She said Wilken would ask her to create websites including the front page and he would subsequently take over control of the sites and do the necessary logins and passwords as well as populate them.
The court heard that Wilken would normally also change the passwords when he deemed it necessary. Moodley said she did not intentionally — for any wrongful doing — destroy any evidence.
“At all times I was well aware the state had confiscated various devices upon which the images and other information were captured. I was however concerned that somebody may hack into my telephone, not the authorities, and retrieve emails and other documents thereby attributing them to me.”
She said she could not comment on any accusation involving Wilken and that he was the controller of all the cards related. “I had no interaction with users of the various sites as it was the first accused who would introduce himself to users,” she said.
In his answering affidavit, Wilken disputed most of the contents of the affidavit of the investigating officer, Hendricus Johannes Boshoff, which was read in court on Monday.
The investigating officer's affidavit revealed that Wilken owned three vehicles, a blue BMW with the registration plate “Kidz NA GP,” a Volkswagen Golf and a Nissan NP200.
Wilken said in his answering affidavit, read in court by his lawyer, that the investigating officer, despite being provided with his affidavit in support of bail failed to provide a factual basis for opposition to his release on bail.
“The vehicle [BMW] was valued at about R800,000 and financed by the bank, with an outstanding balance of about the same amount. I respectfully submit that this vehicle is not an asset in any way and was therefore not included in my initial bail affidavit,” read Wilken's affidavit.
Wilken said the investigating officer had contradicted himself by alleging, on the one hand, that he had no fixed address but he had confirmed his address.
He reiterated that the eviction of Moodley (from their rented home) before she had been convicted or even arrested was a direct result of the frenzy created around his arrest.
“I have a deep and strong relationship with my mother. She is prepared to house me under even these difficult conditions. I will stand my trial until it's finalised and abide by any condition this honourable court may impose,” he said.
State prosecutor Colleen Ryan said Wilken's defence disagreed that a factual basis for opposition to bail had been put forward but she rejected this argument.
“Had this been the case, the entire replying affidavit would have been redundant. Had it been the case that there was no evidence or nothing substantial, given by the investigating officer in his affidavit.
“There would not have been a need for the very voluminous replying affidavit to be drafted. It is the state submission that there is indeed substantial arguments made by the investigating officer,” she told the court.
The matter was postponed to February 14 for the court to deliver judgment on the bail application.
TimesLIVE
Girlfriend of alleged child pornographer Wilken was merely his 'puppet'
Journalist
Image: Thulani Mbele
Tiona Megan Moodley, 25, who has been in a relationship with alleged child pornographer Darren Wilken, 34, for two years and seven months was just a puppet for her boyfriend.
She revealed this in her answering affidavit during her bail application at the Randburg magistrate's court on Friday.
The two are facing multiple charges including possession, creation and distribution of child pornography, and contravention of the Drug Trafficking Act.
They are also facing multiple counts of money laundering, acquisition and possession of proceeds from unlawful activities, possession of stolen property and fraud.
“I do not live a lavish lifestyle as I was effectively only an employee and a puppet of the first accused [Wilken].
“I confirm that R125,000 from the sale of the vehicle was found at the premises. None of the other money found on the premises belonged to me but was that of the first accused [Wilken],” Moodley said in her answering affidavit.
She denied all the allegations levelled against her and insisted she was effectively only the administrator of the business.
Wilken previously detailed in his initial affidavit that he started an online business selling content including digital stock images and online learning courses and he earned R50,000 a month.
He was traced after a so-called 'sextortion' matter was reported by an underage girl in the US. The sextortion matter was investigated and reported to the FBI. The investigations led the FBI to a website which subsequently led to Wilken who was identified as the administrator of this website.
Moodley said in her answering affidavit that Wilken was in control of the business including its accounts. He also controlled her personal accounts, allegedly using them for his own or business purposes.
Alternatively, he would instruct her to make payment on his behalf and that of the businesses. She disputed that she received a large amount of money for her benefit or personal use.
“I also did not participate in any distribution of the funds by the first accused [Wilken]. As such I have no idea as to whom and for what purpose e-wallets were made by the first accused to any cell number, to the first accused's mother or any other party,” read her affidavit.
She said Wilken would ask her to create websites including the front page and he would subsequently take over control of the sites and do the necessary logins and passwords as well as populate them.
The court heard that Wilken would normally also change the passwords when he deemed it necessary. Moodley said she did not intentionally — for any wrongful doing — destroy any evidence.
“At all times I was well aware the state had confiscated various devices upon which the images and other information were captured. I was however concerned that somebody may hack into my telephone, not the authorities, and retrieve emails and other documents thereby attributing them to me.”
She said she could not comment on any accusation involving Wilken and that he was the controller of all the cards related. “I had no interaction with users of the various sites as it was the first accused who would introduce himself to users,” she said.
In his answering affidavit, Wilken disputed most of the contents of the affidavit of the investigating officer, Hendricus Johannes Boshoff, which was read in court on Monday.
The investigating officer's affidavit revealed that Wilken owned three vehicles, a blue BMW with the registration plate “Kidz NA GP,” a Volkswagen Golf and a Nissan NP200.
Wilken said in his answering affidavit, read in court by his lawyer, that the investigating officer, despite being provided with his affidavit in support of bail failed to provide a factual basis for opposition to his release on bail.
“The vehicle [BMW] was valued at about R800,000 and financed by the bank, with an outstanding balance of about the same amount. I respectfully submit that this vehicle is not an asset in any way and was therefore not included in my initial bail affidavit,” read Wilken's affidavit.
Wilken said the investigating officer had contradicted himself by alleging, on the one hand, that he had no fixed address but he had confirmed his address.
He reiterated that the eviction of Moodley (from their rented home) before she had been convicted or even arrested was a direct result of the frenzy created around his arrest.
“I have a deep and strong relationship with my mother. She is prepared to house me under even these difficult conditions. I will stand my trial until it's finalised and abide by any condition this honourable court may impose,” he said.
State prosecutor Colleen Ryan said Wilken's defence disagreed that a factual basis for opposition to bail had been put forward but she rejected this argument.
“Had this been the case, the entire replying affidavit would have been redundant. Had it been the case that there was no evidence or nothing substantial, given by the investigating officer in his affidavit.
“There would not have been a need for the very voluminous replying affidavit to be drafted. It is the state submission that there is indeed substantial arguments made by the investigating officer,” she told the court.
The matter was postponed to February 14 for the court to deliver judgment on the bail application.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Latest Videos
Most Read
News
News
News
News
News