Innocent man detained 21 days: In August 2004 Gabriel Freeman was 25, working as a barman, when he was arrested in a big police swoop on crime in Port Elizabeth. He said he was innocent but was still detained with drunk and disorderly suspects at the police station, and read his rights. Two days later, still protesting, he was taken to holding cells at the magistrates’ courts, where he was threatened by gangsters. His case was delayed and he was taken to St Albans Prison as an awaiting trial prisoner. He was given a humiliating body search, kept with 40 prisoners in a cell made for 18, and abused by other prisoners. He was released after 21 days. Mr Freeman won a case against the Minister of Safety and Security for ‘Wrongful arrest and imprisonment’ and was awarded R250 000 in damages for the trauma, humiliation, damage to his reputation, and for being deprived of his constitutional rights.

A case of mistaken identity: In 2002 a company’s salesperson, Ms Mahlangu, made a hire purchase sale of a computer to a ‘Mr Makgabo’ only to discover he had given fake ID and did not pay a cent. On 26th August, a few months later, she saw a man walk by and thought it was ‘Makgabo’. She and a colleague followed him and suggested he was the thief. This Mr Shongwe denied it, went to fetch his ID, the company meanwhile called the police and he was arrested. He appeared in court on 28 August, was given bail on 4 September and charges were withdrawn on 2 December. In 2006 Mr Shongwe’s Supreme Court of Appeal case for damages against the company was not granted. The Court said people who ‘honestly and reasonably’ report suspected crimes can’t be accused of ‘malicious arrest and prosecution’.

You may be drunk but you still have rights: In 2006 the High Court of the Eastern Cape dismissed a case by a police officer, Robin Glisson, who had appealed against a judgement by a Magistrate granting a man damages for wrongful arrest and imprisonment. The arresting officer, Glisson, had not personally seen the disorderly conduct of a drunk man, who was alleged to have thrown a bottle at the police van, but he arrested and detained him. The court said that to arrest without a warrant there must be proper proof that the arresting officer knows that the offence was committed – he must have first-hand knowledge or get a warrant based on sworn testimony. The Judge said the Bill of Rights supports freedom of the individual, not more power to the police for making arrests without warrants. However, this case shows the unnecessary trouble that being drunk can get you into, like Mavis in Prison.