The courtroom fell silent as one phrase echoed through the proceedings — words so raw and confronting they instantly changed the tone of the hearing.

“I wanted him d—.”

It was a statement the court heard was allegedly made by Victor Majola, the man accused of murdering beloved DJ Warras, and it has now become a central point in the State’s argument to keep him behind bars as the legal battle intensifies.

Majola appeared in court this week facing a decisive showdown over bail, with prosecutors arguing his release would pose an unacceptable risk — not just to the public, but to the integrity of the case itself. What unfolded was a chilling preview of the evidence and claims that may later define one of the most closely watched criminal cases in recent memory.

A Bail Hearing That Turned Explosive

At its core, the hearing was meant to be procedural: determine whether the accused should remain in custody while awaiting trial. Instead, it became something far more unsettling.

The prosecution laid out what it described as a pattern of escalating hostility, alleged intent, and deeply concerning statements attributed to Majola in the lead-up to DJ Warras’ death. Among them was the phrase that sent shockwaves through the courtroom and beyond — words prosecutors say point to a mindset far more dangerous than a momentary loss of control.

Defense lawyers immediately pushed back, warning against drawing conclusions from untested allegations and emphasising that Majola has not been convicted of any crime. They argued the bail hearing was not a trial and cautioned against allowing emotion to override due process.

But by then, the damage was done.

The public reaction was instant.

Who Was DJ Warras?

To understand the weight of this case, one must understand who DJ Warras was — not just a victim, but a figure deeply embedded in his community.

Known for his infectious energy, passion for music, and ability to bring people together, DJ Warras was more than a performer. He was a mentor, a friend, and for many, a voice that defined moments of joy and connection.

His death sent ripples far beyond his immediate circle. Vigils were held. Tributes poured in. And questions lingered — questions that remain unanswered months later.

How did a night that seemed ordinary turn fatal?
And was this tragedy preventable?

The State’s Case: Risk, Not Rumour

During the hearing, prosecutors made it clear their focus was not speculation, but risk. They argued that the alleged statements attributed to Majola, when combined with other elements of the case, painted a picture of someone who should not be granted bail.

The State raised concerns about the seriousness of the charge, the strength of the prosecution case as they see it, and the potential risk of interference with witnesses.

They also suggested that emotions surrounding the case remain volatile — both for those connected to the accused and for the wider community still grieving DJ Warras’ death.

“This is not a matter of a minor offence or an isolated misunderstanding,” the court was told. “The alleged conduct strikes at the very heart of public safety.”

The Defence Pushes Back

Majola’s legal team urged the court to separate allegations from proven facts.

They emphasised that their client maintains his right to the presumption of innocence and argued that the prosecution’s reliance on alleged statements risks prejudicing the process before evidence has been fully tested.

They also highlighted Majola’s personal circumstances, ties to the community, and willingness to comply with strict bail conditions if released.

“This court must be careful not to punish before trial,” the defence argued, warning that public outrage should not dictate legal outcomes.

A Community Divided — and Waiting

Outside the courtroom, the mood was tense.

Supporters of DJ Warras expressed anger and disbelief at what they heard inside, with many saying the alleged statement confirmed their worst fears. Others urged restraint, reminding the public that bail hearings are not verdicts.

On social media, the debate intensified. Some called the alleged words unforgivable. Others warned against trial by headline.

What united both sides was a shared sense that the full truth has yet to emerge.

What Really Happened?

Perhaps the most haunting aspect of this case is how much remains unknown.

Prosecutors hinted at a sequence of events that escalated rapidly, while the defence suggested the situation was far more complex than it appears. Neither side has yet laid out a complete narrative — and they won’t until the matter proceeds further through the courts.

For now, the bail decision looms large.

If bail is denied, Majola will remain in custody as the case moves toward its next phase. If granted, the decision will almost certainly fuel further public debate — and scrutiny.

A Case That Won’t Fade Quietly

As the court adjourned, one thing was clear: this case is far from over.

The alleged words raised during the hearing have already taken on a life of their own, shaping public perception and deepening the sense of tragedy surrounding DJ Warras’ death.

But in the eyes of the law, allegations remain allegations — and the burden of proof still lies ahead.

For a grieving community, that wait is painful.
For the justice system, it is essential.

And for everyone watching, the same question lingers in the air, unanswered:

What really happened — and will the full truth ever be known?