Donkie’s assets to remain frozen during criminal trials

ALLEGED underworld figure Jerome “Donkie” Booysen and his wife, Tina, who are married in community of property, have been prohibited from dealing with their multimillion-rand assets while a criminal case is before court.

A restraint order was issued against the dealing of 18 immovable properties registered in Booysen’s name, and a number of other properties – valued at an estimated R21.35 million – registered to Albatross Isle Trade (Pty) Ltd, while he faces a number of criminal charges including racketeering, and which supports the likelihood that if he is convicted in the criminal matter, a confiscation order may be granted in terms of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (Poca).

Booysen had lodged an urgent application to the Western Cape High Court in which he sought for the discharge or variation of the order insofar as it affected him.

High court judge Ashley BinnsWard said: “Poca is directed at combating organised crime, money laundering and criminal gang activity.”

The preamble to the act records that “it is usually very difficult to prove the direct involvement of organised crime leaders in particular cases because they do not perform the actual criminal activities themselves”.

Booysen faces 95 drug trafficking-related charges at the Bellville Magistrate’s Court, and in a separate court case to go on trial at the high court next year, he and business partner Mark Lifman will appear for their alleged involvement in the murder of Brian “Steroid King” Wainstein.

According to court documents, the court may grant a restraint order if it is satisfied that the person is charged with an offence, and reasonable grounds exist for believing that a confiscation order may be made against that person.

Court documents read: “It appears from the information set out in the supporting affidavits that Mr Booysen is the owner of numerous immovable properties. Eighteen properties are individually identified in the papers

“

It appears ... Mr Booysen is the owner of numerous immovable properties. Eighteen properties are individually identified

COURT DOCUMENTS

as registered in his name. A senior police officer testified that, consequent upon a report received from an informant that Mr Booysen was engaged in drug dealing from a property in the northern suburbs, surveillance was maintained over certain properties registered in his name.

“Subsequent police raids found considerable quantities of drug-manufacturing material at three properties owned by Mr Booysen. The nature of the material that was found at these addresses was indicative of the use of the properties for the manufacture and distribution of illegal narcotics on a commercial scale.

“(Booysen) claims that he had no knowledge of the use of his properties for unlawful purposes. His evidence was that he had engaged the second defendant, Kenneth Hansen, to manage the properties, which were used to generate a rental income.”

Booysen had testified that he acquired property holdings from his earnings as a municipal building inspector for 21 years, with the investment of his wife’s pension payout.

“(Booysen) said that his experience empowered him to acquire properties on auction and renovate them for the purpose of profitable resale or generating a rental income ... He implied (without providing any particularity) that these sources of capital growth and supplemental income had funded further acquisitions.

“(Booysen) has also accumulated a collection of nine motor vehicles of assorted vintage and value estimated to be worth nearly R1.7m,” court documents read.