Read more
The court concluded that the mother has shown the capability to obstruct the course of justice.
Tiffany Nicole Meek appears at Roodepoort Magistrate’s Court in the murder case of her son Jayden-Lee Meek on 23 July 2025. Picture: Nigel Sibanda/The Citizen
Tiffany Nicole Meek, the mother of slain 11-year-old Jayden-Lee Meek, has been denied bail and will remain in custody.
The ruling was handed down by the Roodepoort Magistrate’s Court on Tuesday, following two weeks of arguments presented by both the state and defence.
Meek faces charges of murder, crimen injuria, defeating the ends of justice, and attempting to obstruct justice in relation to the death of her son.
Jayden-Lee’s body was discovered on 14 May on the staircase of his home in the Swazi’s Place complex in Fleurhof, Johannesburg.
He had been reported missing the day before.
Jayden-Lee Meek murder: Mother denied bail
During Tuesday’s proceedings, the magistrate went through the evidence presented by both parties.
She noted that Meek, who earns a monthly salary of R17 000, requested that her bail be set at R5 000.
The court also considered the alternative address submitted by Meek – her father’s residence in Verulam, KwaZulu-Natal (KZN).
The defence contended there were inconsistencies in the state’s case, particularly in relation to the identification of Jayden-Lee’s school uniform on the day he disappeared, and the absence of a murder weapon.
“[The defence argued] no eyewitness can confirm that Jayden was in the company of the applicant after being dropped off or that she was the last person being seen with him alive,” The presiding officer remarked.
ALSO READ: State argues Jayden-Lee Meek’s mother rode public sympathy until the horse bucked
The magistrate highlighted the state’s position that there is prima facie evidence linking Meek to her son’s death.
“The state argues that the applicant has done so by going to an elaborate scheme to evade justice.”
The court proceedings were briefly interrupted by a power outage, after which the magistrate resumed delivering her judgment.
‘Why were alarm bells not sounded sooner?’
The presiding officer highlighted the prosecution’s assertion that Meek had deliberately omitted a critical detail in her police statement – that she returned to Swazi’s Place at around 4am on the morning of 14 May.
“The state argued that because the applicant was not aware of what evidence the investigating officer was going to tender, she did not prepare and was blindsided by the detail of the recording of the happening by the night security on duty,” the magistrate continued.
“The state argues the applicant intentionally omitted the time she returned to the flat that morning because she did not want to play on the mind of the court that she returned to the flat and placed the body of the child outside in his underwear because that was her trying to create a distance between her presence and the discovery of the body.”
Even if Meek’s timeline is accepted, the magistrate noted the state’s argument that it does not change the fact that Jayden-Lee’s body was found after she had already left the complex.
READ MORE: Jayden-Lee Meek murder case: Missing pages and immigration status take centre stage
The magistrate questioned why Jayden-Lee was not reported missing immediately after he was allegedly not dropped off at the complex, as claimed by the mother.
“It begs the question of why, if Jayden-Lee was dropped off by the school transport around three o’clock, why were the alarm bells not sounded sooner?”
She subsequently denied Meek bail as “it is difficult to trust the information presented” by the mother.
“The applicant has shown that she has the ability to defeat or obstruct the administration of justice by causing other persons to be suspected and attempting to obstruct the cause of justice by placing Jayden’s body outside her unit or on the stairs to create the conclusion that the child was harmed elsewhere.
NPA reacts
Phindi Mjonondwane, the regional spokesperson for the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in Gauteng, told the media that the prosecution is confident about securing a successful conviction against Meek.
“The evidence that we have at our disposal thus far is that of a circumstantial nature. Much of that evidence will be diverse during the trial stage.
“For now, we’re dealing with a bail application stage, which the test thereof is that of a balance of probabilities.
“So going forward as the state, we will have to tighten our case because we’ll be expected going forward during the trial stage to prove our case beyond any reasonable doubt,” Mjonondwane said.
The matter is scheduled to return to court on 17 September, following a postponement requested by the state to allow for the completion of the investigation, as DNA results and witness statements remain outstanding.
“We will also be awaiting the decision of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution about the forum where the trial will be held,” Mjonondwane added.
NOW READ: Evidence challenged in Jayden-Lee Meek murder investigation
