KEY POINTS
- The organization AfriForum says it will defend the Bergview College caretaker accused of raping a 7-year-old, since there is no evidence against him.
- The accused and his family have reportedly fled for safety because of reactions from the public.
- AfriForum has said both the police and the media have made mistakes in the case, specifically mentioning possible false accusations.
AfriForum’s Private Prosecution Unit said it is protecting the caretaker at Bergview College accused of raping a seven-year-old by claiming there is no evidence and by warning about vigilante madness.
AfriForum says that the caretaker has faced continuous threats, even though it insists the authorities have neither acted nor gathered evidence against him.
The caretaker and his relatives have not been able to leave their house because of constant abuse. AfriForum said the accusations, which appear to be wrongful, have disrupted his daily life.
 AfriForum defends caretaker,internet reactions, and what the public said
In addition, AfriForum found it problematic that the Police Minister, Senzo Mchunu, identified the principal as a suspect in April, because it lacked solid evidence. Mchunu later expressed regret, stating: My intention was never to bring disrepute to your client or another person. I am sorry for anyone who is mistakenly pointed at in such a way.
AfriForum says online users have unfairly targeted the caretaker and principal, worsening their situation.
DNA request without formal charges
Barry Bateman from AfriForum said the police wanted a DNA sample from the caretaker, but have not quizzed him or considered him a suspect. Bateman said this confirmed AfriForum’s opinion that any rape would not have taken place at the school.
In AfriForum’s opinion, the caretaker found the accusation unexpected but thought the police would look into it fairly.
According to officials, three teachers and a cleaner were all there at the school. He said that if the allegation were true, there should be witnesses to support it. AfriForum defends caretaker because there are currently lack of evidence.
