× Fact! Joining this forum will make you a happier person! - Register for FREE

The Van Breda murder trial
It's like watching a movie with subtitles, sure it's fun in the beginning, but after awhile when you wake up 3 hours later, you contemplate trying to watch it again, but ultimately don't.

(05-18-2017, 06:37 AM)Hamster Wrote: Listening to the emergency call: http://news.searchsa.co.za/news/henri-br...-call.html

I'd lose my shiaat with that emergency operator!! How the bloody hell is he not screaming at this useless woman?

I'd also lose my shiaat and then to find out she was purposefully slow because she thought it was a prank. Ridiculous. I mean, the people were already dead but still. If she does that with everyone she thinks is prank calling, she is costing valuable lives.

I honestly believe that in some places people like her would be charged with culpable homicide.

Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

(05-18-2017, 08:12 AM)Purply Wrote: It's like watching a movie with subtitles, sure it's fun in the beginning, but after awhile when you wake up 3 hours later, you contemplate trying to watch it again, but ultimately don't.

This is hopefully in response to that dreadful call and not my summaries.

Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

(05-18-2017, 11:03 AM)Carly1803 Wrote: This is hopefully in response to that dreadful call and not my summaries.

Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Was in response to your question asking what we all thinking about the progress of the case so far.

I purposefully visit this site daily just so that I can get the update here lol

Day 14 and we will be discussing fingerprints and injuries again.

First on the stand is Jonathan Oliphant. He is a policeman at the Criminal Record Center in Beaufort West. At the time of the murders, he was working at the Criminal Record Center in Worcester. Between 27 and 31 January, he was tasked with finding fingerprints in number 12 Goske Street. He found 53 prints.

On the knife, he found a right thumbprint of Henri on the blade. If the knife points down the thumbprint points up.

He further found the prints of the family, the two domestic workers, the gardener and James' (Marli's ex-boyfriend) prints in the house. 

He also checked the boundary walls thoroughly with the naked eye and a special light. He also used a chemical spray which would give a brown/purple colour if there was a fingerprint. He found no prints or proof of activity on the wall. 

No fingerprints were found on the handle of the axe.

Botha then cross-examined Oliphant saying that if someone wore a glove and climbed over the wall, there wouldn't necessarily be a print.
Oliphant agreed.
There was also a print found on Henri's patio door which wasn't identified. Oliphant said that it could have been a visitor. 
There were various unidentified prints:
On the frame of Henri's bathroom door
Two on the kitchen table
On the car
On a Johnny Walker Bottle
On a Red Heart Rum bottle
(Oliphant said that these were bottles inside the cupboard but yes they are also unidentified) 

Botha then said that the State claims Henri took the axe and attacked his family with it, wouldn't there then be prints on the axe? There was a print on the knife?
Oliphant said that the axe was sent to the lab for testing, he can't testify on their behalf. Oliphant agrees that if the person wore gloves they wouldn't find it. 

Botha then held the axe and the knife - the axe facing towards him and the knife held at the blade - also facing towards him and asked Oliphant if that stance would match the fingerprint location.
Oliphant said he doesn't want to speculate. There were three prints on the knife, two of which are unidentifiable. 

At the top of the blade, there's a smeared print and another further down.

Botha then asked whether the domestic worker's prints were found on the gate because that's where she entered on Monday. Oliphant said no. The responding officer's prints were also not found by Oliphant at the scene. 

Oliphant said that if fingerprints were wiped down or if gloves were worn there wouldn't be any.

Next witness was Dr Marianne Tiemensma. She is a medical specialist at the clinical Forensic Unit at Victoria Hospital. Her expertise includes pathology. She examines and makes findings in both the living and the dead. 

She was asked by SAPS and Dr Albertse to examine Henri's injuries. She compiled two reports on his injuries. One on 12 February 2015 and another 10 March 2015. 

Dr Tiemensma said, "The cut marks were superficial. The incisions have an even depth, parallel and it avoids sensitive areas such as the nipples. The forearm wounds in keeping with self-inflicted injuries, non-lethal, and an even depth. The injuries are all in reachable places. The thorax and the abdomen look different, look caused by stabbing action; also superficial. Judging by the size and the shape of the knife it would be virtually impossible for the knife to have been stuck in any of the stab wounds. I am of the opinion that they are self-inflicted, superficial and non-fatal."

The wounds to the head, leg and the back were unlikely to be self-inflicted. The head injuries could be a blow to the face or a fall.   

The photo is shown of the stairs where the blood spot was found, where Henri said he fell the first time. Dr Tiemensma said that the blood wouldn't be from Henri, his cuts were too superficial to cause blood pooling. It would have had to have been a cut deeper than 4cm as Henri is sturdy. 

Dr Tiemensma said that the second fall could have caused some of the injuries. She doesn't think Henri lost a lot of blood, only a tiny amount, not enough for him to go into shock. You wouldn't expect him to pass out for hours. The bruising and the injury could only have caused a mild concussion.

Dr Tiemensma has read Henri's plea explanation. She said it is quite obvious that some things were described vividly and others not. She said that it's "interesting" how selective it was. 

Marli's hands had defence injuries - bruising on the back of the hands and the knuckles, some small abrasion.These were injuries of someone fighting back. 

The court then adjourned till Monday with Dr Tiemensma to testify again on Tuesday. 

(No ruling has been made on the live streaming yet)

Things are warming up, the doors of hell are opening wider to fit Henri's sturdy physique.

Day 15 is here and only one witness testified. 

A Michelle van Zyl. She is a medical doctor specializing in emergency medicine. She previously worked at Vegelegen Mediclinic.

She saw Henri on the 27th of January, at 20:25 when he came in with James Reade-Jahn and asked one of his wounds to be examined for possible stitches. 

She noted that there was the smell of alcohol on James Reade-Jahn's breath. 

Advocate Botha said that whatever was said between Dr van Zyl and Henri could not be discussed because of doctor-patient confidentiality. 

Dr van Zyl said that Henri seemed fully orientated of his surroundings. She merely stapled his wound as it wasn't deep enough for stitches and the clips would bring the skin together. She discharged him but the police asked her to look at him again and she completed a J88 form. (The J88 is a legal document completed by a doctor or a registered nurse, documenting injuries where a legal investigation will follow)

The second time she saw him, he was still 100% orientated, he wasn't as friendly, she describes him as "jovial" the first time she saw him. 

She reported that both eyes were swollen, the left one worse as discoloration has happened. She says some wounds can take a while to form if they weren't as hard or as deep. 

On the left forearm, she noted three scratch marks where Dr Albertse noted four. Van Zyl said she could have missed the fourth one. The bruise on his knee was also noted on different sides by the doctors. Van Zyl concedes she could have made a mistake.

Dr van Zyl recalls that Henri conversed casually with the staff (but this was not stated in her report), he was not emotional. 

She didn't prescribe him pain medication. She did note that he appeared confident and answered questions with one-word answers. 

Botha then said that Henri told him the policeman who saw him the morning said he look traumatized, family and friends who saw him said he was emotional and teary, he was only traumatized until he went to the hospital. 

Mrs Reade-Jahn had given Henri a tranquilizer after he had been at the hospital the first time. 

And that is all for today.

The court continues tomorrow.

Day 16 was a rather long day in court, so bear with me.

Dr Tiemensma is back to testify and most readers and watchers are quite excited.

We are back on the topic of Henri allegedly passing out for hours on the stairs.

Dr Tiemensma said that fainting from emotional shock happens from stress, lightheadedness and a fast heartbeat, which causes one to lose consciousness. The average duration for this is a few seconds, a minute at most. As soon as you are unconscious the body will correct itself by first raising your blood pressure. Fainting is not a serious medical condition and usually happens due to shock, blood loss or injury. 

Advocate Botha interjected and said but Henri didn't lose consciousness from blood loss. 

Dr Tiemensma continued and said a concussion (in this case) is a mild brain injury and if fainting occurs it would only last a few seconds. 90% of concussion patients do not suffer any loss of consciousness. If the fainting does last for more than an hour and more than even a few minutes the concussion will show through a severe headache, vomiting and or nausea. Those types of concussions will need to be evaluated medically.

Dr Tiemensma compiled a report with notes by Dr Albertse. She explained his mental health and emotional status as very quiet. She didn't note any other concussion-like symptoms.

Reasons why she said his wounds are superficial:
  • Superficial, non-fatal
  • Equal depth, linear, no movement in wounds, parallel
  • Wounds are in reachable areas

[Image: 610PhfR.png]

Dr Tiemensma said that if the altercation took place like Henri said, there would be pushing and pulling transpiring and the incisions would be impossible to make in such a situation. You would also expect the wounds to be in different directions if a person was pulling away. 
The wounds to the thorax and the abdomen are still superficial even if they have a stabbing action to them. The description of how they were sustained does not fit with the injury. 

Dr Tiemensma said that there is a huge contrast between Henri's wounds and that of his family. The family suffered severe axe wounds whereas Henri's wounds are not nearly inflicted with the same force or intent. 
The family exhibits defence wounds which is key when another party is involved but Henri doesn't have any even though he allegedly grabbed at a knife and an axe while defending himself.

Advocate Botha cross-examined Dr Tiemensma (and insulted her quite frankly)

He said that Dr Albertse (a general practitioner) examined Henri and her findings would be more accurate. 
Dr Tiemensma countered that she had the pictures as evidence. 
She also said, "If you are aware, you would pull away. Why would you let someone make exactly the same cut in the same place? They are completely horizontal. Fine and delicate movements. Why would you allow any person to do it? Very unusual and very unlikely. There was movement." 

The way the attack is described and the wounds that are inflicted do not match descriptions given by Henri.

A normal person responds to pain by pulling away, you are not defending yourself by standing still, she said, there was movement going on. 

Advocate Botha then proceeded to demonstrate how Henri said he got the wounds. Dr Tiemensma still disagrees that the wounds and the demonstration do not match. Henri's wounds were "so nice and neat".

Botha continued his argument that the wounds could be caused at the hands of an assailant but Dr Tiemensma stayed adamant that the wounds are self-inflicted. 

He was losing his cool with Dr Tiemensma and Judge Desai told him that he is arguing with the witness and to take a few seconds and ask his question again. 

The blood spot on the stairs was discussed again. Dr Tiemensma said that if the position of Henri's body was correct the blood from the wound on his abdomen could have made the spot. 

Advocate Botha said that Henri was unconscious for 2 hours and 40 minutes after seeing his mother and Marli. 

Tiemensma said she can't give conclusive evidence on the wound on his abdomen relating to the blood spot on the stairs because when she viewed it paramedics had already attended to it. 

As for the bump on Henri's head, he could have had a mild concussion but it wouldn't result in loss of consciousness for hours and he was fully aware of what he was doing when he Googled emergency services. 

Advocate Botha said that Henri's pupils were constricted and had a slow reaction to light. Dr Tiemensma said that this is not limited to a concussion, drug use has the same effect. 

Advocate Botha said that Henri is certain the paramedics didn't clean his wound as those who took the photo wanted to document it as it was. Dr Tiemensma said that she can't comment on that.

The court is adjourned until tomorrow.

Day 17 arrived as another very long day in court.

Dr Johan Dempers testified. A forensic pathologist.

The defence however objected to some parts of his report. Advocate Galloway said that the admissibility is being challenged.

Advocate Botha said the objection arises from the fact that Dempers makes extensive references to what Henri told the police in his statement on the day of the murders. Both have hearsay and character evidence. 

It is then suggested that Dempers gives his testimony only verbally and does not hand in his report. 

According to him, it is not strange for the wounds of the attacked to differ significantly. He said the defensive wounds on Teresa’s fingers is not consistent with that of Henri’s.  He said that Martin and Rudi had the similar blows to the head.
He said that Henri’s wounds are consistent with what the theory says about self-inflicted wounds. He said he finds it hard to believe that the assailant would only scratch Henri. He also said the fact that the wounds are on his left side would indicate a right-handed person, as Henri is. 

According to Henri’s account, the assailant had the knife in his right hand and Henri had the axe in his right hand. As the person attacked, he got hold of the hand and had control over how the knife penetrated. He attempted to strike the assailant’s shoulder. 

Dempers said that he finds it hard that you would hit someone on the opposing shoulder and not the hand holding the knife. 

Henri struck the person and the stabbing took place with both of them still holding on. The attacker then lets go of the knife. Henri pulled the knife out of his side and dropped it. 

Dempers echoes Dr Tiemensma saying that all of this could not have happened in a vicious altercation as Henri describes. You would have to be standing still. Dr Dempers said that when looking at the severity of the other victims’ wounds, it doesn’t make sense that the attacker would suddenly drop the knife. 

Botha cross-examined and said that Dr Dempers only relied on notes and photos to make his conclusions. Dempers said that pathologists must have all the information at their disposal to make conclusions, it is not a thumb suck situation. I look at the injuries and the circumstances, looks at wounds without the history; then he checks the background of what is said to have happened and then looks at the wounds again to determine if they are self-inflicted. 

“If I only look at the wounding, they are superficial, parallel, and that is already suspicious. Am I saying they are all self-inflicted? No. I have to concede that there are other possibilities for some of them.”
Botha, “Is it possible for someone to have caused it?”
Dempers, “Yes, but the victim would need to have been standing still. The depth and characteristics are not in keeping with an attack.” 

Dempers had conducted experiments relating to the wound on Henri’s abdomen. He tested it with a piece of pork using a knife. He placed the knife 5cm into the pork and shook it, the knife remained lodged for 2-3 seconds before it fell out. He did the same with the pork heated but didn’t get a different result. Pork skin is significantly thicker than human skin. The tissue is not as pliable as human tissue. 

Botha says the vast difference between the family and Henri’s wounds could be because he was attacked with a knife and not only the axe. 

Only Martin does not show any potential defence wounds. 

Botha then said that Henri’s adrenaline would have been affected, and after witnessing the attack he would have felt the effects.
Dempers said that it would have had a physiological reaction. 

Botha then asked if Henri did injure himself did he do so to mark his involvement in the incident? Dempers said yes. 
Looking at a photo of Henri in the ambulance, Advocate Botha asked if the marks on his chest could have been from one slashing motion. Dempers said that it could be possible, however, upon closer examination they seem to be coming from different directions, if it were one slash it would have been nearly impossible for both to be the same depth or morphology.

Advocate Botha demonstrated on Advocate Combrink what the attacker had done, but Dempers said that he finds it unlikely. The cuts are perfectly perpendicular. If this was a controlled dance of a fight, yes, but it wasn’t. Exactly equidistant and the same depth.

If you look closely at the photo they are not exactly aligned but they are parallel, running in the same direction. If it happened as part of the struggle the chances of them being parallel is not likely, not plausible, highly unlikely. 
Dempers said that during a struggle for life and death he finds it strange that Henri targeted the man’s shoulder. “The arm was there. It doesn’t fit in with what is expected to happen in a fight or flight situation.”
Dempers said that looking at it logically, saying that the same person who slashed people with an axe, there is no reason why he should suddenly fight so differently with Henri. “I was told to never say never, but in this scenario, I find it very unlikely.”

Botha said that Henri is a strong man, he played rugby and he swam.
Dempers said that the fact the attacker may have been tired doesn’t gel for him. Adrenaline would cause a person to fight back. He would have expected Henri to pull his arm free and hit with the axe with vigour.

The court is adjourned until tomorrow. It is expected that the pathologist who did the autopsies will testify.

Day 18 is here and not exactly perfect for the squeamish. 

Dr Daphne Anthony is the first to testify. She did the autopsies on the deceased family members on 29 January 2015. 

In all three cases, the cause of death is listed as head injuries and the causes thereof. Traumatic injury has a high mortality rate. 

If approached from an anatomical perspective, we start with the scalp, usually covered by hair. Underlying the scalp, you have the skull, consisting of the skull cap and the base of the skull. Underlying that you find the brain; then the intracranial substance of the brain. 

A scalp injury leads to loss of a large amount of blood. The skull can fracture if the elasticity is exceeded. You get different kinds of fractures – linear, multiple compound and common.

It is not the skull fracture that caused the death but the damage of the brain tissue, which eventually caused death. At the base of the brain, a considerable amount of force was applied to the head. 

Henri had moved to the far side of his dock to not view the images of his family.

Intracranial haemorrhage can also occur, leading to raised intracranial bleeding – causing swelling and eventual death of the person. 

From the nature of the injuries, you can draw inferences regarding the object used and a specific occurrence – such as assault or whether a scuffling took place and whether there are any defensive wounds. 

Another important factor is the base of the skull fracture, which leads to blood gathering in the mouth and nasal area. 

Judge Desai then asked about Rudi. Dr Anthony said Rudi was still alive for a while after the attack, he suffered through the pain. We know because he swallowed blood that was found in his stomach.

Head injury does not mean immediately dead, you may be able to move a little, survive for a period of time, maybe lift your head, but if you’re unconscious then not. 

Here is a list of Rudi van Breda’s injuries:
External, sharp and blunt trauma to his head and neck
Injury found on his knee and left wrist, abrasions on his left wrist. Possible defence wounds on left small finger – the nail was loose.
Skull fractures to skull cap and base. Injuries to the brain. The blood in the stomach. A lung appeared collapsed.
The blood in the stomach indicates active swallowing, it can’t happen passively. The person was alive for longer than a few minutes. 
Extensive scalp lacerations. 
Loose skull bone fragments.
Injuries made with great force and speed behind it.
All in all, 12 wounds, of which a great many were large gaps in his head varying sizes from 2cmx7cm and 2cmx4cm.

At this point in time, Henri had his head in his hands and appeared to be crying.

Dr Anthony said that skull examination showed evidence of haemorrhage and fracturing. When she removed the brain she found lacerations, contusions and linear fracture, but no notable swelling. 

Dr Anthony was handed the axe used in the murders. She said that it would have had to be someone strong to wield the axe in such a manner.

Here is a list of Martin van Breda’s injuries:

Evidence of sharp and blunt force on central upper back and head. No signs of defensive wounds. 
Skull fractures and injuries to the base of the skull, he was also not immediately dead. He still inhaled blood which was aspirated to his lungs. 
Also blood in his stomach
His organs failed, indicative that he bled out. 
Chop wound in the upper back, also laceration on the back of his head. 
Also, large wounds indicating great force.

Evidence shows Martin was most likely surprised by the attack as there are no signs of defensive wounds. 

Teresa van Breda’s injuries:

Sharp and blunt trauma to head. Small focal abrasions on nose bridge and contusions on her back.
Evidence of defensive wounds – cut on her thumb as she tried to ward off an attack.
Skull fractures, brain injury.
Severe blood loss
No other internal injuries
Several loose skull and bone fragments. 
Underlying brain tissue visible with the naked eye. 
No blood in her lungs or stomach indicates that she died fairly quickly. 

In Henri’s version of events, the lights were turned on as Martin came into the room (all of this happening with Henri watching) Martin then lunged toward the attacker to either tackle him or at least get between the attacker and Rudi. However, Martin was struck with the axe and fell on the bed, Henri didn’t see him move again but despite this, the attacker hit him a couple of times. The attacker was also laughing whilst attacking his dad.

When asked about fatal wounds Dr Anthony said, one of Teresa’s wounds could have been fatal, three of Martin’s wounds by themselves were enough to be fatal.

Henri was sitting on the floor in court, Judge Desai asked where he is and his head peeped up from the dock.

Marli’s injuries are consistent with that of her family. She showed evidence of self-defense, a great deal more than Teresa and Rudi. Showing that she had a greater scuffle with her attacker than the others. 

According to Dr Anthony, Rudi suffered the most violent attack according to injuries. 

Desai then asked who was killed first?

According to Dr Anthony, she can postulate some of the events from the wounds. Rudi was attacked first, he was laying on the right side of his face, and the trauma to his head shows he was aware of what was coming. He lifted his hand in an attempt to ward it off, hence the lifted finger nail. 

With Martin, his injuries were sustained to the back and head. No evidence of defensive wounds, it is most likely he was surprised from the back, unaware of the attack. 

With Teresa, she faced the assailant, instinctively raising also her right hand. She most likely fell forward on her face where the abrasions to her nose bridge happened. 

Advocate Galloway asked how Marli survived the attack? Dr Anthony said that a lot of factors make the difference, her age, the severity of the wounds, blood loss. Because she was so young she is more likely to survive. 

A photo was then shown of Rudi laying near the bathroom door. Dr Anthony said that even though Rudi was assaulted on the bed it is possible to still move. You are not necessarily immediately unconscious or immobile. 

A Dr Perumal also made reports on Rudi, saying that it took 2 hours and 40 minutes for him to die. Dr Anthony said that she can’t completely dispute it. 

(Then there was questioning about photographs being released to the media)

Dr Anthony said that it is possible if Martin tackled the assailant, that the assailant could reach and strike him from behind. 

Back to Marli’s injuries, she could still survive but head injuries made it possible for her to be in a semi-comatose state but still able to move a limb here and there depending on brain injuries. 

Dr Anthony was excused and the matter of Henri’s statement to the police was called upon again regarding admissibility.

It is clear from the evidence shown that Henri was seen as a suspect at the time. He wasn’t given food, dressed only in boxer shorts and the question posed to Dr Albertse whether his injuries were self-inflicted. His statement was taken at 15.52 that afternoon. He was entitled to be warned that he doesn’t have to make a statement, had the right to legal representation and the right to remain silent. 

Botha said that food and sleep deprivation are acts of torture. It is the reason why he decided to sign his statement. 

Galloway said that the statement was taken as Henri is a witness, not a suspect.

Henri didn’t volunteer to speak, they asked him questions and he answered. 

He was interviewed to determine what had happened and to identify a suspect. 

(So the admissibility is still to be determined.)

The court is adjourned until Monday I believe.

Interesting stuff

That was one vicious "attacker" from the description of injuries

Hopefully he will rot in jail for many many years

(05-26-2017, 11:29 AM)Purply Wrote: Interesting stuff

That was one vicious "attacker" from the description of injuries

Hopefully he will rot in jail for many many years

I can't even think how someone can do that to one person, let alone nearly 4. At this point in time I can't even say anymore whether I think it will be a guilty verdict.
The defence is good. No lies. But some things just don't add for me. Especially his wounds. If it comes to an innocent verdict I would never be able to believe it. He was involved definitely.
The other thing that bothers me is Marli put up a fight, and Henri did what? Stood around, picking his nose, and let his mother and sister be attacked?
Nowhere have I heard that he tried to intervene or save anyone. I hear a whole lot of him being ignored and him watching everything unfold.
I sincerely hope we don't screw this up again.

Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Day 19 (Week 6) and I am already tired just thinking about how boring this day was in court. Not unimportant just not what I thought I would be reporting on. 

Sergeant Clinton Malan is back to testify in the “trial-within-the-trial”. AKA, the admissibility of Henri’s statement and any and all surrounding issues. I will try and keep this as short as possible for all of us. 

Malan says he is aware of the accused and detainee’s rights. Albeit Henri was not notified of his right to remain silent, of legal representation, to not say anything to incriminate himself. 

Captain Steyn also questioned Henri at the scene but Malan was not there at that point. By the time they left the scene, Henri had already given his version of events to Steyn. Malan does not remember giving evidence bags containing swabs to Dr Albertse but says that if she says that that is what happened, then it must be. 

Malan said he doesn’t remember all that well the color of Henri’s shirt or if it had writing on it but he was definitely wearing a short sleeved shirt. Dr Albertse, on the other hand, did not note Henri was wearing a shirt – only his boxer shorts.

A sergeant Adams is the one who spoke to Dr Albertse, he (Malan) was in the waiting room with Henri. He can’t comment on whether Dr Albertse was asked to check if Henri’s wounds were self-inflicted. 

They had driven in a sedan car, Malan said. Henri said in his version though that it was a double-cab bakkie. Henri had sat in the back seat.

Botha said that Henri said that he had been told that Marli had been given a drug and she was wide awake and telling everything. Malan said that this did not happen. 

During the time Henri was questioned he was apparently still wearing shorts. Malan said during Colonel Benecke’s interview with Henri, Henri had been wearing long pants. Malan said that as far as he understands, the family had arrived and this is where the clothes came from. 

Malan said he doesn’t know about the family being denied to see Henri. He also said Henri wasn’t informed of any rights because he was seen as a victim. 

Henri said that during his statement he wasn’t sure of things like the times and that Colonel Benecke would suggest times. Malan said that Benecke asked times and asked what happened – Henri gave the details himself. 

Malan was the one who took the statement. Botha said Henri said that there was more than one person. Malan said that this is not true, Henri said he had seen one person and never mentioned any other persons.

They were further disputing where Henri had gotten his clothes. It’s a big mess of he-said-she-said. 

Dr van Zyl said that she was told that night that Henri is an alleged suspect. Botha said that it’s strange to draw blood from Henri for drugs and alcohol testing if he was only a witness or a victim. 

Botha then turned to the statement Malan took, saying that it is filled with language and spelling errors. Malan said that is correct. Botha then said there are places where words were used which Henri said is definitely not English he would use. Botha then asked that if there was a recording, would this be what he heard? Malan said that is correct. 
Malan said Henri did read the statement after it was taken. Botha said that Henri saw the errors but just signed it because he wanted to go home. 

Botha then asked if Henri was given anything to eat. Malan said no, Henri did not ask for anything. 

Botha says Malan’s version of the statement is not correct in terms of what Henri told him. Henri didn’t give the exact height of the attacker and yet an exact height is given, Henri spoke of two suspects to Benecke yet Malan mentions only one in the statement he took.

Malan says the statement was printed after Henri read it and he signed it. 

The court is adjourned until tomorrow when Andre du Toit – Henri’s uncle - is set to testify.

Could the police possibly make any more mistakes? One can clearly see they take no pride in their work.

Becoming a policeman is an easy job nowadays. They're not there because that's a passion, but because it is a position of job security. So it doesn't really matter to them how good or bad they are. The chances they lose their job is basically zero.

Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Color Skins

Change Color:

Background Patterns:

Background Images:

Main Options: