Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Maasdorp to remain in custody

Maasdorp to remain in custody

Iuze Mukube

The alleged murderer of 27-year-old Delia Weimers-Maasdorp, who was found dead in her flat in the Eros suburb of Windhoek on 25 April last year, will remain in custody, pending the finalisation of his trial.

Magistrate Monica Andjaba delivered this ruling on 7 February 2025, dismissing Wentzel Maasdorp’s application in which he sought to be released on bail.

She said the State had proved beyond a reasonable doubt grounds for objecting to Maasdorp being granted bail.

The State had presented five grounds for objecting to bail including the seriousness of the offence, strength of the State’s case, fear that the accused might abscond, fear of him re-offending, public interest and the need for proper administration of justice.

Andjaba said the State had proved the first, second, third and fifth objections entailing the seriousness of the offence, strength of the case, fear of absconding, and public interest and the need for proper administration of justice.

Maasdorp (40) faces charges of murder, read with the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, theft of a motor-vehicle and theft, in relation to the death of his ex-girlfriend, Weimers-Maasdorp.

Additionally, he is facing a count of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft as well as assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

Andjaba found that in considering his personal circumstance, there was no proof of the four children Maasdorp told the court were under his financial care.

She further said if she were to go by his mere mention that he supports his children, it appears those children lived with their mothers.

Hence, she ruled the interests of society and those of the administration of justice outweighed his personal circumstances, and although innocent until proven guilty, she found the State had proven grounds one, two, three and five on which the opposition to granting of bail is based, and as such dismissed Maasdorp’s application.

On the first point of objection, prosecutor Erik Naikaku argued that murder in a domestic set-up is an epidemic of people preying on the vulnerable, thus reinforcing the seriousness of the offence.

Naikaku added that it is the speculative opinion of the State that the accused is a flight risk, pointing out that he was only arrested on 30 April 2024, five days after the day of the alleged crime, 25 April 2024.

He also said the accused had chosen to exercise his right to remain silent, but in doing so, he failed to address the merits of the matter, for instance when cross-examined on the journal of the deceased.

Maasdorp also failed to substantiate that he was of good standing in his community, as he was an abuser of cocaine, and had allegedly stolen his victim’s belongings to exchange for cocaine and money.

The magistrate concluded that Maasdorp had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was suitable to be released on bail.

The case was postponed to 12 March 2025.

Maasdorp was represented by Samuel Shinedima. -mukubeiuze@gmail.com