The Joburg High Court has dismissed an application for an interdict by DJ Fresh and DJ Euphonik’s rape accuser to bar the musicians from making defamatory statements against her on social media.
Siphelele Madikizela, who is known as Nampree, opened a case of rape against Fresh and Euphonik in 2022 saying they raped her at a lodge in Pretoria about 12 years ago.
The case has since been dismissed by the National Prosecuting Authority, which said there is no sufficient evidence to prosecute and secure a conviction.
After the case was thrown out of the window, Euphonik posted a message purported to be from Madikizela, asking for forgiveness for falsely accusing him of rape.
Madikizela disputed the authenticity of the message and said it was fabricated to soil her reputation.
Euphonik later took to social media and accused Madikizela of being a liar, a scammer and an extortionist who has a fetish to accuse people she does not know from a bar of soap.
Madikizela took umbrage at Euphonik’s post and applied for an interdict to prohibit him and DJ Fresh from posting defamatory statements about her on social media platforms.
Euphonik and DJ Fresh filed papers opposing her application.
In his judgment delivered on Thursday last week, judge JJ Strydom said in February 2021, Madikizela tweeted about the month of February in isiXhosa and said she was broke.
“Loosely translated to ‘February is so long, it feels like January, I am so broke’.
“Of his own volition Nkosi responded on 15 February 2021 and tweeted: ‘Lol because being a liar and extortionist, a scammer and falsely accusing people you’ve never met isn’t profitable … get help’,” reads the judgment.
Strydom further said on February 27 2021 Euphonik tweeted a WhatsApp message where he exposed Madikizela’s personal number.
“The tweet read as follows: ‘On a serious note before things really get out of hand can this girl’s family and friends help her before she hurts anyone else or herself, unfortunately my sister you’ve said and done and damaged way too much to expect any level of help from me’.”
Strydom said Nkosi, in his answering affidavit, did not deny that he tweeted the impugned tweets. He said the tweet was retweeted by 23 people, quoted by 11 people and liked 74 times.
The tweet containing Madikizela’s number, he added, was only retweeted 77 times and liked 138 times.
“Madikizela’s proposed relief is inter alia grounded on her right contained in sections 10 and 14 of the constitution.
“The collective tweets by Nkosi consisted of a sustained attack against Madikizela’s dignity, suggesting that she is a liar and extortionist [who] harmed her dignity.
“Although the tweet was removed from social media prior to Madikizela issuing and serving the application, she had already suffered harm.
“Madikizela has not established the requirement of lack of an adequate alternative remedy and the application is dismissed with costs,” reads the judgment.
Madikizela in a statement on Friday said the courts sought an interdict against Nkosi and Sikwane and acknowledged that her reputation was indeed impugned and that she suffered harm.
Madikizela’s legal team has been instructed to appeal some parts of the judgment pertaining to costs and the relief sought against Sikwane.
For the latest entertainment news from Sunday World, click here.
Or read the latest from Shwashwi here.
Follow @SundayWorldZA on Twitter and @sundayworldza on Instagram, or like our Facebook Page, Sunday World, by clicking here for the latest breaking news in South Africa.
