DJS rape accuser’s legal bid to gag them fails
Madikizela says social media used to defame her
The Joburg High Court has dismissed an application for an interdict by DJ Fresh and DJ Euphonik’s rape accuser to bar the musicians from making defamatory statements against her on social media.
Siphelele Madikizela, who is known as Nampree, opened a rape case against Fresh and Euphonik last year, saying they had raped her at a lodge in Pretoria about 12 years ago.
The case was dismissed by the National Prosecuting Authority, which said there wasn’t sufficient evidence to prosecute and secure a conviction.
After the case was thrown out, DJ Euphonik posted a message purported to be from Madikizela, asking for forgiveness for falsely accusing him of rape.
Madikizela disputed the authenticity of the message.
DJ Euphonik later took to social media and accused Madikizela
of being a liar, a scammer and an extortionist who had a tendency to accuse people she didn’t know.
Madikizela took umbrage at Euphonik’s post and applied for an interdict to prohibit him and DJ Fresh from posting defamatory statements about her on social media platform.
DJ Euphonik and DJ Fresh filed papers opposing her application.
In his judgment delivered on
Thursday last week, Judge JJ Strydom said in February 2021, Madikizela tweeted about the month of February in isixhosa and said she was broke.
“Loosely translated to ‘February is so long, it feels like January, I am so broke’. Of his own volition Nkosi responded on 15 February 2021 and tweeted: “Lol because being a liar and extortionist, a scammer and falsely accusing people you’ve never met isn’t profitable... get help,” read the judgement.
Strydom further said on February 27, 2021, DJ Euphonik tweeted a Whatsapp message where he exposed Madikizela’s personal number.
“The tweet read as follows: ‘On a serious note before things really get out of hand can this girl’s family and friends help her before she hurts anyone else or herself, unfortunately my sister you’ve said and done and damaged way too much to expect any level of help from me.’”
Strydom said Nkosi, in his answering affidavit, did not deny he tweeted the impugned tweets.
He said the tweet was retweeted by 23 people, quoted by 11 people and liked 74 times. The tweet containing Madikizela’s number, he added, was only retweeted 77 times and liked 138 times. “Madikizela’s proposed relief is inter alia grounded on her right contained in sections 10 and 14 of the Constitution.
“The collective tweets by Nkosi consisted of a sustained attack against Madikizela’s dignity, suggesting that she is a liar and extortionist harmed her dignity.
“Although the tweet was removed from social media prior to Madikizela issuing and serving the application she had already suffered harm.
“Madikizela has not established the requirement of lack of an adequate alternative remedy and the application is dismissed with costs,” read the judgment.
The tweet was retweeted by 23 people, quoted by 11 and liked 74 times