Bafana Mahungela has been found guilty of murdering pregnant teacher Kirsten Kluyts, almost three years after her body was discovered following a run at George Lea Park in Sandton.
The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg convicted Mahungela on Friday of kidnapping, robbery with aggravating circumstances, murder, attempted rape and obstructing the course of justice. He is due back in court on 27 October for sentencing proceedings.
Kluyts, a 34-year-old English teacher who was 14 weeks pregnant, was found murdered after she failed to complete her run on 29 October 2023. Her naked body was discovered hidden beneath an old mat. She had suffered severe injuries to her face and head and had been choked and strangled.
Mahungela, who was 23 when he was arrested, pleaded not guilty to all the charges. He represented himself for part of the trial after his lawyer was excused from court. He later applied for Legal Aid but decided that he no longer needed it and would continue representing himself.
Judge Ian Cox handed down the judgment on Friday after considering the evidence presented during the trial. The State’s case relied heavily on CCTV footage that traced Mahungela’s movements through the park before and after Kluyts was attacked.
Private detectives hired by Kluyts’ family worked with investigating officer Constable Aubrey Tshisani and local security companies to piece together the footage. The court heard that Mahungela entered George Lea Park 90 seconds after Kluyts began her second lap.
He was wearing a black shirt, dark trousers, distinctive shoes and a bucket hat, and was carrying only his cellphone. Later footage showed him wearing a blue T-shirt identical to the one Kluyts had been wearing during her run and carrying a black item.
During his bail hearing, Mahungela admitted taking Kluyts’ clothes but said he had come across her dead body and was worried that his DNA would be found on her. His DNA was not found at the scene or on Kluyts.
During the trial, he changed his account and denied that the man seen in the CCTV footage was him. He said he had never seen or known Kluyts and denied following or killing her. He also later denied wearing her clothes.
Mahungela told the court that he had attended a pyjama party in Alexandra on 28 October and had slept there. The following morning, he said, he took an early taxi to Sandton but fell asleep and woke up in Benmore, next to Parkmore, where George Lea Park is situated.
He said he did not know the area, came across the park and entered through the main gate. He told the court that he visited a restaurant, spoke to waiters and then tried to leave. He said he became lost in the playground before child minders showed him the gate, after which he walked home and went to sleep.
Judge Cox rejected that version of events. He said the State had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that Mahungela’s account could not reasonably be true.
“The court is then satisfied that the bare denial of the accused and his criticisms of the video footage evidence is not reasonably possibly true. I find that his version is false and it is rejected as such.”
“I am therefore satisfied that the State succeeded in proving the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt on all of the counts that he is charged with,” Cox said.
The judge said the evidence established that Kluyts “died a gruesome and violent death”. He said she suffered multiple injuries, mostly to her head, and that the injuries were so severe that she was largely unrecognisable.
The court also found that Kluyts had been deprived of her possessions during or immediately after the attack. The force used against her was found to amount to aggravating circumstances, supporting the robbery conviction.
Evidence showed that Kluyts was found naked, with her legs spread and bruising on both thighs above the knees. The court found that although Mahungela did not rape her, the evidence supported the reasonable inference that he intended to rape her.
Cox said the evidence further established that Kluyts had been stripped not only of her clothing but also of all her personal possessions. Those items were removed from the scene, and Mahungela was captured on CCTV concealing items taken from her in a stormwater drain.
“The deliberate removal and concealment of these items demonstrate a conscious effort to prevent the discovery and to distance them from the crime scene,” Cox said.
The guilty verdict was followed by an interruption from Mahungela, who appeared unsettled as the judge finished reading the judgment. He was seen blinking repeatedly and occasionally writing in a notebook during the proceedings.
Mahungela was not seated in the dock, where accused people on trial usually sit. Instead, he was seated at the bar, the section of the courtroom normally reserved for lawyers.
After Cox finished delivering judgment, Mahungela questioned whether he was expected to remain silent while the prosecutor discussed a date for the next appearance.
“Am I supposed to be just quiet – I don’t know?” Mahungela asked.
“Am I supposed to stand and just listen?”
Cox explained that Mahungela was expected to listen at that stage because the court was delivering judgment. He told him that he would have an opportunity to address the court during the sentencing proceedings.
Mahungela then told the court that he was “not sure” whether he wanted to continue representing himself.
“I am not sure if I want to stand for myself because during the trial I was standing for myself under your care, and here I am guilty of all charges, but I was under your care,” Mahungela told Cox.
He questioned whether his rights would be protected during the sentencing process.
“The court said that they will be looking after my rights and all those things, but I am guilty of all charges, and you said that you’re going to look after my rights. So how am I sure that when I come here again, I am not going to be tricked or something?”
Cox advised Mahungela that he was free to obtain legal representation for sentencing and would have six weeks to find a lawyer and instruct them.
“I don’t deny that, but when I wanted to reappoint my legal team during the trial the court did not allow me to do that, now when I am going to sentencing, I have an opportunity to bring back my lawyer,” Mahungela said.
The judge also advised him that he could express his views during an appeal, if he chose to appeal. When Cox asked him to sit down, Mahungela asked: “May I please leave, your honour?”
Cox explained that he needed to remain seated so that he would know when the next court appearance was scheduled.
“It doesn’t really matter, I am not going anywhere,” Mahungela responded.
After the proceedings, Mahungela had a brief conversation with his father. His father told him it was “not over” before turning to journalists in court and saying: “You can celebrate now, but during sentencing you will see.”
Mahungela will return to court on 27 October for sentencing. The court will then hear submissions before deciding the punishment for the convictions linked to Kluyts’ death and the other offences.
For Kluyts’ family, Friday’s judgment brings a guilty verdict after nearly three years of waiting for the case to reach this stage. The evidence about the CCTV footage, the stolen clothing, the hidden possessions and the injuries suffered by the pregnant teacher formed the foundation of the State’s case.
The court has now rejected Mahungela’s denials and found that the State proved every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The next stage will determine the sentence for a killing that Judge Cox described as gruesome and violent.
