South Africa - Martin, 55, Theresa, 54, Rudi van Breda, 22, murdered, 26 Jan 2015 #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Combrink refers to photo of a chip at the entrance. Chip in first an second photo not there on the last photo.

It is there in the first, but not as big as in the photos she took, Brown says.

Rubble lying on dry blood. It didn't fall on there when it was wet. Blood precedes the rubble. Brown agrees.

Whatever caused this damage occurred after the blood had dried, Combrink says.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Brown: I see some damages there is a bit of chip but not as big in the area which Combrink has shown

C: the rubble there did not fall on the blood area there when it was wet?

C because it isn't soaked with blood? B yes it seems as if it must have been dried

C: so that damage occurred after the blood had dried? B: yes

C: once again apparent this was created between first photo and then ones that you took?

Brown: from pictures I have seen and shown on the scene now I agree
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Desai - its possible that it broke before but the damaged part was moved around - Brown yes

C: We know 4 people had to carry Martin out, so do you not think it was quite a possibility that 4 people carrying him out would cause the damage there on the steps? Brown: yes anything with sharp edge with movement could have created this
knowing all the facts you now know are you willing to revise your report? Had you known this u would've considered it?

Brown: in those circumstances I would have considered it as a possibility
 
Whew, that was close. I thought it was adjourned for 8 weeks. I've obviously missed something. Can someone please tell me what happened with the dates. I'm trying desperately to eat dinner at the moment.
 
Marples said:
Even though it would be so hard for her to do, you have to hope Marli can get in there and say "It was Henri". But knowing Botha he'd then try and claim she's saying that for more of the estate or some such rubbish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think the defence would attack her memory, or lack thereof, and say she is confused about what happened or isn't recalling things as they really happened.
 
Combrink refers to the dust on staircase. 6th step debris could fit into wall at staircase.

You didn't find pieces you could hold in your hand? No, Brown says.

Refers to the landing. If you have all the damage parts, makes it easier to make a reconstruction? Had you had more pieces, you would be able to reconstruct it better?

Damage in the men's room, did you find a piece? No, but there was dust, not big enough to physically match.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613
 
I cannot help feeling this morning has been more time wasting on the part of the Defence. How on earth has this niggling argument taken the case forward in any way? The DT seems to be obsessed with minor points that in no way change the story or am I missing something?
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C: shows B a photo of enlargements of photo state gave defense

C showing a wooden skirting on left side of steps

C: turn the page same picture showing wooden skirting and next photo close up of blood too and concrete with blood

Botha: if you have all the constituent parts of damage that fits in with particular area then obviously easier to determine

what happened to cause the damage

C: we know there were more pieces similar to what is lying there but you didnt have them. B didnt see this particular piece

C: the damage occurred in boys room, u never found a piece? B: there was some dust on entrance area but not big particles

Brown I wasn't not able to say with lack of markings that the axe was used

C: as far as H is concerned you said when blow is very hard you expect it to crumble to dust Brown- spattered effect

C: you assume if you find dust then you assume dust? But in respect of H you didnt find any force was used?

B: I did not find striation or indentation, I did not find any pieces I only found dust particles

There are indications of force and contra-indications of force. B yes thats why I opted for uncontrolled due to uncertainty

C: Visual aspect look at fig 20 you took this photo. If you had the constituent parts you would be able to fit them if they fitted

C I didnt have it so thats why it was more difficult to do the indentification

C: there are no useful comparisons to identify due to what u had?

B: its a porous component, the plaster so there were no markings

C: striation you refer to when you see drag marks or see where it starts and where it ends

C: example- you find a culprit that attacks lead with axe (soft metal) if you hit that axe into lead area its a nice reserved

C: area of what the axe looked like it would leave indentation marks. Those markings would follow inside and you know this axe

C; went into that piece of lead. This is an ideal example as the markings are then fully properly and nicely transferred

C: I am just talking broad principles right now

C just as when a thumb print is on something I can see which side the hand was turned

C: in this instance striation marks couldn't give you an exact way of how the instrument was turned when it was used- B yes
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C refers to damage D- you see the top part of the axe seems to be touching the wall the bottom part seems to have space

Brown: it is at the bottom too but it is as it comes down

C: what I am putting to you is that this was not a tight fit it was a loose fit

Brown: refers to her photos to explain why left side is exposed. C- its a space I am saying its not a solid fit

Brown- on the most right side impact is what I am trying to explain.

Brown refers to her photos and has the axe fitted into the most right side
 
When a blow is hard, it has spatter effect. Dust, but not fragments, it would indicate force. She didn't see any striation or indentation marks.

Fitted the axe in the area, but Combrink says the top part touches wall while there is a space in the bottom part of the blade and the rest. Brown says it fits in the bottom as well.

This is not a solid fit, Combrink insists.

Damage broader than the axe. Yes, Brown says.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C: the damage there is broader than the axe? Brown: yes

C because of that when the blade fits in there it doesnt fit tightly?there is a loose element it could move up and down side 2 side

B: yes but this is a plastered area there are pieces that will break out as well it is not homegenous

C: the reasons I understand iro difference of controlled and uncontrolled. 2 elements- 1.indication of directional velocity

C element of direction and control? B yes some of the aspects

C: u were asked could the axe have been thrown? First you said yes and then court more specific as to different variables

C; then you said definitely and then you said "very unlikely"
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Judge Desai clarifies you said it was possible axe thrown but you said highly unlikely

Brown: look at mark in its entirety where it was, components of the wall, length, width, depth impact in its entirety

Certainty of direction, force that was applied, particles found being vaporized, found the plaster was cut through to expose

the brick. I also spoke about the course being followed and beginning and end of markings that could be found
 
Taking into account its a plastered surface, not homogeneous. There are pieces that will break out. Difference between controlled and uncontrolled - direction and force.

Could axe have been thrown? She said it was highly unlikely. Why?

Brown says she looked at the the mark in its entirety, the substrate, where it was, what the component of substrate was, and the length, width, depth, and impact in its entirety.

Certainty of direction, the force, the particles found to be vaporised, the plaster which was cut through to expose the brick, the course of the marks, beginning and end of markings.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613

I'm just waiting from Combrink to ask her how many dust particles were on the stair
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Newtons law the 2nd and 3rd. 3rd for every action and force there is an equal and opposite reaction.

2nd force is equal to mass and velocity. Velocity is acceleration and force change of movement

C: were u provided with his initial statement, warning statement? B- no

B yesterday I only heard a part of his statement. C- I never considered in my reports whether the axe was thrown

C: when u consider science you take a measurement and apply mathematics to conduct experiments - u didnt do calculations

Brown: I didnt do any experiments or calculations
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C if i want to rely on these laws I have to fill in the M- (maths) the V (the velocity) to give it any meaning in this world

B: I dont understand the question

C: you have told us your version that axe couldn't have been thrown without any calculations u only know the mass B- yes

C the reaction in this case is that it hit the wall stops momentum and the breakage which follows
 
Did you use any calculation? No. It's a thumbsuck? No. It was based on laws, Brown says. You didn't do any experiments? No, it wasn't asked of me.

If you want to rely on these laws, I have to fill in the mass velocity, etc to give it any meaning. Yes, Brown says.

Matthys says he consulted with an engineer. Different types of bricks, mortar.

Brown says there are building regulations.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C- you didnt take sample of that wall B no I did not. C you could extract a piece of the wall or use an instrument to measure

C: so broadly you know nothing of that wall. B That is what I said I am not building expert but the standards of building I know

C: given what we now know you know, you cannot truly say axe wasn't thrown

B: I did not have velocity I had the mass of the axe and I didnt have the hardness of the wall from other aspects

Desai- just looking at it you have a better eye than we have what do you see

Brown: by looking at the characteristics and considering the scenario given to me- possible but highly unlikely
 
https://twitter.com/Traceyams

C: what other aspects, the breakage and axe being thrown has quarter chance of hitting wall with sharp blade

C: so 25% each of these of hitting that wall when it is thrown. You see that quarter chance as highly unlikely?

Brown: its not a throwing axe and the part I matched was the sharp blade part

C-what is the point? C: you saying it did hit the sharp blade

Brown: taking into account all other characteristics mentioned and that 25% chance that it would land on the blade

Desai - so you say highly unlikely? Combrink- 25% is a big chance 1 in 4?

C: have you ever thrown this axe? B it was not asked of me to do that so I didnt throw the axe

C: Our expert has thrown that axe he assimilated the movement, our client was certain of how it landed and without
 
No true assertion or opinion you can give? I said possible, but not likely.

Do you see a quarter chance as highly unlikely?

That's not a throwing axe.

It had a 25% chance of landing on its blade when it was thrown, Brown says. It's one in four, Combrink says.

Have you ever thrown this axe? Combrink asks.

Brown says it wasn't asked of her.

Defense expert Kobus Steyl has thrown it, 1.5m away.

Without spinning, it hit straight into the surface, Combrink says.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-26-20170613
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 1,950 (members: 114, guests: 1,836)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
1,836
Total visitors
1,950
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,081
Messages
18,134,372
Members
231,231
Latest member
timbo1966
Back
Top