By Sunday Express

Copyright sundayexpress

Moorosi Tsiane/Hopolang Mokhopi

THE Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Advocate (Adv) Lehlanako Mofilikoane, has challenged High Court Judge, Moroke Mokhesi’s decision to acquit former Military Intelligence director, Brigadier (Brig) Rapele Mphaki, in the brutal 16 May 2017 murders of three civilians.

Adv Mofilikoane has petitioned the Court of Appeal to overturn Justice Mokhesi’s ruling, arguing that the judge erred in concluding that the Crown had failed to present its case effectively against the accused.

Brig Mphaki had been charged alongside nine other soldiers over the murders of Lekhoele Noko, Khothatso Makibinyane, and Molise Pakela.

On 1 August 2025, Justice Mokhesi cleared Brig Mphaki, granting his application for discharge after the Crown closed its case.

The judge ruled that there was no evidence linking Brig Mphaki and seven other soldiers to the triple murder, leaving only Sergeant Lekhooa Moepi and Private Tieho Tikiso to answer the charges. Those cleared alongside Brig Mphaki include Major Pitso Ramoepane, Captain Mahlehle Moeletsi, Warrant Officer Liphapang Sefako, Lance Corporal Mahlomola Makhoali, Private Nthatakane Motanyane, Motšoane Machai, and Nemase Faso.

Adv Mofilikoane, through Adv Motena Rafoneke who handled the prosecution, has now appealed the acquittal, arguing that Justice Mokhesi misdirected himself.

“The court a quo erred and misdirected itself in its decision and judgment that the Crown failed to adduce enough evidence and/or establish a prima facie case against the respondents, thereby granting the application for discharge,” Adv Rafoneke argues.

He further contends that it was incorrect for the judge to disregard the role of Brig Mphaki, who allegedly issued the orders to kill the deceased.

“The court a quo erred and misdirected itself by ignoring the evidence that orders to eliminate the deceased were given by Accused 1 (Mphaki), and therefore discharged him even regarding Accused 3 (Moepi)’s alternative charge under count 1.

“The court a quo also erred in its trial-within-a-trial ruling by rejecting and holding inadmissible the confessions and pointing out made by Makhoali, Motanyane, Machai, and Faso.”

Adv Rafoneke further informed the Court of Appeal that he intends to add to his grounds of appeal once he receives the transcribed records of the court proceedings.