A Cape Town police officer was dismissed from the South African Police Services (SAPS) after attempting to steal a trolley full of groceries from Woolworths.

The officer, identified only as Warrant Officer GF Madeley stationed at the Nyanga Police Station, was arrested in January 2022 at the popular Canal Walk shopping mall.

According to court papers, Madeley entered the store with a trolley filled with empty bags, which he proceeded to fill with various items before attempting to exit without paying. Upon being stopped by store security, Madeley made a dash for the exit, a choice that ultimately led to his arrest. 

He was charged with misconduct and was further accused of theft and of tarnishing SAPS’s reputation and bringing its name into disrepute.

During a hearing in February 2022, he admitted the charges and pleaded guilty.

In mitigation, he cited his 19-year service with the police, his status as a first-time offender, and personal difficulties, including alleged financial pressures and a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. He even presented a psychiatric report suggesting that he may have acted while absent-minded.

However, SAPS contended that Madeley’s actions were calculated and premeditated. They highlighted that at the moment he was stopped by security; he had ample opportunity to resolve the situation in a trustworthy manner.

When making a ruling, the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing sanctioned him to a mere two months’ suspension without pay. The leniency of this sentence did not sit well with SAPS, who sought to overturn the decision in the Labour Court.

During the review process, SAPS argued that the chairperson’s ruling failed to appropriately address the severity of the misconduct, stressing that the trust inherent in the employment relationship had been irrevocably damaged.

The court also heard that no reasonable decision-maker would have reached the same lenient conclusion, given that Madeley’s actions represented a breach of the police code of conduct.

Madeley did not oppose the application.

In her ruling, Acting Judge Deirdre Venter stated that the chairperson had not provided sufficient reasoning detailing why she didn’t consider the seriousness of the offence after her finding that the misconduct was, in fact, serious and premeditated.

Judge Venter further added that there was no prevailing case law dealing with theft, specifically when theft is committed by police officials.

“The first respondent (chairperson) failed to consider vital evidence related to the gravity of the offence and the trust relationship. Her conclusion regarding the sanction appears to contradict the facts and evidence and is unreasonable. Any reasonable decision-maker would have concluded that suspension without pay was too lenient and that dismissal was appropriate,” said Venter.

Judge Venter said there was enough evidence to set aside the chairperson’s findings.

“The sanction of suspension was not reasonable and is therefore replaced by an order that the employment of the second respondent (Madely) could be terminated with immediate effect,” said the judge.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL News

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel

Source link