South Africa - Martin, 55, Theresa, 54, Rudi van Breda, 22, murdered, 26 Jan 2015 #1

[JudgeJudi]

You’ll recall that Media 24 wanted to live-stream the trial. The State, Advocate Botha representing Henri van Breda and Advocate Buikman representing Marli all opposed this.

The prosecution said that most state witnesses were reluctant to testify in the glare of cameras.

Botha said, “Our instructions are to seek leave to appeal‚” “It is impossible to appeal without the court’s reasons.”

The parties asked Judge Desai to furnish them with reasons for his decision. The judge delivered his Reasons on 4 April.

http://saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2017/35.html

Judge Desai is a very senior judge who has served on the bench for 21 years.

In light of what happened with Pistorius, I can’t see the ConCourt granting leave to appeal, but you always have to be prepared for the unexpected in SA.

 

[JudgeJudi]

The dagga possession charges against Henri and his girlfriend have been withdrawn. Henri’s advocate Pieter Botha said on Tuesday that the matter against his client was withdrawn based on the merits of the case.

"The Director of Public Prosecutions studied the docket and the evidence against Mr Van Breda and decided the State can't prove its case against him, as he has been saying all along," Botha said outside the Cape Town Magistrate’s Court.

[url]http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/dagga-charges-against-henri-van-breda-withdrawn-20170411[/URL]

 

[JudgeJudi]

On 6 April Judge Desai refused the State and Henri van Breda leave to appeal his decision allowing Media24 permission to livestream the trial. However, the parties indicated that they would approach the Supreme Court of Appeal. The parties asked Desai to provide reasons for his decision.

In his reasons, Desai said that while the courts had a duty to ensure Henri’s trial was conducted fairly and that the interests of the witnesses and processes were protected, the Constitution stipulated that his right was a fair public trial in which the rights of the media and the public were also respected.

The State and Van Breda appealed against his decision, arguing it would affect the administration of justice. Among their arguments were that the livestream could alter witness testimonies, or intimidate witnesses while they testified.

In his reasons, Desai said that, unlike a journalist's summary of the evidence, live coverage was a more accurate account of the actual evidence.

Hilton Epstein, SC, for the State, said that a courtroom was already intimidating for lay witnesses and that their trepidation may be aggravated by the knowledge that their testimony was being broadcast live to potentially millions of viewers around the world. He also pointed out in the application that there was a possibility that the "aspiration of some witnesses to 'celebrity' status may lead to unreliable or misleading testimony".

The State said Desai failed to recognise that the adverse effects of broadcasting may not only be the intimidation of witnesses, but the possibility that counsel may grandstand, tailoring their arguments to the court of public opinion.

Francois van Zyl, SC, for Van Breda, said allowing the application may inhibit those in the witness box, saying the knowledge that the person is being recorded was the problem.

Media24 is backing up its application to livestream the trial with section 16 of the Constitution, which guarantees certain rights to freedom of expression, freedom of the media, and the right to access to information.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...verage-matter-heads-to-supreme-court-20170406

 

[JudgeJudi]

The National Director of Public Prosecutions then applied to the Supreme Court of Appeal, as well as the Constitutional Court, for urgent leave to appeal the High Court's decision to allow Media24 to livestream the trial.

According to an affidavit in support of the application, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Rodney De Koc, said the fair trial rights of both the prosecution and the accused "will be impaired and their prejudice will be irreparable if the trial is broadcast". He said that Henri also intended to seek leave to appeal to the ConCourt and, conditionally, to the SCA.

Henri will go on trial on April 24, facing three counts of murder, one of attempted murder, and one of obstructing the course of justice.

[url]http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/state-approaches-sca-concourt-over-van-breda-livestreaming-request-20170410[/URL]

 

[JudgeJudi]

On 13 April The Constitutional Court refused to hear Henri’s leave to appeal the decision allowing Media24 permission to livestream the axe-murder accused's trial, saying that it was not in the interest of justice to hear the appeal at this stage. "The application for leave to appeal is dismissed," it said.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...hear-van-breda-media-coverage-matter-20170413

This is a great result. Judge Desai provided very good reasons why the trial should be live-streamed. Quite frankly, it worries me that the State objected to this. Their witnesses will comprise police who attended the scene, DNA experts, forensic specialists, the forensic pathologist who conducted the post mortems, the neighbours who heard raised voices that evening emanating from the van Breda home etc. etc. There's absolutely no reason that I can think of why these witnesses would not wish to be televised. There's always something to worry about with SA trials.

 

[tlorik]

I thought the State opposing the streaming to be odd as well.

Sent from my P01M using Tapatalk

 

[L2L]

Waiting.....!

 

[JudgeJudi]

You may be waiting a bit longer L2L. This is SA and you know how things can play out there.

Henri van Breda has until Monday [24 April] to file answering papers with the Supreme Court of Appeal in his bid to stop the broadcast of his trial. Media24 and the National Director of Public Prosecutions also had until then to file their responses.

The SCA would adjudicate Van Breda’s and the NDPP’s application on the same day, according to directives the court’s acting Judge President Mandisa Maya issued on Thursday.

On March 27, the day his trial was due to start, Judge Desai granted Media24 permission to install two cameras to record and or broadcast the proceedings, subject to certain guidelines.

Van Breda and the NDPP filed an urgent application at the Constitutional Court to appeal the ruling. On April 13, the court dismissed it.

Both parties then approached the SCA separately.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...have-until-monday-to-file-sca-papers-20170420

This is totally bizarre. The ConCourt is the highest in SA. If they say no, how can you possibly apply to a lower court??????????????? Words totally fail me.

 

[L2L]

You may be waiting a bit longer L2L. This is SA and you know how things can play out there.

Henri van Breda has until Monday [24 April] to file answering papers with the Supreme Court of Appeal in his bid to stop the broadcast of his trial. Media24 and the National Director of Public Prosecutions also had until then to file their responses.

The SCA would adjudicate Van Breda’s and the NDPP’s application on the same day, according to directives the court’s acting Judge President Mandisa Maya issued on Thursday.

On March 27, the day his trial was due to start, Judge Desai granted Media24 permission to install two cameras to record and or broadcast the proceedings, subject to certain guidelines.

Van Breda and the NDPP filed an urgent application at the Constitutional Court to appeal the ruling. On April 13, the court dismissed it.

Both parties then approached the SCA separately.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...have-until-monday-to-file-sca-papers-20170420

This is totally bizarre. The ConCourt is the highest in SA. If they say no, how can you possibly apply to a lower court??????????????? Words totally fail me.

... and on and on it goes!

 

[Estelle]

While you are waiting for the trial on Monday, you might be interested in watching this video entitled, "My son the Axe Murderer". (It is further down the page)

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/re...n/news-story/339402e4156edac3def930fe41800bed

 

[JudgeJudi]

That was horrific Estelle. Leaving aside the 2 elements that the defence disagreed with - his mother nodding that he was the killer because she has no recollection of the attack now, and the evidence that he had stolen from his parents because that evidence was too prejudicial (huh!) - the remainder of the evidence was absolutely damning. No wonder the jury was out for such a short time.

If you're dead, you're dead, but if I was going to be murdered and had a choice as to how it would happen, I'd choose a gun. At least it would be over and done with in seconds. I can't even begin to comprehend how someone could use an axe, let alone using it multiple times, against another human being.

 

[JudgeJudi]

The trial is expected to start today but at the moment there is no indication of who will be live streaming. I'll update as soon as I know more.

 

[JudgeJudi]

No news yet.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Please go to the following link and watch the video which will tell you the latest news.

http://www.enca.com/south-africa/van-breda-murder-trial-to-begin

 

[JudgeJudi]

Please go to the following link and watch the video which will tell you the latest news.

http://www.enca.com/south-africa/van-breda-murder-trial-to-begin

There's a comment a bit further down that says:

"It seems limited access will be allowed to cover the trial:
"Judge Desai rules that the media can record the plea but not the first witness testimony"

PC issues again.

 

[JudgeJudi]

If it was due to start at 10, well it's 10.33 right now.

I didn't understand when the journo said it would probably go to the ConCourt. They've already denied leave.

 

[L2L]

If it was due to start at 10, well it's 10.33 right now.

I didn't understand when the journo said it would probably go to the ConCourt. They've already denied leave.

Exactly what I thought! Feels like watching a trial in reverse!

 

[JudgeJudi]

Trial has started



http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-begins-20170424

 

[JudgeJudi]

I never saw the above link earlier. Start right at the bottom.

 

[JudgeJudi]

He had his phone with him in the toilet but rather than ring security or police, he drew attention to himself by calling out. Right.