Johannesburg, 18 May 2026 – In a tense scene today at the Johannesburg High Court, Bafana Mahungela’s father dismissed the Legal Aid lawyer representing his son, raising serious concerns regarding evidence tampering and investigative shortcomings in the highly publicized case.
Bafana Mahungela Senior asserted that his son, who will now take on his own defense, is innocent and has been wrongly accused.
“My Son Never Wore Those Clothes”
The father maintained that his son was not present in authentic video recordings performing the alleged actions and that he did not wear the clothing belonging to the deceased.
He brought attention to a discrepancy in the video evidence: an affidavit from a security manager reportedly indicated the accused was holding items in his left hand, while the arrest photograph shows the right hand. This, he suggested, raises the possibility of evidence alteration.
He also noted inconsistencies in timestamps across various video clips, with some allegedly sent overseas for analysis, claiming none distinctly depict the accused dragging the victim, disposing of items, or climbing a fence as stated by the prosecution.
Claims of Evidence Mishandling and Investigation Flaws
Among the significant allegations presented were:
A private investigator allegedly gathered crucial pieces of evidence (a cap and a cigarette butt) from the crime scene without the presence of forensic personnel or appropriate protective gear.
Conflicting dates and descriptions concerning the collection of items were noted (e.g., khaki versus beige cap).
Several individuals have come forward claiming to be the first to access the victim’s phone and vehicle, raising concerns over the chain of custody.
DNA detected at the scene purportedly belonged to a “foreign woman,” rather than his son. He urged testing of additional individuals seen near the victim, including a man and woman who were ahead of her in the park (with one reportedly leaving the country shortly thereafter).
Furthermore, he alleged that his son was assaulted, threatened with a gun, and coerced into making admissions while in custody.
Dismissing Representation and Self-Defense
The accused opted to dismiss his lawyer, claiming that pressure from the prosecutor and judge hampered his ability to prepare effectively. His father indicated that the defendant received a substantial amount of materials too close to the trial date and accused the court of overlooking critical inconsistencies. He referenced Section 35 of constitutional rights.
Context of the Case
The case revolves around the murder of a young teacher who was 14 weeks pregnant, killed in a Sandton park while participating in a running event in 2023. The accused is facing severe charges, including murder, and has pleaded not guilty. Video evidence constitutes a crucial aspect of the state’s case.
The trial proceeds with the accused now acting as his own defense attorney, a challenging move in a complicated legal scenario.
It is crucial to note that these are allegations made by the father of the accused in court, which have not been independently corroborated. The state has yet to respond publicly to the recent allegations. The accused remains presumed innocent until proven guilty.
