5 disclosure, Govender accompanied other members of the field unit and a few detectives to Mhlongo’s home at Hambanathi. Ramseroop was present. Mhlongo was not at home. Instead they found his son Zamani, who directed them to another residence. There they found Mhlongo and the Hilux which, according to the testimony of Dorasamy Pillay, the complainant in count 2, had been taken from him at gun-point. Mhlongo was arrested and the Hilux seized. The State was able only to prove a case of theft against the appellant as there was no evidence linking him to the actual robbery of the Hilux. [9] On 21 February at 7 am, acting on further information from Ramseroop, Govender again accompanied some officers and Ramseroop to the latter’s residence. There, Ramseroop removed the hidden metal box from the ceiling and handed it to them. This was the very box that had been taken from the post office during the robbery. Ramseroop was released later that day, after making a written statement to the police concerning these events. [10] To sum up, Ramseroop’s evidence implicated the appellant in the thefts of the Hilux and Corolla. His evidence regarding the metal box linked the appellant to the Maidstone post office robbery described below. To the circumstances leading to the discovery of the Hilux and the metal box, which assumed critical importance before us, I will return. [11] The appellant denied involvement in any of the crimes. Regarding the Hilux, the appellant testified that he had merely been helping Mhlongo, who had since died, to facilitate a business deal with Ramseroop for the repair of the vehicle. He asserted that Ramseroop had falsely implicated him in the crimes because the police had tortured him.