Judge Desai dealing with the difference in the accused's statement to police, his plea explanation and his evidence given in court
During cross examination of Op't Hof it was suggested that the movie was 2 hours long, the accused conceded that if they watched the movie after dinner around 9 that his evidence was wrong
Accused could not recall where he was stationed when he opened the bathroom door and saw the attack on his brother
Accused struggled to explain his fathers position on the bed when he testified, his father was trying to attack and probably trying to protect Rudi
In the plea and in his testimony the accused states that he remembers the attacker laughing this wasn't in the police statement. He described it as a high pitched giggle, the accused had impression that the attacker was having fun
In his statement he said he heard his mother being attacked outside the bedroom but in his evidence he said he could not recall if he heard his mother being attacked
When confronted with the discrepancy on where the attacker got the knife, a third version was given, he said the attacker recovered very quickly after being disarmed, he saw the knife in his hand when being approached by the attacker
Judge Desai is still going through Henri's versions to the police, in his plea and his actual evidence in court, and identifying areas where his version was different
Family's dog Sasha- no statements were made that the dog barked, Accused testified that he could not remember if Sasha barked but he didn't think she did bark she was sickly at the time
Accused testified that the first thing he recalled from the morning was seeing Marli. It seems unlikely that Sasha would not have barked at the intruders
http://www.enca.com/south-africa/ju...n-in-triple-axe-murder-accused-van-breda-case
