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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Judge Desai: did his evidence being lead the way he did, impact either parties case? Should I draw inference from the fact that the accused did not testify before his experts

Judge Desai: in this case there is no prejudice –
Adv G: other than it would have made it easier to cross examine the states experts

Adv G: Accused spoke in a very confident and superior manner providing probable explanations when he couldnt remember

Adv G: the accused still tried to give an explanation for everything he couldnt remember, even when not in a position to do so, he would continue to try and justify and reason his decisions

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]
 
https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: the difference in statements were added after the fact by

Galloway: the watching of Star Wars by the family was used by the accused to explain the arguing that was heard by the neighbour

J Desai: one would expect that if your brother is attacked, if he heard gurgling sounds, you would check on him to see if he is alive

Galloway: it is quite apparent that the accused amended his testimony as an "afterthought"

Galloway: state witnesses were credible and corroborated each other

Galloway: the accused testimony should be considered carefully because he only testified after defence witnesses

J Desai: did it really make a difference to the state of defence case? Should I draw any inference

Galloway: it would have made it easier to cross examine the defence witnesses after hearing the accused testimony.
J Desai: I don't have to make a finding on this then


https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

If Rudi #VanBreda made gurgling sounds, he should have known he was still alive, Judge Desai says. Adv Galloway says he didn't mention his brother possibly being alive in the emergency call.


https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

As Desai and Galloway discuss how a sibling would normally come to the aid of another, Henri seems to freeze in his seat, casts a hooded gaze at the judge. Those interactions don't bode well at all for him, do they?
 
Adv G: the accused's version was a well rehearsed version of his plea explanation, when other things put to him "I do not recall, I can't explain" state submits he clearly has selective memory loss

Adv G: attackers entered and exited without being detected, viciously attacked family, stark contrast of the nature of the attacks on the family and on Henri

Adv G: totality of the evidence- extensive chop wounds by an axe, none of the accused's injuries showed characteristics of it being inflicted with the same type of intent or force

Adv G: he then called his girlfriend a number of times, never attended to his family and he smoked 3 cigarettes

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]
 
Are you all getting the background noise (chattering) ? Making it difficult to hear Galloway clearly at times ..........
 
https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: the accused tried to reason his decision making even when he couldn't remember events. The impression left of the accused is a "poor one"

G: if evidence did not fit with #VanBreda version, his answer was "I can't recall or remember". But he remembered other things in great detail, thus suffering from selective memory loss

Galloway: it's inexplicable why he didn't attempt to medically assist his family

G: state witnesses were cross examined in length, only to find very little disputes in the end


https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Henri #VanBreda spoke in a superior manner ,tried to reason his decision making and demeanour while on the stand. When he couldn't remember, he still tried to explain or justify. The ultimate impression left was a poor one.

Adv Galloway says Henri #VanBreda's testimony was a well-rehearsed version of his plea explanation.


https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

Galloway compliments Henri on speaking confidently, but then providing implausible answers, trying to justify himself. Refers to overwhelming incriminating evidence. She's wrapping up now.

Galloway highlights mismatch between Henri remembering certain things in meticulous detail, but foggy in other areas. This is a common pattern in true crime, as we saw in #OscarPistorius case as well.

Galloway cleverly uses Henri not only as an accused, but a witness [based on his own version]. It's a clever way of doubling the ineffectiveness of his version.

High 5 to Galloway - lambasts the defense for the "burden" of irrelevant and inconsequential evidence.

Yes, what happened to Dr. Reggie Perumal? Well, he headed to the #Rohde trial, next door, didn't he? He was also a no-show at the #OscarPistorius trial.

Galloway exposing how much time the defense wasted in this case on nonsense. $$$
 
Adv G: State security witnesses were cross-exmained at length only to find that the points were futile and did not assist the defence

Adv G: during the cross of many state witnesses their versions were challenged and it was put to them that witnesses would be called to dispute the evidence- these witnesses were never called

Adv G: Supposed to call : witness to dispute evidence on Rudi's post mortem, witness to dispute the self inflicted evidence, witness to dispute the shoe print, witness to dispute movement of Rudi etc

Adv G: reading a number of occasions were state witnesses were told that the defence had a witness which would dispute the version of that state witness, the defence however never actually called the witnesses they said they would

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]

[I’m so glad Galloway is specifically drawing this to Desai’s attention as this was exactly what Barry Roux did in in the OP trial. Botha is such a sly individual]
 
Adv G: initial explanation for his loss of consciousness, unsure of whether due to shock or injuries when I fell down the stairs. Dr Tiemensma was harshly criticised for her opinion that it was unlikely he would pass out for that time

Adv G: Accused had never lost consciousness in a similar manner before or after the incident

Adv G: accused was then diagnosed with epilepsy and in his consultation told the doctor he does in fact suffer from these conditions

Adv G: when the only proof of the accused's loss of consciousness is his version himself then his credibility is most important. #vanbreda When he testified he did not raise a prior loss of consciousness

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]
 
https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: although defence indicated they would call their own experts to dispute evidence- like Dr Reggie Perumal, these defence witnesses were never called

Galloway: with regards to the loss of consciousness, he had to explain a time lapse- initially he alleged he loss consciousness. We submit this is very incriminating

Galloway: defence expert submitted that it's a possibility that #VanBreda may have been malingering the loss of consciousness

Galloway: the loss of consciousness changed at the very end, when #VanBreda was diagnosed with juvenile epilepsy

Galloway: the only source of the loss of consciousness, is the accused himself and thus his credibility is important


https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Galloway points out no rebuttal from defence on expert evidence - Reggie Perumal vs Anthony, Joubert, Tiemensma and Dempers. Perumal never testified. Cobus Steyl for Joubert, Van der Westhuizen, Brown regarding blood evidence, shoe print and the axe being thrown.

Time lapse between #VanBreda attack and when emergency was called - Du Treveau and Henri initially said he didn't suffer from any conditions. Explanation changed at last minute when he had an epileptic fit. He now had 2 seizures after the attack, Galloway says.
 
Adv G: he did not even tell doctors that day that he had suffered from an attack or loss of consciousness for a few hours that he cannot explain

Adv G: The psychologist did not testify to explain why Henri's demeanour was the way that it was. Rather Dr Butler was called to give evidence on his post ictal state and submitted that his demeanour would have been strange if not postictal

Adv G: The accused gave very detailed reasons of why he acted n certain ways, I have come to learn I have a speech impediment so I sat down to calm down and smoke cigarettes

Adv G: Dr Butler says that this is not possible if he is in a postictal state.

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]

Galloway is doing a superb job.
 
https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Even if #VanBreda now suffers from epilepsy, no evidence that he suffered this at the time of the incident, Galloway says.

Galloway says only reasonable inference is that Henri didn't suffer an epileptic fit and was in a postictal state - he strategised when making emergency calls, mapping his location. He gives detailed reasons why he acted in a certain manner. Remained calm, unemotional.

J Desai: its possible, Churchill had a stutter which was the reason for him speaking softly and slowly
G: its not just the speaking slowly but remaining calm and unemotional


https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

Dr. Butler reluctantly conceded the accused may have been malingering. Desai wants to know whether the accused ever lost consciousness before. Galloway says no, but I think Butler did say there was 1.

As Galloway goes on, speaking rapidly, defense counsel huddles...

1 thing Galloway has emphasized today that's opened my eyes is the repeated reference to Henri justifying himself. I get the impression, as a young middle child, he was doing a lot of that within the family dynamic,; it didn't go down well, especially not with Rudi.


https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: his demeanor after the events, where the defence requested a psychologist to explain the accused behavior
during and after the events. But the psychologist was not called to testify

Galloway: several aspects where the accused was able to strategise which is not consistent with a post-ictal state, like using the land line, and sending a geo location

Galloway: he gives detailed reasons for his actions or decision making
 
Judge Desai raises a point on Winston Churchill smoking a cigarette and speaking slowly as he stuttered, when he did speeches.
Adv G: yes but not to remain calm

Adv G: the defence witnesses were not objective, they merely raised possibilities to test the state's evidence. Specifically in the case of Olckers

Judge Desai: the evidence of Olckers?
Adv G: her conclusion was, because of non-compliance which Otto explained she disagreed and it was her view that the state .

Judge Desai interrupts: Dr Olckers- just analysed the detail, if she just tested the evidence surely she could have checked.
Adv G: you cannot just criticise you must test

[URL]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]
 
[video=youtube;-e9F-6Ql0a8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e9F-6Ql0a8[/video]
 
Judge Desai: as an expert, challenging every aspect of the states case and it comes to a simple point of doing the test you have an issue with, as an expert, and the response is, I was not told to do the test?

We are going to adjourn for lunch, and Adv Galloway will take us into the afternoon session to close

[url]https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en[/URL]

Lunch adjournment
 
https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: defence witnesses were not objective as witnesses should be, they were merely trying to test the states case

Court adjourns for lunch


https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Galloway says defence witnesses were not objective, merely trying to test state case by raising possibilities. Does not comply with duties of expert witnesses. Makes specific reference to Dr Olckers.

Judge Desai says Olckers gave all the criticism she could, but didn't test any of the blood. Can an expert do that? Is that tenable?
 
I haven't been watching the live streaming, my hearing isn't good enough to follow it, but it sounds like Galloway has been going from strength to strength in summarising the prosecution case. And as though Judge Desai is very much following her arguments and in agreement with them.
 
Must just add: thank you so much JJ and Prime; you've both been doing an absolutely stellar job of covering tonight's (well, in SA time today's) proceedings. I'm feeling so heartened by all that's been said so far. How is Botha going to turn it around at this point and paint a convincing portrait of Henri as the hapless victim? I just can't see it. Galloway has made some great points.
 
Fluffykins said:
Must just add: thank you so much JJ and Prime; you've both been doing an absolutely stellar job of covering tonight's (well, in SA time today's) proceedings. I'm feeling so heartened by all that's been said so far. How is Botha going to turn it around at this point and paint a convincing portrait of Henri as the hapless victim? I just can't see it.
Click to expand...

I also love Judge Desai's humour throughout: "great fun in looking in the mirror while shaving", his "giggling that Defence experts criticize State's results, yet provide no Scientific tests", and many other moments.
Let's see how he acts with Botha.
 
RSBM

JudgeJudi said:
Adv G: totality of the evidence- extensive chop wounds by an axe, none of the accused's injuries showed characteristics of it being inflicted with the same type of intent or force

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en
Click to expand...

And this would be the reason why he said the attacker had a knife and that they struggled over it. He wanted to show that he too suffered some sort of injury, and how precisely could you end up with mere scratches like that from an axe. I believe it would be impossible. Axes don't have the same type of cutting edge as knives as they're very much thicker. His only option was to bring a knife into his story.

On a different note, I don't for one minute believe he wore socks to bed that night. It was very warm and all family members wore light clothing. Who wears socks to bed on a hot night.
 
How can Henri sit back and listen to his 'false statements' being pulled apart?
He just isn't as smart as he thought!!! :blushing:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 1,914 (members: 67, guests: 1,847)

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
1,847
Total visitors
1,914
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,910
Messages
18,115,558
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top