An expert who worked with the prosecution, appeals and investigation team researching the Station Strangler case, says under current laws, Norman Afzal Simons would not have been convicted, due to irregularities in the case.
Last Thursday, Simons was released into the care of his family in Parow and will be on parole for the rest of his life.
He had served 28 years in jail for the murder of 10-year-old Elroy van Rooyen in 1994.
He could never be linked to the bodies of 22 other boys found in shallow graves in Mitchells Plain between 1986 and 1994.
Professor Colin Tredoux of UCT’s Department of Psychology has extensively researched the Station Strangler case under the guidance of “The Innocence Project” in the US.
Speaking to Weekend Argus, Tredoux said: “Of the more than 370 mistaken convictions in the United States, the combination of mistaken eyewitness identification and false or pressured confessions has been one of the major sources of error.”
Simons’ conviction in 1995 hinged on eyewitness testimony, an ID parade, and a confession that was later retracted.
He added: “The law in South Africa was different, and there was a different police force. What happened in the Simons case would not be acceptable at all under the Constitution ratified after 1994.”
In 2006, Simons collapsed in the Mitchells Plain Magistrate’s Court after findings of an inquest into six young boys who were killed during the reign of the Station Strangler revealed that DNA, such as hair, semen and blood, did not match his.
At the time, a series of identikits of the Strangler were released by the police and a reward of R250 000 was offered.
Tredoux said there were several inconsistencies in the investigation.
This included a woman who had seen a man with a scar on his face, and an identikit released before Simons’ arrest showed the scar to be a long knife wound on the left side of the face.
Simons, Tredoux said, had a roundish scar on the right side, under his eye, caused by a suspected paraffin burn.
The identity parade was also sketchy, as Simons was the only one who was dressed differently - in mustard trousers and a floral shirt - and had the scar on his face.
“At the line-up, one witness was unable to identify Simons, and another was able to; after much thought, she remained dubious about the hairstyle of Simons.”
Tredoux also explained that Simons’ confession was not clear as he was deprived of sleep, was interrogated for days and may have been pressured, and he did not indicate if he had murdered anyone, only that he had heard voices telling him to kill.
The release of Simons, 56, has divided the community. There are those who believe the mild mannered teacher who can speak seven languages is innocent. Others believe in his guilt and that his freedom will once again bring terror to the Cape Flats.
A woman who did not want to be named said: “You can’t imagine the devastation and havoc the Station Strangler created back then. And we know there are lots of stories and questions about whether it was actually (Simons) who murdered and brutally raped so many innocent little boys. But what if it was? I would not like to ever see him again.”
Weekend Argus