South Africa - Martin, 55, Theresa, 54, Rudi Van Breda, 22, Murdered, 26 Jan 2015 #5

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams @CapeTownEtc #vanbreda

Adv G: Op't Hof's evidence was not that the argument was unabated for 2 hours but that she knew it started at 10 and ended at 12- counsel in cross-examination used the word "aanhoudened"

Adv G: it is not the defences case that Op't Hof was unable to hear anything from the house

Adv G: if she was trying to construct a version she could have added that her son woke up from screams or added that the argument was heard at 4 in the morning

Adv G:re the evidence of the couch pillows showing they were watching tv, the domestic worker testified that rudi had been lying there

Adv G: no evidence of watching a dvd or dvd near the machine

Adv G: asked about the blood drops on the adjacent walls- I considered the whole circumstances and thats why I concluded most possible is that it was Rudi's blood from within the room

Adv G; The argument re DNA analysis - refers to judgment on the merits of the matter we provided, in these last two matters Dr Olckers was heavily criticised for similar methods she used to test the states case

Adv G: in that matter 2 appellants and one rape victim who shared 5/6/7 alleles and their dna was the only evidence linking one to the crime

Adv G: the court found that given the circumstances of the case, neither the samples or the control mechanisms had any relevance in the matter in hand, he doesnt deny being on the scene nor is this the only evidence linking Henri to the crime

Adv G: Otto answered the questions about accreditation, finances being one of the reason they do not have it but she said it is not a legal requirement

Adv G: with reference to the proficiency test- she decided it was more important whether the suspects profile can be read in rather than the victims

Adv G: Joubert formed opinion that the accused version was highly improbable so its the states argument that the accused did not provide a consistent version throughout, his version changed from inside the bathroom to somewhere at the foot of his bed,to left of attacker

Adv G: he says he steps out of the bathroom when he heard the attacker attacking his mother- he also did not mention the second attacker in this statement

Adv G: Blood spatter evidence on the body of the accused contradicts the blood spatter on the shorts of the accused

Adv G: the shoe print in the bathroom, the analyst said he would no qualify it as a shoe print



https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: never the testimony of Opt' Hof that the argument went on for a full two hours....

Galloway: there was no DVD of Star Trek. Also this not reflected on whatsapps

Galloway: DNA does not stand alone and must be considered with proper perspective....

Galloway: Joubert evidence says that the accused version is improbable. The accused tailored or changed his version when on the stand

Galloway: the accused was closer than what he said in his initial statement

Galloway: the blood spatter evidence on the body of the accused contradicts the blood spatter on the accused shorts

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Adv G: he testified that there was no unidentified shoe prints- he did not take samples of every single print when he saw it was obviously the same one

Adv G: Kleynhans conceded he could not remember a wet stain, but his testimony was that there was no indication of anything wrong in the house until he went up the stairs

Adv G: re Marli;s DNA. No evidence of intruder, Joubert said a blood source would influence the spatter- she was impacted in 6 different places, moreover she was last and the blood on the axe may have affected the transfer

Adv G: It works both ways- if second axe was used the surely when they ran away with axe there would be evidence of her dna, drip, the drip blood is not that of Marli's

Adv G:Rudi could have had a loss of consciousness, he would have been able to move but she was not of the view he would have been able to move independently from the bed to the floor

Adv G: rudi's movement if any would not have been purposeful movement and thus only the accused could have moved him

Adv G: it was evident that Dr Perumal had consulted with counsel on the self inflicted wounds, as Dr perumal had referred counsel to the text book which Tiemensma had the updated version of

Judge Desai: in all my years I have never heard of limiting an experts mandate especially in incriminating evidence



https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: not all show prints were taken because sometimes the expert detected that it was multiple prints from the same person

Galloway: the absence of Marli's blood: it must be considered in context....Joubert says that blood splatter is dependent on victim being hit repeatedly in one spot. Marli was hit in several different areas

Galloway: one would expect to find prints on the axe of the accused, based on his version or the states, but none were found- refers to absence of evidence rule

Galloway: although Defence says they didn't ask Dr Perumal about self- inflicted wounds because it was not his mandate, yet they referred to him in cross examination

J Desai jokes, he watches his grand children very carefully for thumb twitches after the videos shown in court of seizures

 

[Interested Bystander]

Botha looks very uncomfortable whilst Galloway is speaking. Very twitchy at times, particularly on points of his being shot down.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Adv G: refer to Dr Butler's evidence on malingering, he reluctantly conceded possibility of malingering, he says the accused does show strategising, reasoning

Adv G: both these witnesses were of the view that on their own the stab wounds not self inflicted but in the context of other wounds they were likely self inflicted

Adv G: Tiemensma testified that she has examined the after math of knife attacks 1500 victims, 300 perpetrators when it was not fatal

Dr Tiemensma: did not think it was likely for the knife to stick, no bone there, only tissue

Adv G: Prof Dempers then testified that it was unlikely that the knife would have stuck, counsel for the defence now states the 50mm wound as a fact

Adv G: Implication was that when it was moved it fell out, he wanted to simulate the worst case scenario and that is why he used 50mm, he added pork skin is significantly thicker and has less fat

Adv G: pork tissue is not as pliable as human tissue and for these reasons he said it would likely not remain stuck after a fight

Judge Desai: if each possibility exists then the defences version is reasonably possible

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: Dr Butler did reluctantly concede that the accused many be malingering. He was able to rationalize

Galloway: when one considers the available facts, there is no evidence of intruder or intruders... all were in close proximity. The accused was left standing with injuries very different to the rest of the family

Galloway: the version he provides does not match the objective evidence

Galloway concludes her heads

Judge Desai: this is the 66th day of the trial and the court has a lot of evidence to consider. Judgement set down for 23rd April 2018

verdict set for 23rd April 2018

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams @CapeTownEtc #vanbreda

Adv G: Accused left standing and attacked by the same intruder with injuries that are markedly different then his version is inconsistent with the evidence of the scene so only inference is that accused is the attacker

Judge Desai: what about the point that the accused could not have known what the DNA results would be when they were taken 3 months and that he would not have known that marli and his moms blood would be on his shorts

Adv G: deals with the drop that was on Teresa, and the fact of anomalies exisiting in these matters

Judge Desai: its the 66th day of the trial, great deal of evidence, arguments have been advanced, the court now has to go through that evidence, the date we have agreed on is 23 April 2018.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Thank you once again Prime for a sterling job. Time for you to relax and have a well earned rest.

Two months to make a decision seems inordinately long but what do I know .

 

[LouP1209]

Thank you Prime for the updates, re convene in April hopefully JJ will be fully recovered and will here too.

:jail:

 

[Fluffykins]

Well, isn't it a relief it's all over until Judge Desai hands down his verdict. We now have a little bit less of a wait than the one we've just had; it was just on 11 weeks from the adjournment at the end of November until this week's closing addresses, whereas this next wait will be about nine and a half weeks. It went fast enough last time with Christmas and New Year in the middle. We'll be back again before we know it, and hopefully next time we're all together we'll be celebrating justice for the van Breda family. I feel pretty confident Judge Desai will deliver.

Thanks to everyone for your individual contributions. Wish you an excellent and very speedy recovery JJ, and big thanks for basically holding the whole show together! Big thanks also to Prime for keeping us updated and also for the eyewateringly lovely high teas (meringues tonight; madeleines the other night, OMG!). Hugs and best wishes to y'all. Looking forward to getting back together in April.

 

[Tortoise]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Adv G: refer to Dr Butler's evidence on malingering, he reluctantly conceded possibility of malingering, he says the accused does show strategising, reasoning

Adv G: both these witnesses were of the view that on their own the stab wounds not self inflicted but in the context of other wounds they were likely self inflicted

Adv G: Tiemensma testified that she has examined the after math of knife attacks 1500 victims, 300 perpetrators when it was not fatal

Dr Tiemensma: did not think it was likely for the knife to stick, no bone there, only tissue

Adv G: Prof Dempers then testified that it was unlikely that the knife would have stuck, counsel for the defence now states the 50mm wound as a fact

Adv G: Implication was that when it was moved it fell out, he wanted to simulate the worst case scenario and that is why he used 50mm, he added pork skin is significantly thicker and has less fat

Adv G: pork tissue is not as pliable as human tissue and for these reasons he said it would likely not remain stuck after a fight

Judge Desai: if each possibility exists then the defences version is reasonably possible

BBM "Judge Desai: if each possibility exists then the defences version is reasonably possible"

I thought this needed context so I've transcribed this bit from the recording -

Galloway: In conclusion my lord much of the defence case rests on possibilities put to state witnesses during cross examination. As is expected the state witnesses all readily conceded that the possibilities as put to them is indeed possible. As was regularly remarked during the case my lord anything...

Desai: you see if each of the possibilities exists the defence case is reasonably possible too...

Galloway: No my lord I'm getting to that

Desai: Oh

Galloway: ..as is regularly remarked by all the state witnesses ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE but with respect possibilities ought not to be elevated to fact. When one considers the available facts my lord we have ...
[lists the facts]



Traceyams so reminds me of Alex Crawford and her OP trial reporting.

Thanks for doing the updates Prime.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Like you Tortoise, I sometimes find Traceyams interpretations a trifle strange although she does a good job of covering most of the "action" in court. I think her tweeting coverage is excellent.

It does seem she gives HvB the benefit of any doubt a lot of the time. I can see why she avoided criminal law and plumped for corporate law. Maybe she is not a good judge of character.

 

[Tortoise]

Like you Tortoise, I sometimes find Traceyams interpretations a trifle strange although she does a good job of covering most of the "action" in court. I think her tweeting coverage is excellent.

It does seem she gives HvB the benefit of any doubt a lot of the time. I can see why she avoided criminal law and plumped for corporate law. Maybe she is not a good judge of character.

Just a few nauseating quotes from one of her articles this week -

As expected, Advocate Pieter Botha put out a passionate, well articulated, well supported (references to case law) and most importantly a convincing closing argument.

Botha argued his narrative, one which few members of the public have considered because Henri was convicted by social media on day one. It was interesting to hear the defence’s argument, it was a very compelling argument...

Botha said there is no evidence before the court that there was something unusual about this family, of course there is speculation and hearsay in the media regarding Henri’s drug use and possible rehabilitation.

Desai is certainly alive to the fact that Henri may have wiped the axe, this is consistent with his finger prints not being on it either. The Judge was right to note that it is not the only probable reason, but Botha raised some very good points for his client today, points which, collectively may allow for the doubt he needs to get Henri acquitted.

http://www.capetownetc.com/news/van-breda-the-defence-wraps-up/

:sick:

 

[tmar]

So Judge Desai said Botha could have until teatime, and he's kept going until they're now off for lunch, and still Botha doesn't sound anywhere near finished. When is he going to wind it up? When is Galloway going to have her time to reply? This just keeps getting weirder, and it also strikes me as some of the strangest dialogue we've heard so far. The way Judge Desai is arguing with Botha, rebuking him even.

You're doing a fantastic job, Prime. Thanks much. :tyou:

I agree Fluffykins.
Thanks Prime for your great work.
Have a nice rest, and see you back here in April.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Just a few nauseating quotes from one of her articles this week -

As expected, Advocate Pieter Botha put out a passionate, well articulated, well supported (references to case law) and most importantly a convincing closing argument.

Botha argued his narrative, one which few members of the public have considered because Henri was convicted by social media on day one. It was interesting to hear the defence’s argument, it was a very compelling argument...

Botha said there is no evidence before the court that there was something unusual about this family, of course there is speculation and hearsay in the media regarding Henri’s drug use and possible rehabilitation.

Desai is certainly alive to the fact that Henri may have wiped the axe, this is consistent with his finger prints not being on it either. The Judge was right to note that it is not the only probable reason, but Botha raised some very good points for his client today, points which, collectively may allow for the doubt he needs to get Henri acquitted.

http://www.capetownetc.com/news/van-breda-the-defence-wraps-up/

:sick:

Compelling argument!! What planet is she on?

 

[bleuboy]

Compelling argument!! What planet is she on?

Not the same planet as me lol... After all that we have to wait until April. Is this normal for SA. I must say I find the court system lazy in SA. This trial could have been over in half the time it has taken. Another thing is I've never seen attorney's speak to a judge like Botha as done all through this trial. Something should really be done about that, he is so disrespectful.

 

[Tortoise]

There is one piece of evidence that I don't think the defence attempted to address and that is the rolled up duvet on the floor. They postulated that Rudi might have been able to pull it down off the bed. I really don't see the point in that if they don't then address how it went from being flat on the bed to purposely rolled up in the corner.

I can't help but think the police investigation was shoddy in that respect. And they didn't examine the t-shirt on the floor next to it either. I think the duvet had a role in this, and Henri was trying to hide something by rolling it up and putting it in the blood on the floor. For the state prosecutor it's like doing a jigsaw puzzle with a few pieces missing. Maybe he used it to cover his body like a toga to shield himself from Teresa and Marli's blood spatter. Maybe he layed it out on the floor to walk around on and not get blood on the bottom of his socks. I wish they did better investigation work!

Funny how there was a duvet on the floor with blood spatter evidence in the Pistorius trial which also didn't receive the attention it should have done. Well not funny really, more infuriating ullhair:

 

[PrimeSuspect]

There is one piece of evidence that I don't think the defence attempted to address and that is the rolled up duvet on the floor. They postulated that Rudi might have been able to pull it down off the bed. I really don't see the point in that if they don't then address how it went from being flat on the bed to purposely rolled up in the corner.

I can't help but think the police investigation was shoddy in that respect. And they didn't examine the t-shirt on the floor next to it either. I think the duvet had a role in this, and Henri was trying to hide something by rolling it up and putting it in the blood on the floor. For the state prosecutor it's like doing a jigsaw puzzle with a few pieces missing. Maybe he used it to cover his body like a toga to shield himself from Teresa and Marli's blood spatter. Maybe he layed it out on the floor to walk around on and not get blood on the bottom of his socks. I wish they did better investigation work!

Funny how there was a duvet on the floor with blood spatter evidence in the Pistorius trial which also didn't receive the attention it should have done. Well not funny really, more infuriating ullhair:

Actually, they're pretty good ideas of how HvB might have used the duvet, it's a very important piece of evidence but no-one cared to test it. Is it for lack of imagination or investigative skills? It wasn't bagged when collecting the other evidence so it's now unable to be forensically examined? :/

Adding to your train of thought he used the duvet as a toga/shield, could he have used when he cut Marli's throat? IIRC, it couldn't be determined when her throat was cut because she survived, (Thank God!) the medics worked on her open wound and it was surgically repaired, so they're unable to pinpoint a time. He probably did it just before making the emergency call and was sure she'd die before the ambulance arrived.


Funny how Botha conceded that 'some' of HvB's wounds might be self-inflicted, what does HE make of this?! Luckily, he did a lousy job in the summing up, I don't think he could convince his own mother!

I was a little apprehensive about Judge Desai continuing to question Botha the next day, he did so probably because he couldn't get satisfactory answers from HvB while on the stand and wants proper answers! J Desai's question about HvB wearing socks in warm weather, Botha replies, he can't explain why his children do what they do?!!! What kind of answer is that?! Again, he instantly makes HvB sound like a small child as he did at the start of the trial. Ask HvB, he was right behind him! :facepalm:

Roll on 23 April!!!

 

[Tortoise]

Botha's desperate that's for sure. He even tried to say that the red substance on the kitchen door and the blood drops on the neighbouring house backed up the likelihood of a second axe and Marli's attacker. He must be an idiot. As Galloway replied the mark on the kitchen door had no human DNA in it and the blood on the outside wall was Rudi's.

Actually I can't quite believe he would be so stupid. If I get time later I'll see if I can find it and transcribe what he said.

 

[tmar]

There is one piece of evidence that I don't think the defence attempted to address and that is the rolled up duvet on the floor. They postulated that Rudi might have been able to pull it down off the bed. I really don't see the point in that if they don't then address how it went from being flat on the bed to purposely rolled up in the corner.

I can't help but think the police investigation was shoddy in that respect. And they didn't examine the t-shirt on the floor next to it either. I think the duvet had a role in this, and Henri was trying to hide something by rolling it up and putting it in the blood on the floor. For the state prosecutor it's like doing a jigsaw puzzle with a few pieces missing. Maybe he used it to cover his body like a toga to shield himself from Teresa and Marli's blood spatter. Maybe he layed it out on the floor to walk around on and not get blood on the bottom of his socks. I wish they did better investigation work!

Funny how there was a duvet on the floor with blood spatter evidence in the Pistorius trial which also didn't receive the attention it should have done. Well not funny really, more infuriating ullhair:

Tortoise, you are right.
Why wasn't the duvet examined????
Imagine if, as you suggest, it was used as a shield, and has Marli's and/or Teresa's blood on it.
I hope this important point is raised by Judge Desai: but probably he is not permitted.
A major error by the State.

 

[Interested Bystander]

This report touches on Galloway's questioning of HvB re the duvet amongst other things. I don't think I have read it before but apologise if it has already been posted.

https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/so...breda-trial-the-most-damning-question-of-all/