WATCH | ‘Cat’ Matlala trial: accused’s bid to block evidence dismissed

The presiding judge in the trial of Vusimusi “Cat” Matlala and his co-accused has dismissed an objection by Musa Kekana’s lawyer to allow the state to use his hospital records to test his credibility.

On Wednesday judge Cassim Moosa ruled the objection was “not justified and not sound in law”, allowing the state to continue questioning Kekana about an entry on page 51 of Exhibit N.

The dispute arose during the state’s cross-examination of Kekana in the trial within a trial on Tuesday when the defence argued the hospital entry was hearsay because the medical practitioner who made the record had not been called to testify.

Moosa said the objection had to be considered in the context of how Exhibit N came before the court.

He noted the hospital record had been handed in by Kekana’s defence “without any rider” or limitation on how it could be used.

“There was no qualification to say certain parts of the document should be used and others should not be used,” Moosa said. “This document was handed in its totality.”

Alleged hitman Musa Kekana, who is the co-accused of controversial businessman Vusimusi ‘Cat’ Matlala, is being cross-examined at the Johannesburg high court. pic.twitter.com/PUaZxZ34uV— Sowetan (@Sowetan1981) September 16, 2026

The judge said once a document is formally admitted as an exhibit, it becomes part of the evidence before the court.

“Either party is thereafter entitled to refer to it, to explore its contents, and to cross-examine any witness, including the accused, on it,” he said.

Moosa said there was no rule preventing the state from examining an accused about a document introduced by the defence.

“It follows that if this hospital record was handed in without qualification, the party who tendered it cannot, once opposing counsel begins to explore its contents in cross-examination, retreat to the position that the contents are hearsay and therefore untouchable,” he said.

“Our law does not permit a litigant to approbate and reprobate.”

Explaining the principle, he said it means a party cannot “invoke the benefit of a piece of evidence for one purpose while disowning its evidentiary character the moment it becomes forensically inconvenient”.

Moosa said the state was not seeking to rely on the clinical observations of the medical personnel on page 51.

“The state is attempting to cross-examine the accused on the current complaint as set out on page 51,” he said.

WATCH | Former defence and military veterans minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula is in high spirits as she returns to the stand at the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria. pic.twitter.com/WToBrp7sBX— Sowetan (@Sowetan1981) September 16, 2026

The state argued it wanted to compare what Kekana allegedly told medical staff on March 3 2024 with what he told Dr Pooja Panicker on April 17.

Moosa found the state was using the record to test Kekana’s credibility, rather than relying on the medical practitioner’s observations as substantive proof.

“The established distinction between substantive reliance on hearsay content and the legitimate use of an exhibit to test the witness’s credibility” was central to his decision, he said.

Moosa ordered the objection raised by Kekana’s counsel be overruled.

The trial within a trial is examining whether Kekana’s April 17 2024 arrest for the murder of Vereeniging engineer Armand Swart was lawful, and whether evidence obtained during subsequent searches and seizures can be admitted in the current case.

Kekana is charged alongside Matlala, his wife Tsakane Matlala, Tiego Floyd Mabusela and his daughter Nthabiseng Nzama.

They face 25 counts, including conspiracy to commit murder, money-laundering, and the attempted murders of actor and Matlala’s ex-girlfriend Tebogo Thobejane and taxi boss Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni.