South Africa - Martin, 55, Theresa, 54, Rudi van Breda, 22, murdered, 26 Jan 2015 #2

[Tortoise]

OMG, I've just had a penny drop moment. Tell me if I'm off base with this.

This Botha smoke bomb isn't at all about the statement HvB gave. I've been thinking to myself what could be so bad that Henri couldn't get around by saying he was in shock, he hadn't slept, he had a head injury, he misread it before signing it etc.

No, it's bigger than that.

It's a ploy to get Judge Desai to say that Henri was the police's only suspect from the word go. Hence every police witness can from that point on be discredited is a biased witness, acting under instructions from whoever was in command and had decided Henri was guilty, didn't investigate objectively, perhaps didn't investigate any other angles, and their evidence cannot be relied upon as honest.

Botha knows he has a very weak case, unless he can discredit the entire police investigation and say they fit Henri up and made the evidence fit the crime, rather than being objective. I think it's a very very sly game plan.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Tortoise, you could be right. B is a devious player as has been displayed in other cases. I can only hope Desai doesn't see fit to accept any such suggestion. It would be just awful if he did.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Omg, Tortoise, I hope J Desai sees through this charade and Botha won't get his way! It took 1 1/2 yrs to arrest HvB ( he handed himself in), Botha can't say it was done it haste and maybe, this will work in the state's favour, even though I thought it was outrageous at the time, and that HvB got bail. :no:

 

[JudgeJudi]

Well, Marli is still on the State's list.

We can only hope her amnesia has gone and that's the reason Galloway has been so chilled about Botha.

The last I read is that Marli is still suffering from retrograde amnesia and the State is undecided as to whether they will call her.

I can think of another reason why Galloway has been so chilled.

We are yet to hear from the data expert. If the following is true, HvB will be up the river without a paddle.

Forensic police officers reportedly analysed the search histories of phones and computers in the house and found one mobile had been used to look up information about an axe attack carried out by a U.S. man on his parents in 2004. It was not said whose mobile phone was used to make the search. Attempts by News24 to get comment from the NPA were unsuccessful and the police also refused to confirm the claims.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...sed-to-find-info-on-other-axe-attack-20150323

In the U.S. case the 21-year-old son was convicted of murdering his father and the attempted murder of his mother. He’s currently serving a 50 year prison sentence. What the father did after the attack is one of the most bizarre things I’ve ever heard of.

https://www.bizarrepedia.com/christopher-porco/

What the son said at his sentencing hearing.

http://news10.com/2006/12/12/judgement-day-christopher-porco-gets-50-years-to-life/

 

[Tortoise]

If Botha is successful with having HvB assessed by J Desai as the police's only suspect, he will assert that the police investigation of James was a paper exercise because they already had their man in their sights. He's already sown the seeds.

He plays dirty. I hope the police can withstand this and they can show James had a cast iron alibi.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

We are back in court this morning eagerly awaiting legal argument on the admissibility of Henri's statement
Counsel are in Judge Desai's chambers most likely discussing the order of events today

Adv G: starts - hands up written heads of argument
Adv G: will give a summary of heads. Grounds of objection of accused based on constitutional rights

 

[Tortoise]

Here come the wide boys.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Here come the wide boys.

Yep! Botha just gives me the chills!

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Judge Desai - section 35 is not applicable automatically Judgments of Bozalek and S V Kahn on rights to suspect
Adv G: 1st argument was accused suspect when made statement? If so should he have enjoyed rights of sec 35

Adv G: only relevant evidence in that regard is Malan du toit's evidence didnt assist or take matter further
Adv G: only told the court he was allowed access friends and go home with friends

Adv G: Malan's evidence-accused victim, taken to note injuries not unusual statement was to determine what had transpired
Adv G: to allow police to tell intelligence and investigate. At that stage no reason to believe accused was suspect

G: accused gave statement, didnt incriminate him and he read and signed and went home
Albertse corroborated

 

[Tortoise]

Yep! Botha just gives me the chills!

Did you see how he answered J Desai back the other day when he was reprimanded for bullying the witness. He said 'that's a very serious accusation'. I didn't think it was etiquette to answer a judge like that.

 

[Tortoise]

Yes, get in there Galloway!

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Malan was a credible witness

Defense say that he wasn't credible due to not saying he went to blue downs and saying he took the content down w/o paraphrasing
Judge Desai - the content wasn't put to him only the grammatical errors

State:essence of the statement remains almost the same as what the accused version is doesn't differ materially
G: the evidence on the accused's clothes are irrelevant.

Judge Desai - assuming he wasn't dressed - so what?

J Desai the clothing and food issue is not their case its only to color their case in attempts to wear down witness with tactics

Desai it isn't the case here that they did attempt to deprive the witness - Judge Desai doesn't see relevance in clothing issue

G: State submits that report made by accused was as a witness and not a suspect

 

[JudgeJudi]

Day 21

Today's live news feed:

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-21-20170531

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

G: only if he was seen to be a suspect does it place in question entitlement to sec 35 rights
G: then refers to a number of cases - there is a judgement which allows pre-trial proceedings

Judge Desai - that judgment is a bit over the top - pre-trial presupposes a trial
Refers to a judgment where similar and accused wasn't a suspect and didnt follow that judgement

Another judgment where accused was found to be entitled to warning as a suspect

S V Orrie differs because there was incriminating evidence against accused and he wasn't advised he was suspect - inadmissible

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv Susan Galloway to give closing arguments in trial-within-a-trial.

Grounds for objection based on Constitutional rights being violated.

She says he had not been detained at the time

First argument is was the accused a suspect when he made the statement?

Galloway says the only relevant evidence is that of Sgt Malan. Mr Du Toit's evidence doesn't assist in this, doesn't prove he was detained or a suspect.

Undisputed evidence of Malan was that he had been a victim, treated in ambulance, taken to Dr to list injuries, not unsual and standard police practice.

Accused never indicated he didn't want to talk to police

He wasn't put in a position where he had to give information.

He said nothing incriminating in the statement.

He was free to leave and be with his family, where after he had a beer.

Dr Albertse confirmed that accused was brought to her as a victim of a crime.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-21-20170531

 

[Tortoise]

If Henri was cold he could have asked for a blanket.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

Adv G: court held it has discretion to admit evidence unlawful obtained
G: this court found that the admission of evidence would not render the trial unfair and allowed it

Adv G: refers to judgment with acting judge Griessel - what pre-trial rights does suspect have?
Griessel - none of evidence admitted had been obtained in contravention of sec 35

G: Orrie matter is not applicable as there is no evidence at the time of statement that could have made accused a suspect
G: should this court find 35 is applicable and he is entitled to fair pre trial procedures - evidence still admissible

evidence obtained must be excluded if it would render the trail unfair. We submit that it would not render it unfair

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

JDesai clarifies that if he finds in favor of state, its an interlocutory application he could change his finding b4 end of trial

Botha and Galloway agree with the judge on this matter


(i've got my glasses on and still read it wrong, i thought he was in favour! Jumped the gun! LOL)

 

[JudgeJudi]

Alluded that Malan was not credible because of spelling and grammatical issues. English is not his mother tongue. The content remains undisputed. During questioning, Malan also said when he couldn't remember.

The essence of the content of statement is not disputed, a record of what is already before the court.

Adv Galloway citing case law to support her argument.

Police were eager to take his statement because he was the only witness in a serious and violent crime and needed information for crime intelligence.

He never indicated that he was dissatisfied with the police's conduct.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-van-breda-axe-murder-trial-day-21-20170531

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/Traceyams

G: Albertse said no real treatment necessary he was then taken to police to take his statement and at that time he was the only witness of a very serious violent crime. He spent 4 hours with the police and never indicated unwillingness to co-operate

only 6 hours later was he brought to hospital and Van Zyl was told he was a possible suspect and she was asked to take blood

G: only 2 hours of interview and around 2 hours to give his statement. Accused wasn't in a position where a confession true/false
was more desirable than the circumstances he found himself in

G: Malan said he was fully clothed when statement made, given a coke and allowed to smoke cigarettes

G: taking a statement from witnesses in this manner is accepted police practice

G: du toit confirmed had he known henri was giving a statement on what happened he would have waited and accepted it

G: the statement is not an admission or a confession but it is a witness statement

G: Public interest indeed requires admission of evidence, police faced with serious violent crime and needed to obtain info
G: conduct of police was bona fide in accordance with police practice. Accused co-operated fully and never raised any issue

G; which is now being raised in objection.