Contradictory witness testimony emerges in Old Nic Mine robbery trial

CONTRADICTORY testimony from three prosecution witnesses dominated proceedings in the trial of four men accused of carrying out an armed robbery at Old Nic Mine in which nearly US$800,000 was allegedly stolen.

Andile Mlilo, Thobekani Dlodlo, Content Mguni and Langathani Mlalazi appeared before senior Bulawayo Regional Magistrate Mark Dzira on Wednesday facing three counts of armed robbery. All four pleaded not guilty.

Mlilo, Dlodlo and Mlalazi are represented by Goodluck Katenaire of Katenaire-Mbeure Law Chambers, while Mguni is represented by Tinashe Dzipe of Morris-Davies Law Firm.

The prosecution alleges the accused orchestrated a robbery at Old Nic Mine on June 23, 2025, making away with more than US$790,000 in cash.

State witness Simon Gumbo, a security guard at the mine, told the court he was confronted by two men wearing overalls and cloth face masks.

"They were wearing face masks and I did not identify them. One of the accused pointed a gun at my face and told me to comply, as they said they wanted to work," Gumbo testified.

"They escorted me to a Honda Fit and instructed me to lie underneath it."

During cross-examination, defence lawyer Tinashe Dzipe questioned how Gumbo could identify the attackers while lying underneath a vehicle.

"You were gripped with fear and lying under the car. What you are saying defies logic because you were facing down," Dzipe submitted.

Mine administrator Kimberly Amy Fisher gave evidence that differed from Gumbo's account, telling the court that one of the robbers wore a cloth mask while another wore a surgical mask.

Dzipe argued that her testimony did not corroborate Gumbo's version of events.

"Which statement should the court believe? You said one of the accused had red, shot eyes. Do you see anyone with such eyes?" he asked.

Fisher responded that none of the accused before the court had red eyes.

Chief security officer Kyle Bennett also testified that he was unable to identify any of the suspects.

"When I reviewed the CCTV I did not recognise them. I only saw their backs and they were all wearing blue overalls," Bennett told the court.

The matter was postponed to August 17 for continuation of the trial.

According to prosecutor Jethro Mada, Mlilo and Dlodlo, who were employed at Old Nic Mine, allegedly leaked information about a large cash delivery to their accomplices.

"Mlilo and Dlodlo were employed at Old Nic Mine and caught wind of information that there was a massive cash delivery," Mada said.

"Armed with this insider intelligence, they leaked the information to their accomplices. At around 12:50pm, Mguni, Mlalazi and two other suspects who are still at large descended on the mine armed with unidentified firearms and plastic cable ties."

The State alleges the gang first overpowered security guard Simon Gumbo, tied him up with plastic cable ties, robbed him of his service firearm and communication radio, and forced him underneath a parked vehicle before proceeding to the mine offices.

Prosecutors say the robbers stole an initial US$1,550 before forcing administration accountant Kimberly Amy Fisher to open the financial safe, from which they allegedly took US$769,016.65 in cash. They are also accused of stealing an additional US$20,000 from another safe drawer and a Redmi 13C cellphone worth US$130 belonging to Kimberly Judith Muvidziwa.

The State alleges detectives later arrested the suspects and recovered the stolen cellphone together with a small portion of the cash that had allegedly been buried.

During proceedings, the defence also referred to a separate armed robbery case in which Mguni and three co-accused were acquitted after a court found the State had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

In that judgment, Western Commonage Magistrate Pasipanodya Maturure ruled that the identification parade had been improperly conducted because the investigating officer participated in the process.

"It came to light in court that the investigating officer participated in carrying out the identification parade, and that was procedurally wrong because he was an interested party. An identification parade is supposed to be conducted by an independent police officer," the magistrate said.

He also found significant inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, casting doubt on the reliability of the witness identifications in that separate case.