The Western Cape High Court heard renewed focus from the State on telephone communication originating from prison in the run‑up to the attempted murder of attorney William Booth, the court was told on Thursday. The matter is part of the larger trial involving Nafiz Modack and 14 others on various charges relating to the same incident.
State outlines pattern of calls
Prosecutors presented cellphone activity to establish a pattern of contact between one of the accused, identified in court as accused four, Toufeek Brown, and other persons allegedly implicated in the shooting. Records shown in court indicated Brown had called his wife, Kauthar Brown, and co‑accused Ziyaad Poole repeatedly in a short period in April 2020, the State said.
"What were those conversations about, that you had to stay in the middle? What was that about?"
"I can't remember," Brown replied.
The State alleges the calls are relevant to linking roles in the attack: Poole is accused of arranging the getaway vehicle used in the shooting, while Kauthar Brown has previously reached a plea agreement and admitted involvement, the court was told. Defence counsel sought to challenge the significance of the call records during cross‑examination.
What the record shows
Prosecutor Blaine Lazarus led questioning around the timing and frequency of calls. The records introduced indicated numerous calls between 3 and 9 April 2020, which the State advanced as part of a chain of communications that preceded the incident.
| Period | Evidence presented |
|---|---|
| 3–9 April 2020 | Multiple calls recorded between Brown, his wife and co‑accused Poole (State says more than 20 contacts) |
Courtroom developments and next steps
Cross‑examination of Brown was adjourned and is scheduled to continue on Monday. The hearing is one element of a lengthy case in which Modack and others face charges that include an attempt on Booth’s life, an event that occurred about six years ago.
Matters of telephone evidence — particularly calls made from within correctional facilities — have been a recurring feature in major criminal trials. The State relies on such records to establish contemporaneous lines of communication; defence teams typically seek to undermine the inferences drawn from them, arguing that frequency of contact does not automatically prove criminal coordination.
- Who is on trial: Nafiz Modack and 14 co‑accused on various charges including attempted murder.
- Key witness in focus: Accused four, Toufeek Brown, cross‑examined over cellphone calls.
- Next court date: Cross‑examination set to resume on Monday.
Why the evidence matters
Phone records can corroborate timelines and relationships between suspects, and when combined with other evidence may assist the court in building a narrative of who did what and when. In this trial the State is relying on those records to show contact between accused persons immediately prior to the shooting.
Defence strategy in response — as reflected in the brief exchanges reported from the witness stand — is to cast doubt on the content and significance of the calls. Brown repeatedly maintained an inability to recall the substance of those conversations when pressed by the prosecutor.
The trial remains sensitive: it involves allegations against multiple accused and centres on an attack on a legal practitioner, a fact that has attracted public attention and emphasised concerns about safety for those operating within the justice system. The court will continue to weigh the relevance of electronic communication alongside other material evidence as the case progresses.
Reporting from the Western Cape High Court will continue as cross‑examination resumes. The hearing will likely test how the court evaluates digital records from prisons and the weight those records carry in a complex, multi‑accused prosecution.
