Lawyers representing Bafana Mahungela, who is facing trial in the Johannesburg High Court, have urged the director of public prosecutions to drop charges, pointing to major inconsistencies in recently revealed DNA evidence.
Mahungela is charged with the murder of Kirsten Kluyts, a 34-year-old English teacher from Johannesburg.
In November 2023, he was taken into custody at a Parkmore student residence. He is also accused of kidnapping and aggravated robbery.
The trial has been adjourned to May 14 to allow the defence to prepare following the release of a police docket and additional evidence on April 14.
In their submission, Mahungela’s attorneys argue that crucial DNA evidence, available since December 22, 2023, was withheld during bail hearings and early pre-trial stages.
The prosecution had opposed bail, citing pending forensic and post-mortem results.
The newly disclosed DNA evidence reportedly shows no connection between Mahungela and the crime scene.
Instead, swabs from the deceased’s hands and fingernails suggest a physical struggle with an unidentified female around the time of death.
Court misled about status of forensic results
The defence claims that the prosecution not only failed to disclose this evidence but also misled the court about the status of forensic results as recently as February 23, 2025, stating they were unaware of the DNA findings but would investigate further.
“This DNA evidence opens a critical new avenue of investigation that demands thorough exploration in the interest of justice,” the defence stated.
“We request the withdrawal of charges until this evidence is properly investigated.”
Mahungela, a student with no criminal record and deemed not a flight risk, has pledged full cooperation with any investigation.
His bail denial unfolded at the Alexandra magistrate’s court in Johannesburg.
The court cited the severity of the charges against him: rape, robbery with aggravating circumstances, and premeditated murder.
However, the court did not find conclusive evidence of rape. The state argued against Mahungela’s bail, pointing out inconsistencies in his testimony.
The state also suggested that these inconsistencies were because Mahungela caused Kluyts’ fatal injuries.
