Kabelo Masoabi
THE High Court in Leribe has acquitted six men from Ha Lekhoatha-Khoatha, Matlameng, who were charged with the 2021 murder of Pule Maeka following a mob justice attack.
Acting Justice Tšooana Lesaoana ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie (straight forward) case, finding that the evidence presented did not link the accused to the fatal assault.
The acquitted men are Mokoto Makoa, Mahlomola Phooko, Tšebeletso Maeka, Thabo Maeka, Tumisang Maeka and Ramotlali Mpeli.
The trial proceeded in the absence of co-accused Thabang Lekiba of Mokhotlong, who could not be located and is believed to be in South Africa.
In her ruling, Justice Lesaoana said the State’s own witnesses failed to place any of the accused among those responsible for the fatal assault on Mr Maeka on 22 September 2021.
The court heard that Mr Maeka died after angry villagers apprehended him in Matlapeng village over allegations that he had attempted to sexually assault a woman identified only as ‘Malebitso’.
State witnesses, who were among those escorting him to Pitseng Police Station, testified that villagers, including some of the accused, poked him with small sticks whenever he slowed down or attempted to flee. They also admitted beating him on the buttocks with sticks.
However, they maintained that the severe assault only began after people from the neighbouring villages of Lota and Lipohong joined the crowd and repeatedly beat Mr Maeka with fighting sticks all over his body, including the soles of his feet.
The court also heard that Mr Maeka was widely disliked in the Matlameng area because of his alleged habitual criminal conduct.
The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted Mr Maeka with sticks while he was restrained, inflicting the injuries that led to his death. It further argued that although he had sustained injuries during the escort, the first State witness testified that his injured leg could still touch the ground and that he managed to walk after leaving Ha Lekhoatha-Khoatha.
Justice Lesaoana, however, noted that the trial never clarified either the extent of Mr Maeka’s injuries or the manner in which he had been restrained.
Police investigation
Investigating officer, Woman Police Constable (WPC) Lepheane, had testified that police were alerted by the chief of Lipohong village, who reported that a body had been discovered near a local school.
“We proceeded to the scene and found a large crowd gathered there. We were informed that the deceased was Pule Maeka,” she told the court.
She said an examination of the body revealed multiple bruises consistent with a severe assault. The body was taken to the mortuary while police launched an investigation that led to the arrest of the accused.
According to WPC Lepheane, the village chief was instructed to tell the suspects to report to Pitseng Police Station, where they complied. After interviewing them, she found their explanations unsatisfactory and charged them with murder.
She further testified that the following day the chief brought four fighting sticks and a plastic sjambok (kubu) to the police station, alleging they had been used in the fatal assault.
The alleged murder weapons later became the subject of intense legal argument.
Defence counsel Advocate Mashaile objected to their admission as exhibits, arguing that they had neither been recovered directly from the accused nor identified and handed over by them.
“The accused have maintained that they never handed over any exhibits to the police. The chain of custody and authenticity of these exhibits has therefore been compromised,” Adv Mashaile submitted.
During cross-examination, he questioned how the alleged murder weapons could have been delivered to police by a third party rather than being recovered directly from the accused.
WPC Lepheane testified that while the accused were in police custody, they directed the village chief to where the weapons had allegedly been hidden. The chief then retrieved the items and delivered them to the police station. However, under cross-examination, the prosecution was unable to cite any legal authority supporting that procedure.
The defence also challenged the authenticity of the exhibits after pointing out that both the police’s LMPS 12 exhibit register and the court’s exhibit records bore official stamps dated May 2026, despite the alleged murder having occurred in 2021.
Adv Mashaile told the court that the defence had initially been provided with a docket that did not contain an LMPS 12 exhibit register.
“We question the authenticity and origin of these exhibits,” he argued, asking where the alleged murder weapons had been kept between 2021 and 2026.
He suggested they may have been introduced later to strengthen the prosecution’s case.
Justice Lesaoana also questioned the apparent discrepancy.
“Where have the exhibits been since 2021 until 2026 when they were presented to the Clerk of Court? Possession should have been either with the police or the Clerk of Court,” she remarked.
The prosecution defended the investigation, arguing that the accused had identified the alleged murder weapons when the village chief presented them at the police station.
Prosecutor Tlali submitted that the investigating officer could not immediately register the items as exhibits because they had not yet been seized on the day of the incident.
According to the prosecution, the village chief later recovered the weapons after being directed to their location by the accused, after which they were formally entered into the exhibit register.
Despite that explanation, the prosecution ultimately withdrew the disputed exhibits after questions were raised about their handling and authenticity to allow it to review the matter before deciding how to proceed.
The defence then applied for the discharge of the accused.
The judgment
Delivering judgment this week, Justice Lesaoana said the prosecution had failed to present evidence capable of requiring the accused to answer the murder charge.
“The accused are therefore accordingly discharged,” she ruled.
The judge said the State’s case had also been weakened by its failure to call a crucial witness.
“We heard from the third prosecution witness that when the accused arrived with Mr Maeka at the chief’s place in Lipohong village, one Thabiso Thokoane informed him that they had found the deceased at Ha Matlapeng, tied him up, and escorted him while beating him along the way. While still at the chief’s place, the first accused, Mr Makoa, allegedly struck the deceased with a whip.
“However, the said Thokoane was not called as a witness to substantiate these allegations, and the court was not provided with any explanation as to why he was not called to testify. In the absence of such evidence, I consider these allegations to be hearsay and not deserving of any weight. I cannot find that the accused have a case to answer based on hearsay.
“…In light of the fact that all the Lekhoatha-Khoatha State witnesses testified that they themselves contributed to beating or chastising the deceased, particularly on the buttocks, and that villagers from Lota and Lipohong also heavily assaulted him, it would have been important for the investigating officer to identify the location of the bruises she observed on the deceased’s body. She did not.
“Relying on the authorities cited above (set out in full in the ruling), I cannot be faulted for finding that the evidence presented by the Crown is such that no reasonable court, acting carefully, could convict the accused of the crime of murder. The Crown has therefore failed to establish a prima facie case, and the accused are accordingly discharged,” Justice Lesaoana ruled.
