Matlala trial: Expert reveals police car GPS data on Kekana arrest

The high‑profile Matlala trial, which centres on alleged underworld kingpin Vusimusi “Cat” Matlala and his co‑accused Musa Kekana, has taken a technical turn. The defence has called a specialist in vehicle‑tracking technology to testify that the police’s automatic vehicle location (AVL) records are reliable, even though the speed data for a key police car was missing on the day of Kekana’s arrest.

Why the AVL system matters in the case

South Africa’s police force has relied on AVL technology for nearly two decades to monitor patrol movements, improve response times and provide evidence in court. The system combines GPS satellites with on‑board vehicle sensors to generate a continuous stream of latitude, longitude and speed information. When the data are accurate, they can pinpoint a vehicle’s location at any moment, a factor that has become crucial in the Matlala trial‑within‑a‑trial.

On 17 April 2024, police officers arrested Musa Kekana near 8th Road in the Kew suburb of Johannesburg. The state claims Kekana was placed in the boot of a VW Golf GTI (often referred to as a “Golf 7”) and driven to a police station. Kekana, however, maintains he was forced into a white, unmarked Toyota Fortuner, taken to his home, and assaulted there. The divergent accounts hinge on whether the Golf or the Fortuner was present at the two critical locations – 8th Road and 34 5th Road.

Expert witness Eric Deysel explains the data

Eric Deysel, a consultant for C‑Track and a veteran of the SAPS AVL project for 19 years, appeared before the Johannesburg High Court to clarify how the system works and why the missing speed reading does not invalidate the GPS coordinates. Deysel explained that the Golf’s speed sensor was incorrectly configured, causing the AVL unit to look for speed data from the vehicle itself – a source that the car cannot provide. Consequently, the system logged “no speed” and interpreted the vehicle as idling.

“The GPS coordinates are independent of the speed reading,” Deysel told the bench. “Even when the speed field is blank, the satellite‑derived latitude and longitude remain accurate.” He added that the vehicle’s path could still be reconstructed because the AVL software records a timestamped series of points, each representing the car’s exact position at a given moment.

When cross‑examined by Kekana’s counsel, Adv Riaan Gissing, Deysel affirmed that the absence of speed data did not affect the location data. “Technology can fail in one component while the other components function perfectly,” he said, reinforcing that the court could trust the GPS trace of the Golf.

Chronology of the two police vehicles

Deysel presented a detailed timeline derived from the AVL logs. According to his analysis, the Golf GTI was first recorded at 8th Road at 08:50 am, where it remained stationary until just after noon. At 12:01 pm the vehicle departed, briefly returned, and later moved to 5th Road, where its ignition was switched off at 04:01 pm. The car stayed at that spot until 07:42 pm, when it finally left the area.

In contrast, the Fortuner’s movements were more frequent. The AVL system logged the Fortuner at Midway Mall between 07:38 am and 08:37 am, after which it appeared at 8th Road at 08:46 am and left five minutes later. The Fortuner then shuttled between 8th Road and 5th Road multiple times, being recorded at 8th Road four separate occasions and at 5th Road five times throughout the day. These logs suggest the Fortuner was actively used during the operation, supporting Kekana’s claim that the vehicle transported him.

Implications for the state’s case and the defence strategy

The state had previously called 13 witnesses and sought to provisionally close the trial‑within‑a‑trial, arguing that the evidence presented was sufficient to move forward. Defence lawyers objected, insisting that a substantive decision was required before any closure. By introducing AVL evidence, the defence hopes to demonstrate that the state’s narrative about the Golf’s exclusive involvement is incomplete.

If the court accepts Deysel’s testimony, the GPS data could undermine the prosecution’s assertion that the Golf was the sole transport vehicle. It would also lend credibility to the Fortuner’s presence, as testified by W/O Johannes Phiri, who confirmed he drove an unmarked white Fortuner during the operation and that it was used to move Kekana.

Legal analysts note that South African courts have increasingly relied on digital forensics, including AVL logs, to resolve disputes over police conduct. In the 2022 State v. Mthembu case, the Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the admissibility of GPS data despite minor technical glitches, provided the source was trustworthy. Deysel’s long‑standing involvement with the SAPS AVL project positions him as a credible expert, potentially tipping the balance in favour of the defence.

What lies ahead for the Matlala trial

The trial‑within‑a‑trial remains ongoing. The judge must decide whether the AVL evidence is sufficient to rebut the state’s claims or whether further investigation is needed. Both sides are expected to present additional witnesses, including forensic analysts who can corroborate Deysel’s interpretation of the data.

Beyond the immediate legal battle, the case highlights broader concerns about police accountability and the reliability of surveillance technology in South Africa. As AVL systems become more sophisticated, courts will continue to grapple with questions of data integrity, chain‑of‑custody and the impact of technical errors on criminal proceedings.

For now, the Matlala trial stands as a litmus test for how modern digital evidence can reshape the narrative of a high‑stakes criminal case, potentially altering the fate of Musa Kekana and the alleged kingpin Vusimusi “Cat” Matlala.