…as Justice Sakoane questions soldiers’ actions
Moorosi Tsiane
CHIEF Justice Sakoane Sakoane has raised serious concerns over glaring inconsistencies in the army’s handling of crucial evidence in the long-running murder case of Lisebo Tang, questioning why an army officer took key exhibits to the police while leaving behind the suspects involved.
In this matter, Sergeant (then Corporal) Tjekane Sebolai and Corporal (then Private) Selone Ratšiu, face charges of murder, attempted murder, malicious damage to property and defeating the ends of justice.
The charges stem from a 9 May 2014 shooting outside the Ha-Leqele home of then Lesotho Defence Force (LDF) commander, Lieutenant General Tlali Kamoli, in which Ms Tang was fatally shot while her companion, Tšepo Jane, was seriously wounded.
According to court testimony, the two soldiers allegedly opened fire on a vehicle parked near Kamoli’s residence, killing Ms Tang.
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Warrant Officer Class II (WOII) Liau Jase, who worked at the LDF armoury at the time, testified before Justice Sakoane that the morning after the shooting, one Captain (then Lieutenant) Moeletsi came to collect two rifles allegedly used in the attack, saying he was taking them to the police for ballistic testing.
Jase told the court that Capt Moeletsi went to the police accompanied by Staff Sergeant Mokoena Mokoena — but not the two accused soldiers who had actually fired the weapons. Surprisingly, it was Staff Sgt Mokoena, who was not even at the scene of the shooting, who gave a statement to the police.
When the ballistic results came back, they deepened the mystery. The two rifles handed over by Capt Moeletsi did not match the bullet shells recovered at the scene of the crime.
This revelation suggested that the firearms given to the police were not the same weapons used in the fatal shooting — a discovery that prompted Justice Sakoane to sharply question the handling of evidence.
“How many people handled these firearms?” Justice Sakoane asked pointedly.
“These firearms did not match the shells found at the commander’s place. That simply means there was no shooting at that place — that is the dilemma I have now.”
He further demanded answers about Capt Moeletsi’s conduct.
“These are not the firearms used in the shooting, which means Moeletsi misled the police. Why did he take the firearms to the police and leave behind the two accused? And why did he go on to give a statement when he only arrived after the incident?”
As the court tried to unravel the chain of events, LDF Commander Lieutenant General Mojalefa Letsoela added another layer of confusion when he contradicted the defence’s key argument that a “red alert” order was in place on the night of the shooting.
A military “red alert” refers to a situation indicating an imminent and extreme threat requiring immediate action to preserve life, protect assets or prevent mission failure.
The accused soldiers, through their lawyer, Advocate Sello Tšabeha, had claimed that they opened fire because they believed they were acting under a red alert, issued in response to January 2014 bombings at the homes of then First Lady ’Maesaiah Thabane (then Liabiloe Ramoholi) and former Police Commissioner Khothatso Tsooana.
However, Lt-Gen Letsoela told the court under cross-examination by Advocate Motene Rafoneke that no such alert existed at the time.
“I do not know if there was a red alert order by the time of the shooting. That came the following morning, but it was not a red alert but was a ‘stand-to’, meaning troops had to be cautious as the situation was becoming unstable. I was then the Air Wing Commander and ordered the same for my troops. It lasted for about a week.”
When asked whether a January bombing could justify a red alert still being in effect in May, Lt-Gen Letsoela was categorical.
“Between January and May, the time would have long lapsed. I cannot say that incident would still warrant a red alert order.”
The trial continues.
