Residents of a spacious complex with a park-like setting in an upmarket Durban neighbourhood have unanimously said no to a “dangerous criminal” relocating to their community.
The resounding sentiment was made known during a court sitting this week for the latest parole application made by serial rapist Andre Gregory Mohamed, 54, who was initially convicted and sentenced for his crimes in 2001.
Mohamed appeared before magistrate Sharon Marks at the Durban Regional Court on Thursday where probation officer, Renuka Moodley, presented a supplementary pre-sentencing report, before the matter was adjourned to November.
Mohamed raped 43 women in Durban and Pretoria, many at gun-point during the 1990s. Some of the other charges he faced included indecent assault, armed robbery and the illegal possession of a firearm.
During 1996 and 1997, he targeted women living in Morningside, Durban.
Mohamed, who lived in Overport, was arrested but managed to escape from custody while attending an ID parade at the Durban Central police station.
He fled to Pretoria and continued his predation before his rearrest. Many of his 22 victims, mainly from the Sunnyside area, were also robbed of their motor vehicles.
Magistrate Marks sentenced him to an "indefinite" term of imprisonment (non-determined sentence) in 2001 and he was declared a “dangerous criminal”.
Legislation dictated that he was eligible for parole after 15 years.
He made unsuccessful bids for freedom in 2016 and 2021 as Marks found that he had not been subjected to the various rehabilitative sessions of counselling and psychotherapy that she ordered.
On both occasions Marks maintained that he was a dangerous criminal and his indeterminate sentence should continue.
He was sentenced for the Pretoria offences in 2004, declared a dangerous criminal and also handed an indefinite prison term.
His latest parole bid began earlier this year. The State, represented by senior public prosecutor Advocate Val Melis, remains opposed to the bid.
The Department of Correctional Services, stated that he was a candidate for correctional supervision (house detention) with various conditions. According to the department, Mohamed's sister was happy to house him at the complex she lived in, subject to the body corporate’s approval.
Moodley participated in an online special general meeting, last week, convened by the body corporate to ascertain whether residents would approve Mohamed living at the complex, if parole was granted.
An 80% turnout was recorded and residents were also given an overview on Mohamed.
Residents indicated unanimously that they would not be amenable to the accused taking up residence at the complex, and he would not be accepted into their community.
Some of the reasons they cited included; residents would lose their sense of peace, harmony, safety, security and enjoying the common property, which was a violation of their rights and a cause for concern.
They were wary that no tenant would want to rent there knowing that a dangerous criminal lived on-site, which would severely prejudice the owner’s investment.
They also feared that while a criminal may change his behaviour for a short time, he will eventually go back to the way he was.
“In view of the new developments regarding the current court case, it is recommended that the accused continue his sentence,” was the recommendation recorded in Moodley’s report.
“The community is saying no to him entering the environment. That’s the essence of what they are saying.
“I have to canvas alternate living options,” said Advocate Sean Edwards, Mohamed’s legal representative, in requesting the adjournment, which was granted.