South Africa - Susan Rohde, 47, murdered, Stellenbosch, 24 July 2016

[JudgeJudi]

Defence says it will bring application for a special entry and will need time to draft this. Also objects to ruling. VDS says the ruling is grossly unfair, prejudices his client. "There is not a jot of justification for court’s ruling.

VDS: The trial has been contaminated as a result. Judge says a special entry has been noted and asks when the next witness will be available.

Defence indicates that forensic pathologist is only available next Tuesday for cross-examination. Defence seems a bit taken aback by the developments. Judge Salie-Hlophe postpones the trial until then.

Team News24 (@TeamNews24) | Twitter

 

[Tortoise]

Adjourned to 19th June 10am for next witness Dr Perumal.

 

[Tortoise]

I think I'm gonna have to watch Milady again, that was so good.

 

[Tortoise]

Panieri-Peter was immediately excused from the stand and seen rolling her portable luggage out the courtroom.

Prosecutor Louis van Niekerk could not wipe the smile off his face with the ruling.

Rohde trial: Judge orders defence psychiatrist off the stand

 

[Hag]

Panieri-Peter was immediately excused from the stand and seen rolling her portable luggage out the courtroom.

Prosecutor Louis van Niekerk could not wipe the smile off his face with the ruling.

Rohde trial: Judge orders defence psychiatrist off the stand

I would very much. like to hear JudgeJudi’s take on this latest development; regarding impact on trial as it continues. Hoping no deleterious effect will result, somehow!

 

[Tortoise]

I would very much. like to hear JudgeJudi’s take on this latest development; regarding impact on trial as it continues. Hoping no deleterious effect will result, somehow!

I can tell you that having read Section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act after hearing van der Spuy's application this morning, it is a procedure for noting on the record an objection to the court's decision based on an error of law. I don't think he was that clear about laying out his grounds, specifically. From what I have read (the livestream only started running at the end of the judge's ruling) the judge was quite clear in saying that the report was a regurgitation of witness testimony (for the court to weigh its value not the witness) and other anonymous testimony that was basically hearsay.

I can't see how that is an irregularity or an error of law, which is what the defence are saying. The upshot of all this is that if JR is convicted, having a Special Entry noting the objection on the record can be raised as the grounds of appeal under the following section, Section 318 of the CPA.

I don't know if they can't claim the irregularity existed if they don't make an application at the relevant time. I think they will have a hard job arguing that the judge was wrong.

 

[Hag]

I can tell you that having read Section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act after hearing van der Spuy's application this morning, it is a procedure for noting on the record an objection to the court's decision based on an error of law. I don't think he was that clear about laying out his grounds, specifically. From what I have read (the livestream only started running at the end of the judge's ruling) the judge was quite clear in saying that the report was a regurgitation of witness testimony (for the court to weigh its value not the witness) and other anonymous testimony that was basically hearsay.

I can't see how that is an irregularity or an error of law, which is what the defence are saying. The upshot of all this is that if JR is convicted, having a Special Entry noting the objection on the record can be raised as the grounds of appeal under the following section, Section 318 of the CPA.

I don't know if they can't claim the irregularity existed if they don't make an application at the relevant time. I think they will have a hard job arguing that the judge was wrong.

Thank you Tortoise. The Judge appeared very confident when making the decision she did regarding the witness today. I know the remaining section of LPP’s report was to be read by Judge and Lawyers overnight and I gather it was not presented to court this morning ??

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you Tortoise. The Judge appeared very confident when making the decision she did regarding the witness today. I know the remaining section of LPP’s report was to be read by Judge and Lawyers overnight and I gather it was not presented to court this morning ??

That's right.

 

[tmar]

Thank you Tortoise. The Judge appeared very confident when making the decision she did regarding the witness today. I know the remaining section of LPP’s report was to be read by Judge and Lawyers overnight and I gather it was not presented to court this morning ??

The Judge was absolutely terrific.
No hesitations.
When Defence was laying out his grounds, the Judge's mannerisms, I felt, indicated he was wasting his time', and repeatedly stated she has noted his objection.
She was definite in stating this ruling should not delay the trial, when Defence hesitated, and will proceed on Tuesday when Perumal is available.

 

[tmar]

Could someone please find out what brand of lipstick Judge Gayaat Salie-Samuels Hlophe wears? Perfectly applied, never smudges or shows wear & tear even after hours in court. Driving me nuts & difficult to concentrate on anything else until I know!

And Hair Conditioner.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I would very much. like to hear JudgeJudi’s take on this latest development; regarding impact on trial as it continues. Hoping no deleterious effect will result, somehow!

To put it simply, if a party considers there has been an irregularity or illegality, providing it has been placed on the record during the trial, the special entry will be dealt with if the accused is convicted and appeals. It will then become one of the grounds of appeal.

From the Judgment in Sithole and the State

[10] “As was explained in Staggie v The State (38/10) [2011] ZASCA 88 …the only purpose it serves today is to record irregularities that affect the trial that do not appear from the record. … the so-called irregularities relied did not qualify because they all concerned an attack on rulings made by the court during the proceedings and they do not relate to irregularities that affect the trial that do not appear from the record.”

www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2012/158.rtf

For those who want to know more, you can also read paras. 9 and 11.

 

[Hag]

To put it simply, if a party considers there has been an irregularity or illegality, providing it has been placed on the record during the trial, the special entry will be dealt with if the accused is convicted and appeals. It will then become one of the grounds of appeal.

From the Judgment in Sithole and the State

[10] “As was explained in Staggie v The State (38/10) [2011] ZASCA 88 …the only purpose it serves today is to record irregularities that affect the trial that do not appear from the record. … the so-called irregularities relied did not qualify because they all concerned an attack on rulings made by the court during the proceedings and they do not relate to irregularities that affect the trial that do not appear from the record.”

www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2012/158.rtf

For those who want to know more, you can also read paras. 9 and 11.

Thank you for this information. I hadn’t seen this situation before.

 

[Tortoise]

I advise reading this with a green bucket at hand - the report refers to LPP's full conclusions including her analysis of JR - but it's worth bearing in mind that, as the article states, "None of this evidence will carry any weight"

Rohde trial: Here's what judge said in dismissal of defence's psychiatrist

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you for this information. I hadn’t seen this situation before.

Didn't Botha object during the HvB trial to Desai's ruling allowing HvB's police statement into evidence? I'm not sure now whether he objected before or after the ruling come to think of it. And during Panayiotou's trial Price objected to Chetty's ruling allowing the covertly recorded tape into evidence. Maybe these are different, I don't know.

We'll have to wait and see whether Botha uses that as a ground for appeal in the HvB matter.

 

[JudgeJudi]

5 Key Difficulties for Jason Rohde’s Defence [and they’re all unexpected]

https://shakedowntitle.com/2018/06/13/5-key-difficulties-for-jason-rohdes-defence-and-theyre-all-unexpected/

Nick van der Leek (@HiRezLife) | Twitter

 

[JudgeJudi]

Jason Rohde Trial: The #1 Hurdle for the Prosecution

https://shakedowntitle.com/2018/06/14/jason-rohde-trial-te-1-hurdle-for-the-prosecution/

Nick van der Leek (@HiRezLife) | Twitter

 

[JudgeJudi]

Lynne Baker‏ @LynneBa58647702

@JamesGrantZA Can a judge dismiss a witness' testimony as has happened in the Rohde trial?

James Grant (@JamesGrantZA) | Twitter

Yes - but it depends - a judge can exclude the testimony of any witness if the testimony is *irrelevant*. Relevance is the touchstone for admissibility. An expert is under a special duty to the court - s/he must assist the court by the application of special knowledge of skill.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Dr Panieri-Peter's report included:

“The community around Mrs Rohde was first confronted by the news of suicide. Soon thereafter‚ various rumours began in the community and then Mr Rohde was arrested. A deluge of media speculation and sensationalism followed. Family and the community then faced the possibility of homicide".

“Comparisons were made at the time with comments such as‚ ‘another death in a bathroom’. The ‘story’ has elements of scandal‚ secrets‚ lies and death.”

Rohde trial adjourned as judge throws out psychiatrist's report

I can't believe those comments would fall within the ambit of a psychologist's assessment. The overriding duty of an expert witness is to assist the court in reaching its decision by providing relevant and impartial evidence. With that assistance, the Court will reach its own conclusion in the proceedings.

Was she impartial ... no. Biased ... very.

 

[JudgeJudi]

In the report, compiled by the psychiatrist after she spent 20 hours with Rohde, she said that on the weekend Susan died in the couple's hotel room, Jason wanted to be with his mistress, estate agent Jolene Alterskye, "in the shadows".

Rohde told the psychiatrist his mistress's virtual presence in their room at the Spier wine estate was "the final trigger of his wife's despair".

"The couple attended marriage counselling [13] years ago. As an act of affection, in consequence to the counselling, he had his wife's name tattooed onto his body," the report said.

PressReader.com - Connecting People Through News

 

[Hag]

In the report, compiled by the psychiatrist after she spent 20 hours with Rohde, she said that on the weekend Susan died in the couple's hotel room, Jason wanted to be with his mistress, estate agent Jolene Alterskye, "in the shadows".

Rohde told the psychiatrist his mistress's virtual presence in their room at the Spier wine estate was "the final trigger of his wife's despair".

"The couple attended marriage counselling [13] years ago. As an act of affection, in consequence to the counselling, he had his wife's name tattooed onto his body," the report said.

PressReader.com - Connecting People Through News

Very interesting. I wondered what was in that report. Thank you. Such a gesture (tattoo) would do nothing for me! Agree......