The Labour Court in Cape Town has delivered a ruling in the case of Noreen Bam, a former police sergeant whose dismissal by the SAPS for shoplifting has been upheld after a comprehensive review.
The court's judgment reaffirmed the findings of an arbitrator who determined that Bam, who was stationed at Mowbray SAPS, engaged in shoplifting at Checkers Hyper and attempted to mislead authorities by providing a false name when apprehended. The ruling emphasised Bam’s failure to act in the interests of her employer, leading to a substantial breach of trust critical for the operations of the police service.
The court heard compelling evidence detailing Bam's actions on the day of the incident, which occurred in December 2014. Witnesses observed Bam and her mother loading various items from a store trolley into bags, subsequently leaving the store without paying for those items. When the alarm sounded as they exited, security personnel found unpaid goods worth over R440 in the bags.
Bam, during her arrest, identified herself as 'Suzette Karelse,' the name of a local singer. In an apparent attempt to evade charges, she pleaded with the store to allow them to leave and even offered to withdraw R1,000 to cover the cost of the items stolen.
Testifying in her defence, Bam claimed to be unaware of her mother's actions, stating that she was occupied with changing her baby's nappy at the time. Contrarily, her mother insisted that she had unknowingly bought meat items for R50 from a stranger. This contradictory testimony failed to provide a credible alternative to the evidence presented against them.
During arbitration proceedings, Sergeant D Vergotine and security officer P Zinqxondo testified regarding Bam's behaviour, with Vergotine noting that Bam had attempted to evade arrest and dissuade her mother from accepting blame. Zinqxondo provided further corroboration of the shoplifting, confirming the sequence of events that led to Bam’s apprehension.
Despite Bam's appeal, which contested the substantive fairness of her dismissal, the court deemed her narrative implausible, citing inconsistencies between her and her mother's testimonies. Judge R Lagrange stated, “The evidence presented revealed a conscious decision to mislead authorities," thereby affirming the arbitrator's assessment that Bam’s defence amounted to a mere 'simple denial', failing to convincingly counter the prosecution's strong case.
