Chaos as Mogotsi’s Lawyers ACCIDENTALLY Bury Him LIVE

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-31

[00:00:00]Brown Maggots's lawyers walked into court trying to fix one problem and somehow created five more. They tried to explain the address, but by the time they were done, even the house number looked like it wanted to testify against him because honestly it looked like Motsi hired his lawyers from Teu or something. These lawyers were not make sure. One minute it was 4454, next minute it was 4544.

[00:00:27]Then suddenly it was an honest mistake, a technical error. Same street, same area. Guys, even Google Maps was probably confused. You have to watch this one carefully because this is not just a bail hearing. This is a courtroom disaster wearing a suit. Welcome to Mr. T podcast. Please like the video. It costs nothing. Now, Damini, show us the first clip where MGOTs's address story starts collapsing in front of the whole court.

[00:00:55]>> On 25th May 2026, I was requested to follow up on a residential address verification of the applicant.

[00:01:06]Seven, a pin location was supplied as per the applicant supplementary statement placed before court. 8 27 on 27 in 8. At the pin location of the left hand side, I found a residential address.

[00:01:36]There was no street number displayed at the house attached as AR O2 photos 2 to7.

[00:01:48]I I approached the house and found a female at the residence. I introduced myself and she introduced herself as Dorothy Lewaba.

[00:02:02]I verified her identity with her uh ID she produced. I took a photo of her ID attached as a R uh 0241 10. I confirm that she is the same person that supplied the affidavit with relating to the residential status of the applicant attached to the applicant statement placed before court as well as my statement placed before court. 11. As I as I could not establish the straight number of the property, I asked Dorothy Luaba if she knows what the number of the property is. She immediately told me that the number is 4544.

[00:02:58]This does not correspond with the house number in the affidavit.

[00:03:04]12. She was requested to point out a personal property of the applicant. She pointed out uh minimal clothing in the main bedroom.

[00:03:18]13.

[00:03:20]She could not produce any personal documentation of the other belongings of the applicant. 14.

[00:03:29]In my view, there is no property or of substantial value at the residence belonging to the applicant. 15. It is a small threebedroom house. I took photos of the inside of the house attached as AR uh O2 photos 1 to 17 16.

[00:03:55]She provides a lease agreement attached as AR um 01 to the statement. It indicates that the lease is in her name and the tenant with house number 44 54 Musher Street unit 13 17. The lasso uh >> is that this lease is signed on the 1st of July 2026 which obviously is not probable. But if court goes to the first page of that document, the lease was signed on the 1st of July 2024, meaning that your worship it would then on the last page be signed on the same day.

[00:04:47]What I submit with regards to the difference of the years is that the year that is entered to on the last page is a typographical error.

[00:05:04]Logic would dictate that it will be the same date you enter which is the same date which you conclude.

[00:05:22]Now whilst we are still also on the lease your worship I invite the court to look that to look at the fact that the landlord according to the list is according to the list is Albert Mus and according to the founding papers of the applicant this is the individual.

[00:05:46]The issue here is not whether or not they are more in quantity. The fact of the matter is they are there. It proves that he resides in that property.

[00:06:01]The submission that he makes that the land belongs to the traditional council is based on his understanding according to the lease agreement. And if if the traditional council had an issue, it would not have given him the proof of residence.

[00:06:25]And on that, the council is not saying that he is the owner. They are saying that we acknowledge him amongst the people that live in this area, the applicant is one of them.

[00:06:40]Hence that letter is labeled as a proof of residence and not a proof of ownership of any form.

[00:06:47]Now should the court find that there's a misrepresentation or a possible misre misrepresentation from the applicant I submit that that misrepresentation would have been made by Albert Mai the submission from the respondent is that there's no mistake this has been done deliberately and worship. If we also look at exhibit B, this is the statement of the investigating officer where the investigating officer indicates that um this connection statement of she now the question is how then do we know that we have to your worship.

[00:08:23]It must be bear in mind that uh the honors is on the applicant.

[00:08:30]>> These lawyers came in to fix one broken story and left five new holes in it.

[00:08:35]They blamed the landlord. They blamed the chief. They blamed a future date on a lease like that was normal. Then they stood there and told the judge that a few pieces of clothing in someone else's bedroom proves Mcgotsi lives there. The state did not even raise their voice.

[00:08:52]They just read the pin location and the municipal letter and let the defense team keep talking until the excuses started fighting each other. Every time the lawyers opened their mouths, they gave the prosecution another reason to keep him inside. The house number did not match. The lease did not match. The belongings did not match. Yet somehow it was still everyone else's fault. That is what happens when you hire lawyers who sound like they are guessing their way through the hearing. Motsi wanted bail.

[00:09:24]What he got was his own team turning a single address problem into a full courtroom disaster. The judge saw it clear and pushed the ruling to the 4th of June. He stays locked up while the Teu defense keeps making the case against him stronger with every excuse.

[00:09:40]>> Just I have few questions.

[00:09:51]I don't want to go deeper into the merits but just verify some aspect the the incident that happened at for Loras.

[00:10:09]It was the 3rd of November 2025. That is >> and when you address me now you said after the incident he never reported this but after 10 days of submitting the avid through the attendant.

[00:10:34]>> Was there any firearm found in possession of the applicant? If yes, where and how? Answer is um you should the trial court will ask.

[00:11:02]>> It's it's fine. Yes, it's more than enough to do what you have said.

[00:11:33]Photograph 13.

[00:11:35]>> Paragraph 13 of exhibit.

[00:11:53]Is there any way that he's linking this other cases that you have mentioned here? Older adult case 212 stroke 12 2021 as well as >> the applicant is not personally linked.

[00:12:11]It's they use the firearm that is illegal.

[00:12:29]The very same cartridges that were found at the scene of the crime at First Loras, they are relate to these two cases. That is quite important.

[00:12:58]So I can conclude that they come from one firearm.

[00:13:03]If you look at this screenshot, the pin it's on motion street.

[00:13:12]If we look closely to that particular screenshot, it's on street that particular pin.

[00:13:21]Then when we look at the second attachment where it shows the location of the actual house even though the number is different it shows Mohatra Mohatra close that is in relation to the pin that was provided to the investigative officer.

[00:13:51]I'm not sure if the court is able to see because it's it's in black and white but I have it in color which is the reason why I can actually be able to see that there's a strict name which is Mua Mushu on the pin that was sent to the investigating officer and then on the screenshot with the house with the actual house it's Moata doesn't show him >> uh on the bottom. It's it's it's it's 4545 and then there on the bottom the bottom of the screenshot I'm not sure if it's it appears >> uh an extra OB five >> yes I think it's five and six >> motion it is there >> yes then six on the bottom bottom right on the bottom address if the screenshot worship did not >> at at number six is Moala.

[00:15:11]>> It's Muhata. It looks >> No, unless it ever maybe because of there is this um arrow on top it might have been. No, not not I see the air washing but on the right at the bottom where there's also two years ago the picture taken two years ago on the bottom bottom >> where it say 45 >> that's correct that's correct that is the name of the street the screenshot >> I've also noted that my colleague have now changed that uh these numbers they are not on the same street because it was submitted and this honorable court was informed that these numbers are on the same street and now my colleague is now showing the honorable court about the pin and and indicating that it is black and white.

[00:16:11]But earlier on >> that GPS presentation was extraordinary.

[00:16:16]The defense lawyer stood in front of a magistrate, held up a screenshot, and spent several minutes saying, "Mushu, muhata, mochu, mhata, four, five, four, five. No, wait. Bottom right. The arrow.

[00:16:31]Maybe it's five and six." That is a lawyer losing an argument in real time.

[00:16:37]That is a lawyer who got handed a screenshot 5 minutes before standing up and was told, "Explain this." And after all of that confusion, the state prosecutor stood up and said four sentences. Said, "You told this court earlier, these numbers are on the same street. Now you are saying they are different streets." The court heard both arguments. Done. Four sentences. The magistrate said, "I suppose, thank you."

[00:17:06]And reserved judgment. which means the magistrate watched a lawyer completely unravel a GPS screenshot in front of her and decided she had seen enough.

[00:17:16]>> Now if the court looks at anxi which is the supplementary affidavit that was written by the investigating officer AR02, there's a photo there. It's photo number 10.

[00:18:02]If the court looks at photo number 10, there's a jacket. It's it's that jacket that made waves from the Madanga Commission and at one point or another it ended up being a meme. It's the same jacket that was worn by the applicant in the Madana proceedings.

[00:18:22]Now this is the jacket that is found at the now correct address which is 4544.

[00:18:31]I submit that it is not in dispute that the applicant resides at the mantra.

[00:18:39]The remainder of whether it's a 44, it's a 45, it's a 54.

[00:18:43]>> I'm going to reserve my judgment. Can we arrange the date? Um, I'm available the 29th of May. Please stand up. You are 29th of May.

[00:18:54]>> Yep. The date is in order.

[00:18:56]>> Yes.

[00:18:58]>> The date is in order.

[00:19:00]>> Are you available? That is tomorrow your portion >> if it's tomorrow.

[00:19:09]>> Sorry my mind said um no let's give it a lengthy postponement. It says um I'm actually looking at next week. My apology >> as a question was just excited sometime.

[00:19:32]>> Um next week Thursday >> the fourth >> the fourth is suitable.

[00:20:00]I think applicant want to say something else.

[00:20:03]>> Yes.

[00:20:31]Thank you worship your worship the first is in order is also It is suitable.

[00:20:56]>> The jacket became a meme because of the Madlanga Commission testimony. It was that specific. South Africa laughed at that jacket and his own lawyer just walked into court, pointed at the investigating officer's photographs and said, "Look, the meme jacket is in that house. The house the state found, the municipality's house, the one with the wrong address number." His lawyer's entire point was that this proves he lives there. Fine. But she also called it the now correct address. the word now, as in this is the address we are going with now, not the one he swore to.

[00:21:33]And then after the jacket, after the GPS confusion, after the fake address, after the chaos in the cells, the magistrate tried to schedule a ruling for the next day, then realized it was tomorrow. Said her mind was confused, then pushed it to next week, Thursday, June 4th, and Brown McGotsy had to stand up at the end and tell the court the date worked for him.

[00:21:58]The man accused of staging his own murder, lying to the court about his address, and trying to bribe a police officer had to confirm his diary availability. He is still in custody.