Latest News
Sarah-Jane Trent moves to scrap her ad hoc testimony, claims it was against her will
Sarah-Jane Trent, a former associate of forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan, has formally requested parliament’s ad hoc committee to declare her testimony invalid and strike it from the official record.
Mkhwanazi Inquiry: Mr Paul O’Sullivan and Ms Sarah-Jane Trent
Meeting Summary Video (Part 1) Video (Part 2) Ad Hoc Committee on Gen Mkhwanazi's Allegations The Ad Hoc Committee met on 5 March 2026 to continue its inquiry into the allegations made by Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi regarding corruption and...
Mkhwanazi Inquiry: Mr Paul O’Sullivan (Day 2)
“Mr Malema: Have you ever been found guilty of a GBV?
Mr O’Sullivan: What is GBV?
Mr Malema: Gender-based violence.
Mr O’Sullivan: Yes, in 1999 I paid a R500 admission of guilt fine for an alleged assault. In retrospect, I probably should not have paid the fine, but my lawyer at the time advised me that either there would be a trial or I could just pay the fine and it would not be a criminal record. Unfortunately, I paid the fine. It was made a criminal record. And then it was subsequently, what do they call it, expunged from the record.
Mr Malema: Do you still have your firearm licence?
Mr O’Sullivan: Yes, I do.
Mr Malema: Is it not the requirement that when you are found guilty of such a thing, they should withdraw your firearm licence?
Mr O’Sullivan: So there was not a trial and I was not found guilty. I just paid an admission of guilt fine. It is like if you are driving at 150 kilometres an hour and the speed limit is 120, you get a ticket in the post and you can either go to court and challenge it and then you get convicted and then it will be on your record or you pay an admission of guilt fine and then it does not appear on your record, although that is now changing, because I think with the new Act, even if you pay an admission of guilt fine now, it becomes part of your record. But at that time, it was not the case.”
Mkhwanazi Inquiry: Mr Paul O’Sullivan (Day 1)
Mr Paul O’Sullivan appeared before the Ad Hoc Committee to give evidence concerning corruption, misconduct, and interference within the criminal justice system. The Chairperson explained that the purpose of the meeting was to hear his account and to allow members to...
O’Sullivan’s new tormentor: JSE-listed company CEO alleges Paul is a “sellout” to Zunaid Moti’scriminal enterprise
Mantengu CEO Michael Miller fires back at Paul O’Sullivan, calling him a “sellout” to a criminal enterprise linked to controversial businessman Zunaid Moti. In this explosive interview with Alec Hogg, Miller claims O’Sullivan took money and shares to withdraw sworn affidavits — and accuses the Johannesburg Stock Exchange of covering up share manipulation. With death threats, legal battles, and accusations flying, this is one of the most explosive BizNews interviews yet.
The story of a court endorsed home-wrecker
2.3 You severely assaulted our client last week by, among other things, knocking our client’s glasses off her face twice, pouring water on her computer, shouting loudly in her ear, pushing her around and throwing her to the ground, kicking her and hitting her with a hanger. Our client had to wear a neck brace for a day to make the pain bearable.
2.4 Our client’s eyelid was blue and swollen and our client could not sleep on her back for two nights due to all the bruises.
2.10 Your unacceptable behaviour creates the impression that you want to isolate our client from her friends, her religion and free choices.
2.11 You regularly saw a psychiatrist until April 2019, and used mediation for your mood disorders.
The lady who framed a Judge and a Journalist for sexual assault
“We are looking for something like allegations of sexual assault, tax evasion, etc.”
Michelle Van der Merwe concerning retired SCA Judge Fritz Brand
Antony Mostert & Another v Simon John Nash, Paul Robert O’Sullivan, Sarah-Jane Trent & Others
“[98] Moreover, the forensic report does not contain facts and the averments that the forensic report does contain are substantially false. The respondents do not make out a case that the contents of any future version of the forensic report will be different or anything other than substantially untrue.
[99] The respondents’ statements regarding the applicants reflect an absence of concern on the part of the respondents, not only with the truth or correctness of those statements but also with the language used to express them.”
The Late Koos van der Merwe MP, concerning his granddaughter Michelle
“In other words, what I mean is that I don’t believe her. I told her, “Michelle you are a liar. You are fabricating these things. What the hell is wrong with you. But now, Michelle, that you have decided to take the warpath, we will meet you here. We will fight you from now on. You are impossible, and the only way to deal with you in ‘hard’. You go to court and there will be lawyers who will crucify you. You are a psychological person, with a history of psychological problems, you have A, B, C, D, E, and F. You have been to Dendron. You are a troublemaker. You are a liar. You are going to go to court? Fine! We will meet you there. We will destroy you. You will never become a lawyer after this.”
– Koos Van der Merwe, MP
