. . . as the 2020 case of traditional healer’s killing winds up
Hopolang Mokhopi
SIX Sefikeng men, accused of killing a traditional healer they suspected of practising witchcraft, will know their fate on 5 December 2025 when High Court judge, Justice Tšeliso Mokoko, delivers judgment in their murder and attempted murder trial.
Justice Mokoko reserved judgment this week after both the defence and the Crown wrapped up their arguments.
Initially, 14 men from Sefikeng, Berea, were charged with the murder of Mokola Lebakeng and the attempted murder of his brother, Seemane Lebakeng, following a violent mob attack at the Lebakeng family home on 11 May 2020.
Mr Lebakeng, a traditional healer, was brutally assaulted and doused with petrol before being set alight. He died from the burns.
Over the course of the trial, some of the accused were acquitted. Those still facing charges are Thokaone Maqelepo, Mothibeli Maqelepo, Lesane Salemane, Ranko Nkhopea, Mokete Lekomola and Poloko Phonyokoane.
Molefi Ramothamo, Rethabile Salemane, Phuthi Moreboli, Tankiso Noto, Thabang Noto, Thuso Khomolishoele, Teboho Khomolishoele and Tšitso Thakong were acquitted.
Crown counsel, Advocate Thapelo Mokuku, argued that key facts were not in dispute: the accused admitted being at the deceased’s home and acknowledged several statements and reports tendered in evidence.
What remained contested, he said, was their specific conduct.
Adv Mokuku submitted that four Crown witnesses described a coordinated attack allegedly led by one of the accused, Maqelepo, who is said to have instructed the group to throw stones at the Lebakeng home, break windows, and forcibly drag the deceased outside “so they could kill him”.
When Mr Lebakeng attempted to flee, the mob allegedly chased him into a field, assaulted him and ultimately set him alight. Witnesses testified that flames were visible from a distance shortly afterward.
Some of the accused were identified by their voices, and one was allegedly heard celebrating later, claiming the group “deserved alcohol for what they had done”.
The Crown argued that the sequence of events showed a clear common purpose, with the group acting in unison from the first stone thrown to the moment the deceased was burned.
Defence counsel, Advocate Mohale and Advocate Mohapi, countered that the Crown had failed to discharge the burden of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt.
While the accused admitted being present, the defence said many villagers had converged at the scene, and their mere presence did not mean they participated in the killing.
They highlighted Seemane’s earlier misidentification of another villager as evidence that identification — particularly at night, under chaotic and emotional conditions — was unreliable.
Other witnesses, they said, did not witness the assault itself; they only heard stones being thrown and saw a crowd.
The Defence also challenged the credibility of voice identification, arguing it was inherently unreliable under such circumstances.
Additionally, they said Accused 1’s involvement in repairing Seemane’s damaged home after the incident was just “a gesture of friendship” not an indication of his guilt or otherwise.
In closing, the Defence maintained that the Crown had not proven that any of the accused actively participated in the killing and that the evidence fell far short of supporting a murder conviction.
