Convicted Lentegeur drug dealer Fadwaan Murphy denied bail

The Western Cape High Court has denied the bail application of convicted drug dealer Fadwaan “Vet” Murphy, who is appealing against his conviction and sentence of 18 years’ direct imprisonment.

The court found that Murphy was likely to resume his drug dealing and money laundering activities in Lentegeur, causing shock and outrage in the Mitchells Plain community if he was released pending appeal. This was the gist of the decision handed down by acting Judge Diane Davis on Monday, 5 August 2024 in the Western Cape High Court.



Murphy was convicted in July 2023 for drug dealing, money laundering, managing a racketeering enterprise and receiving property derived from racketeering.

Murphy and his ex-wife Shafieka Murphy operated a tik-packaging business dealing in methamphetamine (tik). At the heart of the so-called “Murphy enterprise”, was Murphy, his ex-wife and his sister Glenda Bird, who died of cancer in December 2019.

These crimes were committed between July 2013 and September 2015 within the districts of Mitchells Plain, Wynberg, Cape Town, Strand, Worcester and Caledon. When police pounced on his packaging house in September 2015, they seized 9kg of tik and found R1.9-million in cash. Murphy was also fined R2-million.

The State successfully argued that his drug dealing, motivated by greed for money and power, destroyed communities. Shafieka Murphy was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment.

In a further blow, the Asset Forfeiture Unit seized Murphy’s assets worth nearly R54-million, which included three properties and 14 vehicles, all obtained with criminal proceeds.

On 19 January 2024, the court sentenced him to an effective 18 years’ direct imprisonment. He applied for leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence, which was refused on 12 February 2024.

Murphy then petitioned the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) for leave to appeal, which was granted. He then sought bail pending the hearing of his appeal by a full bench of the Western Cape High Court.

Murphy’s claims

Murphy deposed an affidavit in support of his application to be released on bail pending his appeal of conviction and sentence. He relied heavily on the fact that he was granted leave to appeal on petition, which he claimed meant he had a good chance of success on appeal.

One of his arguments was that the chances of his appeal being heard before 2026 were extremely slim, which meant he could be incarcerated for another two to three years before his appeal was heard, despite the fact that the SCA believed he had a reasonable chance of success on appeal.

Murphy submitted the following arguments in support of his release on bail:

1. He claimed that his record showed he was unlikely to endanger public safety or commit Schedule 1 offences.


2. There was no danger of him interfering with witnesses now that his trial was over.


3. Had no intention of fleeing, was granted bail following his arrest in 2016, and the State did not consider him a flight risk at the time.


4. He remained convinced that he would be acquitted on appeal. He claimed that his unwavering belief and confidence that he would be acquitted on appeal precluded any possibility of fleeing.


5. His ambition in seeking his release was merely to be reunited with his wife and young children, with whom he enjoyed a close relationship.

Murphy also stated that he was in poor health and suffered from several chronic conditions, claiming that he had not been consistently given his prescribed medications in prison.

He claimed that the State had effectively frozen all of his assets and that he had not worked in more than a year since his incarceration.

He further stated: “While my wife (Aneeka) earns variable amounts in conducting her modest home industry, such is barely enough to cater for everyday household expenses including school, medical and transport needs.”

He asserted that his court proceedings were “ruinously expensive” resulting in him being “financially exhausted”, yet he said that “with the help of members of my wife’s family however I hope to raise an amount which may serve to ensure that I will serve my sentence should my appeal be unsuccessful”.

State’s counter arguments

Senior state advocate Aradhana Heeranum used Colonel Johan Smit’s answering affidavit as the basis for her counterarguments. Smit is the investigating officer in Grassy Park CAS 416/09/2015 (the case number in relation to the offences with which Murphy was charged and convicted).

The state took offence at Murphy’s complaint that he had not consistently received his prescribed medication. Smit’s affidavit was accompanied by an affidavit from Deidre Martin, the operations manager at Drakenstein Prison Maximum’s Healthcare Department.

Martin stated that Murphy received medical treatment daily and that his medication was regularly administered. She asserted that if Murphy claimed otherwise, he was not telling the truth.

Furthermore, Colonel Smit disputed Murphy’s claim that his wife barely made ends meet. Smit claimed that an investigation revealed that Mrs Murphy financed four vehicles on 23 August 2021, 9 February 2023, 14 March 2023, and 31 March 2023, totalling more than R3.5-million.

The investigation further revealed she had several companies registered in her name.

Smit also made damning allegations about the alleged drug trade in the area around Turksvy in Lentegeur, where Murphy’s wife lives. He said her house was directly opposite Murphy’s territory, known as “the Island” and that Murphy continued to have links with his former gang, the Dixie Boys.

“The investigation revealed that drug dealing has continued since Murphy’s incarceration. The Fancy Boys gang has taken over this area. According to informants, Murphy and the Fancy Boys’ leader have reached an agreement. The former Dixie Boys, who sold drugs on the island, have become Fancy Boys and continue to do so. It is understood that Murphy received monetary compensation for this arrangement. According to sources, Murphy’s wife now runs this ‘business’ while he is incarcerated.”

Smit said that because of their experience with gang culture, the Fancy Boys would not give up this lucrative drug territory and would fight to keep it.

“There is a strong likelihood that should Murphy be released this could spark off a gang war in the area as Murphy would seek to reclaim his territory. The Western Cape as a whole, but more especially, Mitchells Plain, is notorious for gang wars and the fight for drug turf. This most often leads to violence and, inevitably, the loss of life,” he said.

Arriving at judgment

Before passing judgment, acting Judge Davis elaborated on the possibility that Murphy, if released on bail, would endanger public safety or commit a Schedule 1 offence.

She said: “To my mind, the evidence at the trial showed that Murphy had a propensity to deal in drugs on an ongoing basis, drug dealing being a very prevalent offence in the Mitchells Plain area. He also had a propensity to launder money.

“While I accept that Murphy has no record of having committed any physically violent crime, to my mind dealing in tik is a crime which clearly endangers the safety of the public by virtue of the great potential for addiction, which wreaks havoc on the lives of those who become addicted to it, as well as their families.”

Furthermore, she said, the evidence presented at the trial also showed that Murphy had a propensity to launder money and that he used his close corporation, Ulterior Trading Solutions, to create the façade of a lawful business operation to launder the proceeds of his drug dealing.

Davis reiterated that given the notoriety of the case and the reception of Murphy’s conviction, she agreed with Smit that Murphy’s release on bail was likely to cause shock and outrage in the Mitchells Plain community, undermining public trust in the criminal justice system, especially if Murphy resumed his drug-dealing activities. DM