Key Takeaways
- The Johannesburg magistrate’s court has dismissed an application by murder accused Victor Majola to have CCTV footage presented in court, citing ongoing investigations and the risk of interference.
- The footage allegedly shows Majola and the alleged gunman before and after the fatal shooting of DJ Warras.
- Majola’s defence claims he was in Soweto at the time of the shooting and that the case against him is based on mistaken identity.
- A protection order was previously obtained by DJ Warras against six individuals linked to a dispute at Zambezi Flats.
- The bail hearing has been postponed to Friday for the state’s final arguments, after which the court will deliver a ruling on whether Majola will be released on bail.
Introduction to the Case
The Johannesburg magistrate’s court has made a significant ruling in the case of Victor Majola, who is accused of murdering entertainer Warrick "DJ Warras" Stock. Magistrate Annelise Thlapi dismissed an application by Majola to have CCTV footage presented in court, which allegedly captures the fatal shooting of DJ Warras. The footage, recorded by a security camera at a butchery near the murder scene, is believed to show about 45 minutes of movement involving the alleged gunman and Majola before and after the shooting. The court ruled that summoning the footage at this stage would risk interfering with ongoing investigations, as the video was under forensic analysis and not yet ready for presentation.
The CCTV Footage
The CCTV footage is a crucial piece of evidence in the case, and its contents have been revealed through the testimony of the investigating officer, Abe Montwedi. According to Montwedi, the footage allegedly shows Majola seated with two others, including the shooter, shortly before the attack. However, the defence argues that the footage has not been formally presented in court and that the investigating officer’s testimony about its contents is hearsay. The court has ruled that the testimony is admissible in bail proceedings and sufficient for the court to make a decision at this stage. Once the forensic analysis is complete, a formal Section 212 report will be made available to the defence during trial proceedings.
The Protection Order
The court also heard details of a protection order previously obtained by DJ Warras against six individuals linked to a dispute at Zambezi Flats over rental collections and control of security at the building. The threats were made against Stock and his business partner at two separate events in November 2025. The state argues that the protection order is part of the broader context leading up to the murder, suggesting escalating tensions before the fatal shooting. This information provides a motive for the murder and suggests that the killing was not a random act of violence.
Majola’s Defence
Majola’s defence maintains that he was in Soweto at the time of the shooting and that the case against him is based on mistaken identity. In support of this claim, Majola’s lawyer, Dumisani Mabunda, presented a statement from a mechanic who says Majola was with him on December 16, the day DJ Warras was killed. According to the statement, Majola arrived at the man’s workplace at about 11am, driving a black Volkswagen Golf, and remained there with him and other individuals who were repairing a vehicle. The statement says Majola stayed with the group for several hours and left briefly at about 2pm to withdraw cash from a nearby ATM. Mabunda argued that this version makes it "impossible for Majola to have been in two places at the same time".
The Bail Hearing
The bail hearing was postponed to Friday for the state’s final arguments, after which the court is expected to deliver a ruling on whether Majola will be released on bail. Mabunda requested permission to submit a supplementary affidavit to formally place the alibi evidence before court, which was granted. The court’s decision on Majola’s bail application will depend on whether the state can prove that he is a flight risk or a danger to society. The defence will need to convince the court that Majola has a strong alibi and that the case against him is based on circumstantial evidence.
Conclusion
The case against Victor Majola is complex and involves a range of evidence, including CCTV footage, witness statements, and a protection order. The court’s decision to dismiss the application to present the CCTV footage in court highlights the importance of ensuring that investigations are not compromised and that evidence is properly analyzed before it is presented in court. The bail hearing will continue on Friday, and the court’s ruling will determine whether Majola will be released on bail or remain in custody until his trial. The outcome of the case will depend on the strength of the evidence presented and the ability of the defence to prove that Majola is innocent of the charges against him.
