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

[JudgeJudi]

Judge Desai: is there any other motive? I accept no lead on bad business etc but is there an alternative motive? No factual basis for a business dispute, he was an honest business man according to Martin's brother

Adv G: but moreover improbable that someone who comes to attack or hurt the family will arrive at the scene without weapons to do so

Judge Desai: a key issue is motive, there is no motive? Adv G: there is no evidence of anyone having a motive, but the scene doesnt fit that anyway, come with a pre-determined intent to execute but leave Henri

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

J Desai interrupts the closing arguments by the state, asking questions

J Desai: assume it's a hired assassin would they come with a gun? There is no motive against the family

Galloway: why would there be time for the family to gather in the boys room, and according to the accused there was more than one perpetrator, but why did one only act

Galloway: timeline is undisputed.

Galloway: the cell phone records show that accused called was only logged 07:12. It begs the question what the accused did during the time in between


https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

Desai is really interactive; openly asking questions, Galloway conversationally responds. Desai ponders a possible alternative motive if there was no burglary. Galloway says no outsider could possibly have held a grudge against the family. Did Henri hold a grudge?


https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Galloway: Martin #VanBreda was an honest businessman. No evidence on record of anyone having a grudge against the family. Improbable that someone executing a hit on the family to come to scene without any weapons and use weapons of opportunity.

Judge Desai says there seems to be no motive. He asks why would a hitman take out an entire family? Adv Galloway agrees, asks why they would also not be killed in their beds.

 

[Fluffykins]

Adv G: Captain Steyn testified around modus operandi on the balaclava gang. Nothing was taken from the house, despite valuable items that were on the scene

Adv G: Weapons. The attack on deceased and Marli was done with the axe found on the scene the knife inflicting the accused's injuries was also on the scene, no evidence to date that these items came from outside the house

Common sense dictates that any person approaching a target would not do so without having a suitable weapon to attack or defend

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en

Is anyone else losing the feed?

RBBM

Yes!!! Go Galloway!!!

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: why would there be time for the whole family to gather at the boys' room, why would they not surprise everyone

Judge Desai: when they entered the house the house must have been dark? Adv G: correct, only the study lamp was on so they must have known the layout of the house

Adv G: Refer the court to emergency calls- timeline is undisputed. 04h24 he called Bianca 04h27 internet search seeking emergency numbers 04h29 he calls incorrect number 07h12 makes a call to emergency service

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: what happened between 04h24 and 07h12? We know that Marli was awake and alive when he made the call and police arrived

Adv G: He did not seek any help from any neighbours or the easily accessible security officers who were known to patrol the area

Adv G: instead of calling security he called Bianca a number of times who at the time was a 16 year old girl staying in hostel

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: he made no attempt to help or comfort his family members, he did not touch one of them, instead he smoked 3 cigarettes

Judge Desai: dealing with the phone call and laughter, Judge Desai could not quite make out laughter? Asks Adv G what she thinks? Adv G: even if it was a giggle it is not uncommon to giggle when they nervous

Adv G: the audio call is indeed as was described, silent and general lack of emotion after these traumatic events, whether he giggled or not the court must decide

https://twitter.com/traceyams?lang=en

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: his emotional state was not consistent with that nature of crime, the phone operator thought it was a prank, at 08h11 he was calm enough to direct them up the stairs, not unfocused and distraught he knew what was going on

Adv G: that day when interviewed by the police he was similarly not emotional and able to give an account of event

Adv G: we concede not every reacts the same but we submit that his acts were not consistent with someone who had experienced such a crime

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

15 minute adjournment

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Henri #VanBreda's call history supports inference that at 04:27 attacks must have been concluded. Emergency call logged only at 07:12. What happened during that time?

#VanBreda's lack of emotion following the attack - demeanour is contrary to emergency call operator's experience. Calm enough to direct first responders upstairs. When interviewed by police, not emotional but calm, Adv Galloway says.


https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: state submits that the list of emergency numbers on the fridge was very applicable

Galloway: instead of making use of the help around him, he decided to call his 16 year old girlfriend who is a minor

G: the accused didn't attempt to help his family or even comfort them in their last moments. Instead he decided to smoke three cigarettes

J Desai: I listened to the emergency call again. I can't quite make out the laughter

Galloway: in all honesty, even if it was a giggle, it's not uncommon for some people to giggle when nervous. The court can make up its own mind on this

Galloway: the accused demeanor during the call is inconsistent with that of a victim of a crime. The emergency operator thought it was a prank

Galloway: when the doctor first examined #VanBreda was confident, calm and unemotional. His behavior changed later when he arrived with the police

Court adjourns for tea

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

I've found it very surprising how lighthearted the court proceedings have been, given that it's a triple murder trial. Judge and both counsels seem very relaxed and good humored, almost as if everyone except Henri knows the joke is on him. Laughs, chuckles, jibes...

 

[JudgeJudi]

News24 is live streaming and also tweeting

https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/live-henri-van-breda-closing-arguments-20180212

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: deals withe the cuts on his chest and stab wounds and Dr Tiemensma's evidence on them being self inflicted

Adv G: the bigger stab wound she testified as being possibly self inflicted. Bear in mind Dempers' evidence his test was on the worst case scenario

Judge Desai: assuming the court finds the principal wounds self inflicted- its common cause its self inflicted? He says inflicted by himself during the attack?

Judge Desai: why did the accused inflict them himself? If the only inference you can draw that the accused committed the crime then one has to find in favor of the accused's version?

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

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/TeamNews24

Circumstantial evidence points to Henri VanBreda as the attacker. Believes injuries were self-inflicted or by family members while being attacked, Adv Galloway says.

Bloodstain analysis and tampering with scene - Rudi's body was moved to floor in front of bathroom, and duvet was bundled next to Rudi's body, Adv Galloway says. No evidence presented by the defence to gainsay this.

Illogical for attacker to stay behind and randomly move things around. #VanBreda was on scene for 3 hours before phoning for assistance, Adv Galloway says. Also, axe damage caused by controlled movement according to Captain Brown.
Only inference to be drawn is the accused version of throwing the axe cannot be correct.


https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Galloway: stab wounds sustained by #VanBreda were self-inflicted

J Desai: assuming that the court finds that the wounds were self inflicted, what inference is there?

Galloway: if court finds that some wounds were self inflicted the totality of the accused version cannot be accepted

J Desai: the question that emerges is why did the accused inflict these wounds?

G: to show that somebody attacked the accused family

Galloway: with regards to tampering with the scene- Rudi was moved to floor in front of the bathroom, grey duvet was also moved

Galloway: the accused was in the scene for 3 hours between the attacks and when he called for help

Galloway: the accused version of throwing the axe cannot be supported

Galloway: the location of the blood in the bathroom of the boys room, does not make sense

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: confirms and submits that the court must then disregard the pathologists evidence in this regard. Evidence that these were text book copies of self inflicted wounds

Adv G: she described the wounds as grouped and parallel- strange for attacker to inflict such serious wounds and immediately thereafter such superficial wounds

Adv G: non of the accused's wounds showed any of the same characteristics of the wounds which the family had sustained. Professor Dempers confirmed her evidence

Adv G: if the intent to survive during the fight, chances of those scratches having the same depth and length highly unlikely

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

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: The movement of Rudi and the duvet, state submits that there is sufficient evidence of the movement of the scene before the police arrived

Adv G: accused had been on the scene all the time for 3 hours between the crimes and the police arriving on the scene and had sufficient time to move things around the scene, tool mark in the wall was through a controlled movement

Accused's version of throwing the axe could not have been true, Defence did not present their own expert witness to dispute this

Adv G: blood containing at least Rudi's and Henri's DNA was found in the shower, blood cannot jump from room to room on its own accord, Henri was the only vessel to transfer blood to the shower

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

 

[JudgeJudi]

Judge Desai: its also possible that the police could have transferred it? Adv G: the evidence was that they put protective gear on there were no transfer patterns in the shower (defence attorney notably annoyed at this point)

Adv G: Henri said he often shaved in the shower, Adv G- that would imply that both the accused and Rudi showered and shaved in the shower and cut themselves and blood landed together and wasnt cleaned

Adv G: the only visible blood splatter was on his shorts and on his socks. Accused's version that he ran after the attacker, this would not have been possible if he did run after the attacker

Adv G: absence of visible blood on the bottom of the accused's sole- unexplained whether he is the victim or the attacker

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

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/ajnarsee

Blood DNA in bathroom of boy's room - Rudi's blood found inside, and a mixture of at least Rudi and Henri was found in shower. How was blood transferred? #VanBreda said attacker never entered the bathroom. Accused is only possible vessel.

Henri's explanation of him possibly cutting himself while shaving: it not only his blood, it was a mixture of the accused and Rudi's blood. Unlikely that both of them shaved there, cut themselves and never cleaned it, remaining there until the day of the attack.

Galloway: there was no visible blood spatter on #VanBreda torso or body. Expert says there was inconsistent movement of the blood pattern

Galloway: the presence of his Mother's DNA on his sock, is inconsistent with his version which claims he was not close by during her attack

J Desai: the statement taken by police is largely consistent with the accused version

https://twitter.com/TeamNews24


Galloway: blood cannot move on its own, it's therefore stands to reason how the blood got to the bathroom. Accused says the attacker never went to the bathroom. He is the only vessel that could transfer the blood

J Desai: there is evidence that the accused shaved in the shower... shaving in the shower is an unusual way to shave... great fun of shaving in the mirror is you can look at yourself

Galloway questions lack of blood under socks as Henri #VanBreda was on the scene during the attack, whether as a victim or the attacker.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

https://twitter.com/HiRezLife

Galloway highlights something Gerrie Nel seemed to have missed with #OscarPistorius - no blood on underside of white socks. Henri explained he stepped around the blood. Amazing he could think about where he was walking, but not come to the aid of his family.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In reference to the lack of evidence of Marli's case, this is an anomaly similar to the clean socks blood on the bottom of the accused's sole- unexplained whether he is the victim or the attacker

Judge Desai: the police statement is substantially the same as the version he gave in court. Adv G: agrees and we are unclear in the manner in which the police were attacked about taking that statement

Adv G: our view is that there are NB inconsistencies.
1. The timeline of what family did- omission that the accused, Martin and Rudi watched a movie - this was done to explain the noise heard by the neighbour

2. Opening the bathroom door- this was done to explain the blood on Henri's t-shirt

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

 

[JudgeJudi]

Judge Desai: evidence of the star wars movie is quite important, as if it is not accepted then there was a fight

3. Martin's attack - changed to explain why martin was attacked from behind

Adv G: unusual that the accused can now choreograph the demonstration of the fight with the intruder, it is to fit in with the evidence lead by Dr Tiemensma- who gave evidence on the dynamics of a fight

Adv G: the time he noticed teresa and marli - the new version is to explain why he did not stumble over their bodies when exiting the room

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

 

[JudgeJudi]

Adv G: he references gurgling sounds and the state says this is an after thought to explain Rudi's movement.
Judge Desai: if you hear your brother still alive surely you would come to his aid if he is still alive

Adv G: the strange behavior of smoking cigarettes instead of helping his family had to be explained which is why he said he did so to calm himself down

Adv G: most of the evidence was not disputed. most of the states experts were corroborated with that of the defence, we submit that the state has made out a case against the accused

Adv G: the accused only elected to testify after calling all but 1 witness in his defence

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