State says Kekana tailored his evidence as hitman trial cross-examination continues

The State has accused alleged hitman Musa Kekana of lying on the stand and shaping his evidence to suit his case, as his cross-examination continued at the Johannesburg High Court.

Prosecutors put it to Kekana that his testimony was contradicted by the record on two points in particular, his medical history and his account of a Hyundai i20 found on his property. That vehicle has been linked to firearms recovered in the same investigation.

The confrontation happened during a trial-within-a-trial in the attempted murder case against Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala and his co-accused. Kekana is asking the court to rule that evidence taken during his arrest should not be admitted.

What a trial-within-a-trial decides

A trial-within-a-trial is a hearing inside the main trial that deals with one question only, whether disputed evidence may be placed before the court. It is held when the defence argues that evidence was obtained in a way the law does not allow.

In this matter, the disputed material comes from Kekana’s arrest. If the court rules it inadmissible, the State cannot rely on it in building its case against the accused. If the court admits it, that evidence stands as part of the record.

The hearing puts Kekana’s own conduct under scrutiny in a way the main trial would not. He is not the accused in the attempted murder matter, but his credibility as a witness is now central to whether the evidence he helped produce can be used.

The two points the State attacked

The State argued that Kekana’s version of his medical history did not hold together, and that his explanation of the Hyundai i20 found on his property did not match what investigators recorded. The vehicle matters because of what it connects to. Firearms were recovered in the same investigation and the car has been tied to them.

According to eNCA’s reporting, the State described the discrepancies as sharp and told the court that Kekana had tailored his account. Kekana denies that.

Security concerns around a hospital visit

The hearing comes after earlier reporting that raised security concerns about Kekana while he was at a hospital. That context hangs over proceedings at the High Court in Johannesburg, where a witness whose safety is already in question is now being pressed on his truthfulness.

What it means for the main case

The outcome of this hearing does not decide whether Matlala and his co-accused are guilty. It decides what the court may hear. That distinction matters to the families on both sides of the attempted murder charge, who are waiting on a trial that has already been extended by this separate proceeding.

If the evidence is excluded, the State’s case must stand on other material. If it is admitted, the trial moves on to the merits. Either way, the ruling will set the terms on which the rest of the matter is argued.

Cross-examination of Kekana continues on Thursday.

Source: eNCA, State pokes holes in Kekana’s testimony