fight for justice,” Uren said.

Blood test analyst Sabelo Ncwane, from the SAPS forensic lab in Durban, told the court that when he tested Siyayana’s blood sample it had shown he was nearly three times over the legal limit. His blood alcohol level was 0.14mg to 100ml of blood – the legal limit is 0.05mg.

Ncwane submitted a document to court which contained the details of the test kit, serial numbers and the expiration date, which was February 2016.

Uren said: “It is unacceptable in this day and age that these types of offences are not taken seriously. Our road fatalities are one of the highest in the world. Yet our convictions do not reflect accordingly.”

Sinyanya was further acquitted on the alternate charge of driving under the influence because the state did not call the first responding officer to testify.

Montgomery said on Monday the arresting officer must appear at the next court date.

According to Roelofse, the officer would be a court witness.

“This could have a huge impact with regard to the severity of the sentence imposed,” he said.