… as she accuses magistrate of silencing her during bail hearing
…says she was given only two minutes to oppose bail before accused was freed
Moorosi Tsiane
A Mohale’s Hoek woman, who accuses her former colleague of sexually assaulting her, has challenged the manner in which Thaba-Tseka Magistrate, Mpho Maema, handled the accused’s bail application, alleging she was denied a fair opportunity to explain why he should remain in custody.
In papers filed before the High Court, the complainant seeks to overturn Magistrate Maema’s decision granting bail to Lemena Letlalo, arguing that the proceedings were rushed, procedurally irregular and failed to protect her as the alleged victim of a violent sexual offence.
She claims Magistrate Maema repeatedly interrupted her, restricted her to just two minutes to present her objections and prevented her from placing crucial evidence before the court to demonstrate why Letlalo posed an ongoing threat to her safety.
She is asking the High Court to review and set aside the bail ruling, declare the proceedings null and void and order that a fresh bail hearing be conducted before a different magistrate.
In her founding affidavit, the complainant says the ordeal began on 16 June 2026, when police summoned her to the Thaba-Tseka Magistrate’s Court for Letlalo’s first appearance.
After waiting several hours because of a congested court roll, she says she was interviewed by prosecutor Letuka, who asked whether she opposed bail.
“I informed the prosecutor that I was opposed to the accused being admitted to bail. I explained the reasons why I believed he should remain in custody, and I was advised to place those facts before the court.”
She says the matter was postponed until later that afternoon but could not proceed because of delays and was rolled over to the following day.
According to the affidavit, she returned to court on 17 June expecting to fully explain her fears but instead found herself under intense pressure.
“The presiding magistrate informed everyone that the court would only hear the matter for 15 minutes. I was then told that I had only two minutes to explain why I objected to the accused being admitted to bail.”
She alleges that every attempt to explain her concerns was cut short.
“The court was visibly impatient. Every effort I made to state the facts upon which I objected to the accused being admitted to bail was met with censure from the presiding magistrate, who kept telling me that those were facts for trial and not for bail.”
She says the experience left her emotionally overwhelmed.
“I became greatly frustrated, broke down and cried. The proceedings were adjourned and I was instructed to see a counsellor.”
The counselling session, she says, lasted only about five minutes before she was called back into court.
“When I returned, I was instructed to mention only the salient facts relevant to bail. I was dumbfounded because I did not know which facts were considered relevant and which were not. I could not continue narrating my evidence.”
She says discussions then continued between prosecutor Letuka, Magistrate Maema and the defence lawyer without her understanding what was being argued.
“The accused’s lawyer motivated for bail and shortly thereafter the accused was admitted to bail.”
She contends that the entire process was fundamentally flawed.
“The entire court process leading to the accused being admitted to bail was riddled with serious irregularities, improprieties and illegalities.”
Among the grounds raised in the High Court application is her claim that the bail proceedings were conducted in the magistrate’s chambers rather than in open court and without a sworn interpreter.
She also alleges that the magistrate denied her the opportunity to present critical evidence demonstrating why Letlalo should not have been released.
According to her affidavit, had she been allowed to testify fully, she would have explained that Letlalo had allegedly terrorised her over several days before the alleged sexual assault.
She alleges that on 11 June 2026, Letlalo came to her home in St Theresa, Thaba-Tseka, and refused to leave until village vigilantes chased him away.
The following day, while they were travelling together on official duty near the Senqu River, she alleges Letlalo stopped their vehicle in an isolated area and threatened to kill her unless she submitted to his sexual demands.
“He questioned why I had called the village vigilantes the previous night. He told me he was going to kill me. I was afraid because I had heard that he had previously killed someone. He even boasted that he was not afraid of going to prison.”
She further alleges that Letlalo repeatedly returned to her home over the next two days despite her attempts to keep him away.
On 14 June, she claims, he forced his way into her house armed with a weapon.
“He locked the door, threatened to stab me and injured my finger during the struggle. I was bruised on my arm, punched on my head and left eye, suffocated, overpowered and sexually assaulted.”
She further alleges that after the assault, Letlalo warned that he would attack her again.
“He told me that he would do it again. He said he was not afraid of going to prison and that I could report him to the police if I wanted.”
According to the affidavit, Letlalo allegedly took her cellphone after the assault and called another man, claiming he had assaulted her after finding her with someone else.
Villagers who responded to her cries allegedly tried to apprehend him, but he escaped in his vehicle.
The complainant argues that none of these allegations were properly considered during the bail hearing because she was prevented from presenting them in full.
She also accuses Magistrate Maema of inaccurately recording parts of her evidence.
“I constantly live in fear for my life because of the decision admitting the accused to bail.”
She disputes the official court record, saying it incorrectly states that she told the court Letlalo’s release would negatively affect her marriage.
“I never told the court that. What I said was that after sexually assaulting me, the accused took my phone and attempted to contact my husband. I also made it clear that I had no relationship with him at the time.”
She acknowledges that she previously had a relationship with Letlalo but says it ended in 2024, nearly two years before the alleged assault.
“I informed the court that I had stopped the relationship in 2024. He sexually assaulted me when no relationship existed between us.”
She also dismisses any suggestion that she concealed the alleged assault from her husband.
“My husband was fully aware that I had been sexually assaulted and that the matter had been reported to the police and was before the courts. He knew every day that I attended court.”
She argues that the rushed manner in which the proceedings denied her a fair hearing.
“The truncated manner in which the proceedings were conducted was inimical to the utmost diligence and caution required of the court to conduct the hearing fairly and impartially, resulting in a failure of justice.”
She is asking the High Court to review and overturn Magistrate Maema’s decision, declare the bail proceedings invalid and order that the application be heard afresh before a different magistrate.
