Carly1803

Day 36, an interesting day in court. Captain Marius Joubert took the stand after being ill. He has 27 years experience in the police force. He has been a crime scene investigator since 1993. Blood stain pattern analysis delivers crucial information on how a crime was committed. On 27 January 2015, Colonel Benecke asked Joubert to go to 12 Goske Street to analyze blood. All the blood stains belonged to the victims. Credit to News24 for the following notes on all the blood stains that were noted in court today: - Non spatter on the tile floor at front door entrance. - Transfer blood stain, suggests contact. Probably created by contact from the object onto the tile floor. - Non spatter on the tile floor at front door tile, regular shape, no reconcilable pattern. - Transfer blood stain. Probably created between object and tile floor, resulting in a transfer. - Non spatter on the tile floor at front door entrance, regular shape, recognizable stain, probably created from the blanket of EMS and dropped onto the tile floor. - Carpet in front of the staircase leading to the bedroom. Irregular margin randomly distributed blood drops. Probably created from blood dripping from the first floor onto carpet from the first floor (Probably from top floor to ground floor) - Spatter on the kitchen door, elliptical stain, not possible to find the mechanism responsible. No DNA could be obtained from that sample. - Spatter stains on the staircase, circular and linear, classified as a drip. blood result of a source of motion. - Blood spatter stain on Teresa Van Breda right leg. Random. - Blood spatter on buttocks of Teresa, circular shape, dripping from a moving object in this area. - Non-spatter on the tile floor on first-floor passageway. Regular shape stains, from a source object. Classified as pattern transfer. Probably created between an EMS stretcher and tiled floor. - Spatter on the tiled floor of the first floor, drip. Probably blood dripping from a moving object. - Spatter stain on front aspect of the cabinet in the passage. Classified as an impact spatter pattern. Probably a result of a force applied. - Non spatter on the front of the cabinet in the passage. Described as irregular shape and no recognizable pattern. Swipe patterns. Probably created between blood stained object and surface. Marli's blood. - Non spatter on the cabinet on the first floor, irregular shape, no recognizable pattern. Probably made by blood stained fingertips of EMS personnel while assisting Marli van Breda. - Spatter on the tile floor in front of Henri's room. Elliptical. Impact spatter. Probably caused by force applied to something traveling through the air and resulting in an impact. - Spatter on the bedroom door. - Headboard spatter suggests an impact possible. Created by force applied a blunt force which resulted in a spattering of small droplets. Henri's blood. - Wall spatter against the wall, probably caused by a bloody object. - Spatter on bedroom wall, possibly caused by projection - Spatter on the wall next to Rudi. Elliptical, impact spatter pattern. Probably force applied to blood source on the bed, creating an impact spatter pattern. Rudi's blood. - Henri's blood found bedroom carpet. Swipe stain (indicating movement). - Non-splatter blood stains on the floor of Rudi/Henri's bedroom. Complex splatter. Blood clots present in blood stains, Rudi's blood. - Non-splatter blood stain in their bedroom. Contact stain, created by Rudi or a hair like an object covered in the victim's blood. - Spatter stains on the staircase wall. Linear, probably caused by blood bearing object striking staircase wall. Rudi van Breda's blood. Rudi and Maritn's blood in spattering on another part of the wall. - Wall adjacent to the wall of boys bedroom: can't define mechanism, suggests impact or projection. Teresa's blood. - Spatter on wall/door frame droplet may be the result of projection. This goes on for a good long while as Joubert laboriously explained the spatters. There was blood found on the shower door handle, tap, door, wall and floor. The blood belonged to Teresa, Rudi, and Henri. Henri's gray shorts had various blood spatter stains on the front. Stains found on Henri's shorts: five stains belong to Rudi, 9 to Henri, 5 to Martin, 3 mixed samples. None belonged to Marli. Also possible urine stains on the shorts. There were multiple spatter stains on Henri's socks. Joubert says the force was applied to a source, traveled through the air and landed on the socks. Blood samples found on the top and sides of Henri Van Breda's socks - 9 from Rudi, 1 from Martin, 1 from Teresa and 2 from Henri. A number of stains on the scene were made by EMS personnel. Blood stain pattern suggests Rudi was grabbed or moved from the bed over the carpet between the beds towards the door. Blood stain pattern suggests Rudi was moved through the pool of blood which resulted in the creation of swipe and wipe patterns. Rudi's blood had time to clot before he was moved, time passed before his upper body on the bed was disturbed, Joubert said. The most interesting part of today came right at the end when Joubert said, Henri's gray shorts were in close proximity to the blood sources of Rudi and Martin. His socks were in close proximity to the blood sources of Teresa and Rudi. The court is adjourned until tomorrow.

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] Sent from my SM-G955F using Platinum Wealth mobile app

Today in court we heard that Henri van Breda is fast running out of money to support his case. The blood spatter expert is still ill and is unavailable to testify. He is apparently the final witness for the state. (from which I then presume the defence will call Marli) The state asked for postponement as their expert is ill. Botha objected to this, referring to their own expert they had flown in, incurring costs. Desai decided in favor of the state. The case is postponed until 11 September. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

I've been trying to be objective but it is getting difficult as the prosecution makes a good case. The defense started off strong but I feel they are lacking their vigor lately. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

I think you will still be waiting a while. The past two days in court have been rather uneventful. To the point of boring. Combrink was zooming in on an evidence box that was not sealed but was sealed inside a bag when it arrived at the SAPS laboratory. Otto confirmed this but said the sample was not contaminated or else they would have known. Today in court Sergeant Apollis testified that nobody matching the description of the intruder given by Henri van Breda had ever been found. Botha pointed out there was a not a lot they could go on if the person was wearing a balaclava. Apollis responded and said that they had gotten perpetrators before with less information, but no one knows anything of the "big" intruder in the De Zalze estate. He said that the police are generally aware of the usual suspects involved in crime in the area, however, no one could give information on this person Henri described. The trial continues on Monday. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Due to the state's witness falling ill and being unable to testify, Desai granted a postponement until tomorrow with an alternative witness. Today's witness will be available next week to testify on blood spatter. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Not a whole lot happened today in court as Sharlene Otto took the stand again. Combrink tried to besmirch the Laboratory in which the samples were tested by showing a picture where some of the people in the lab were not wearing complete coverings as per standard procedures. Otto clapped back and said that when someone is not working with the samples it is not necessary that they wear all the covers. And that is it. Until Monday as far as I know. Have a good weekend. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Today in court, the sassy Sharlene Otto was back on the stand. Swab 63’s paper trail was requested which she has today. Swab 63 is the “blood” that was found on the laundry door that is not blood. Sharlene said that at least 20 staff members worked on the van Breda samples. Which is a lot of manpower for the lab that has about 60 staff, including admin staff. Otto said that it takes anything from a week to a month before a sample is finished being analyzed. She said that only one person dealt with swab 63. Otto once again reassured the court that the lab is state of art. Otto said that the kits SAPS use are bought from US companies and that it gets used in labs all over the world. Desai jokingly asked Sharlene if it is the same ones they use on CSI. Otto once again says that they use very strict procedures and that nothing went wrong with any of the 216 samples. Otto was clearly frustrated with Combrink and told him that they were going in circles. Combrink then asked how her competency is verified. Otto said that she has had years of training and mentorship, not to mention the yearly proficiency tests that happen internally (national) or externally (international). Otto said that samples below standard are not ignored but amplification kits are used when the input DNA is too low. The court is adjourned until tomorrow.

Day 29 arrived. A short day in court as Sharlene Otto continued her testimony on DNA. I watched some of the live trial. And I can tell you I was impressed with Sharlene, a real sassy lady who took no nonsense from Combrink. She said that even though it takes a lot of money and time for samples to be tested, all 216 samples were tested. She wanted to make it clear that the SAPS Forensic Laboratory was reliable even though it was not an accredited establishment. The only difference between unaccredited and credited is an audit by the South African National Accreditation System. On a side note, Desai asked that cameras will not roll when Marli van Breda testifies. The court is adjourned until Thursday. Enjoy Women's Day.

Indeed. That is what the expert said.

Day 28 or Day 27 (as no one seems to be sure) has arrived with great anticipation. News24 has apparently been streaming the trial (today's) albeit I was under the impression they are not allowed to? Some testimonies are not aired when the testifier objects and Desai needs to grant this. UPDATE: After some research, I see News24 has an audio stream of the trial which I tried listening to but I could not skip forward at all because then I lose the audio. Honestly, what is the point? If I could be there myself I definitely would be. These people are making reporting increasingly difficult. Sharlene Otto testified today, she is a lieutenant colonel. She is attached to the biology section of SAPS Forensic Laboratory. She has 24 years of service with a B.Sc Degree at UFS and "extensive training" in DNA Analysis. Every single person's DNA is made up 50% of their father and 50% from their mother. She said they receive any swabs from scenes in a sealed condition at the lab where analysis then takes place. The analysists do not know from which cases the bags come from so as to remain objective with each case. The testing happens as follows: Preliminary Test DNA Isolation Phase Quantification Phase Polymerase Chain Reaction Phase Electrophoresis And then Data Analysis is done. She said they analysed 216 samples. They keep high quality, international standards when it comes to quality control. Analysts undergo proficiency testing each year. She then talked about the DNA of each and where it was found. No new or unexpected places. But then, in a second report, scrapings from under Henri's nails have Teresa's, Rudi's and Martin's DNA. There was a mixture of different DNAs on the bottom of the axe handle. Henri's DNA can be read but not enough of any others were found to be discerned. A swab from the corner of the shower floor also reads that of Henri, Teresa and Rudi. Touch DNA from the handle of the knife came back as only positive for Rudi. Rudi's DNA was also found in the scrapings from underneath Martin's nails. On the shorts Henri was wearing DNA from Henri, Teresa and Rudi can be read. Otto said they had optimal samples as there was a lot of blood on the scene. She said there may have been mixed samples of DNA but there was no unknown DNA on the bottom of the axe handle. Galloway asked her what the odds are of someone entering and not leaving a trace to which Otto explained the Locard Principle - Every touch leaves a trace. The "blood" on the laundry door was tested and turned out to not be blood. The court is adjourned until tomorrow.

I would say the Domino's by me was wonderful. Never had a bad experience and yet they closed down. I guess that's that. No more Domino's for me. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

As the last I heard indicated the trial to continue this Monday, the 7th of August, please stop in on Monday for hopefully an update. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

I did say so in my last day of trial[sMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND COLD SWEAT] Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

No news. The trial, as far as I am aware, resumes again 7 August. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

I am honestly not quite certain as the trial did proceed even when the appeal and judgment were still being considered. I read in IOL that Judge Desai first ruled that some broadcastings may be made with the exception of Marli's testimony which may only be note recorded. Which instills in me the idea that she is indeed on the witness list. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Today the news broke that Henri won his battle in court against Media24 to NOT livestream the trial. So be prepared to read my neverending updates. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

Earlier in the trial someone was called to the stand who was said to have been witness number 80 on the list. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

It hasn't been confirmed nor denied. And in a witness list of eighty or more I would expect Marli to be one of them. What if she does remember something? Even if she remembers an intruder or whether Henri did it. Or if she could attest to anything different from what Henri says. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

I see the views dropping, which is understandable, people are uniquely wired to search for the sensational - which this trial is not so far. I want to hear from Marli and I wish they'll decide to stream it already. Everything in this country is taking a lifetime. Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app

UPDATED Day 26 has clearly not garnered a lot of attention for the media as by 16:13 all I can find is a very unhelpful Times Live article. Not a stitch from News24 which I usually use for their live tweeting of the entire trial, but alas, it seems today not a single person pitched. Candice Brown was on the stand again, and from what I can gather, Brown and Combrink (for van Breda) went back and forth for a good hour and a half over a mark on one of the walls (not the one on the stairs) with Brown standing her ground and Combrink standing his, neither conceding. They then went back to debate the mark on the stairs. Brown said yesterday that the way Henri said he threw the axe in his plea explanation was “possible but highly unlikely”. Combrink went after her statement today saying that she did not do any calculations or experiments, asking her whether it was all then “thumbsuck”? Brown replied that the theory of throwing the axe was only put to her on Monday in court, and based on her official reports it was not thumbsuck. Combrink asked her to share Newton’s Laws of Motion which she had referred to on Monday. Which she could do. Combrink then said that without knowing the velocity her statement has no meaning in this world. Brown responded and said that that is why she called it a possibility instead of ruling it out completely. She is sticking to her statement of “possible but highly unlikely” based on how she examined Mark D and her 14 years of experience. UPDATE: Matthys Combrink alluded to the fact that the axe shown in court is maybe not the axe everyone thinks it is. James Reade-Jahn remembers it being black but the family’s domestic worker, Precious, was the only one who testified that it is the same she saw in the scullery. Incredulously Judge Desai asked whether Combrink thinks there was another axe? To which he replied, “There was possibly more than one axe.” Combrink asked Brown if she had thrown the axe? Brown responded that that was not asked of her. The defence’s expert, Kobus Steyl, has thrown it a distance of 1.5m and it hit straight into the surface without spinning. Unfortunately for us, the trial has been postponed until 7 August.

So today was apparently Day 25? These things are really confusing. But I have a section that was not available last week at the time of writing about the shoe prints. Danie van der Westhuizen testified about the footprints found at the scene. 38 were taken and 36 were identified and accounted for – belonging to emergency services and officers. Danie said that he didn’t consider the other two to be real footprints as it could not really be said what they were. Now onto today’s trial. Candice Brown was on the stand. A ballistics expert, with a degree in Human Life Sciences and an Honors in Genetics. She was called to 12 Goske Street in January 2015 to examine impact marks at the scene. She compiled a report in February 2015. To credit this to News 24, part of Candice’s report: “One piece of painted cement laying on the floor at front door entrance; one impact mark with damage caused by adjacent to the front entrance area. One piece of painted cement on the staircase; an impact mark consistent with sharp-edged movement above staircase rail; powder particles, like cement powered particles on staircase rail. A piece of tile fragment on the staircase with the same appearance of tile on staircase floor; impact damage and particles consistent with breakage damage on the 17th stair; impact damage consistent with a sharp edged tool movement in the tile area in the first bedroom.” A piece of tile fragment on staircase floor lying in debris; one impact mark in the bedroom. She said that they make replicas of marks with a rubber type substance to make a cast of it. She examined both the axe and the knife. Impact marks B, D, and H were caused by a sharp-edged tool. The right-hand area in the front entrance hall is marked as B. In terms of impact mark B, she couldn’t determine if the axe was the cause. Candice Brown: “When looking at these marks I observed there was certainty of direction, the edge of the two walls was the weaker area of the wall structure, the marks had a beginning and an end, I could follow the course of the marks. In ballistics terms, we normally look at striated marks and indentations. When looking at those marks, there was definitely force applied to have made this controlled sharp edged tool impact mark.” Advocate Galloway then referred to Henri’s plea bargain where he said he saw the attacker in the middle of the landing and threw the axe, not knowing where it landed or what it hit. Brown held up the axe and said that there is a quarter of a chance the axe might land on the sharp area or any of the other areas (butt, head and handle) The impact on the landing was deep as the brick was exposed. Judge Desai asked if the throwing the axe could result in an unpredictable result? Brown said it is highly unlikely, possible but highly unlikely. There were about three uncontrolled impact marks. Galloway then asked what is the damage on the axe? Brown said that there was a little nick out of the metal at the top part of the blade edge. The metal was basically folded she said. She noticed some scrapings off the head of the axe on the green paint. There were also chip marks at the rear pole area. Advocate Botha asked for matters to stand down to consult with his expert. Galloway didn’t object. Court resumes tomorrow.

Day 25 was, I am sure, a very compelling day in court. Not so much by words but visually. The 30-minute video Hitchcock took of the scene that greeted him that morning at 12 Goske Street was played in court. Advocate Botha objected to the video being played by the State as he said evidence had been tampered with between the time the video was taken and the photographs were taken, as well as the gruesome nature of the video, showing close-ups of the dead bodies of Martin, Rudi and Teresa. Judge Desai overruled the objection but he did clear the public gallery. The media was allowed to view the footage but were warned that they may not be graphic in their reporting. Henri had moved to another bench so as not to view the footage of his previous home on that morning. Hitchcock’s recording showed bloody footprints and blood spatters in the entrance hall. The lounge seemed to look normal, with everyday things standing and lying around. Magazines and a laptop on tables, a handbag and a monopoly board. It all seems so normal until you remember what had happened. In the kitchen there were cigarettes and a lighter, a cordless phone and a cellphone were lying on the counter. Kitchen drawers were slightly open. Cigarette butts lay on the floor, seemingly burnt out on their own. A drop of blood was noted on the doorway leading to the pantry. The back door stood open, and items on a washing line could be seen. A perimeter inspection showed numerous first floor and second-floor windows open. Two blood droplets were shown on the boundary wall near the gate where the key was still in the keyhole. Back inside, Hitchcock moves toward the tiled stairs. There is blood spatter at the foot of the stairs next to a pair of shoes. As he continues up the stairs blood spatter is seen everywhere but the top few steps were completely covered in blood. At the top of the staircase, next to a bookshelf, Teresa lies on her stomach in a pool of blood, wearing a vest and underwear. Moving on to Henri and Rudi’s room, Martin’s body is collapsed over the bed closest to the door. The wall above the headboard is covered with blood spatters, as is the gray duvet and pillow on the bed that he lies on. At the end of the second bed, Rudi is seen on the floor with his feet towards the en-suite bathroom. In the en-suite bathroom, Hitchcock has footage of the faeces in the toilet. Henri said in his plea explanation he had been busy passing his bowels when he heard the noises in the bedroom. There is footage of all the valuables still in the house. Various laptops and cellphones were left as they are. A variety of footprints were marked, but Botha pointed out that there were much more. Hitchcock said only those that were thought relevant were taken (38 pairs) Shoe print expert Captain Danie van der Westhuizen is next on the stand.

Apparently, that halfhearted day on Monday was Day 23 as I see they are saying today is Day 24. Botha is back with a vengeance and we are in for a ride. Andre Hitchcock is on the stand again. Advocate Botha: You told us last week that when you arrived at the scene on 27 January 2015, there had already been other officers there? And there had been various bloody footprints at the scene? Hitchcock: Yes Botha: Captain Joubert had also been on the scene. Looks like you forgot that he had also been taking photos. He is in one of the photos. Hitchcock then said that Joubert had been there for blood spatter. Botha then asked whether anyone else was in the house while the photos were being taken and the scene processed. However, Hitchcock said he can’t confirm if anyone else had been there. To which Botha replied that nobody should have been in the house while he documented the scene. Hitchcock said Joubert and Captain Danie van der Westhuizen had been there to look at the blood spatter and bloody footprints. They then referred to photos of possible points of entry at the boundary wall and back gate, which Hitchcock did mark as possible points of entry. He said that he doesn’t know if the side gate was locked but the key was in the keyhole. Botha then refers to the open cupboard doors where touch DNA was taken. A photo shows a sealed and an unsealed evidence box. Hitchcock said it’s possible that it hadn’t been sealed at that time. Botha then asked for the outcome of the DNA evidence on the cupboard. Hitchcock said that the outcome does not get sent to them. Botha: Seals can’t just fall off, right? Hitchcock: No. Hitchcock said that he remembers collecting the evidence of the blood in the basin and the shower in the bathroom of the bedroom where the bodies were found. Botha then referred to photographic evidence that clearly shows Joubert taking the swabs. Botha said he gave Hitchcock the opportunity to say he does not remember or that he was unsure. Hitchcock conceded and said that no one is perfect and he made a mistake. Botha said that the chemical spray used to look for blood was a false positive for the shower, later determined by officer Nel. Botha then asked for the photos of the evidence kits number 113 – 117. Hitchcock then said it appears that it was not taken. Botha asked why they didn’t follow usual procedure. Hitchcock meekly said he can’t give a specific reason for this. There are also no photos of the sealed evidence bags after they were put in their boxes. There was also an exhibit number changed. Wrong address was used in one of his reports. Hitchcock said no swabs were taken in any other bathrooms in the house. Botha then showed two photos of the axe. Hitchcock said that the sharp end of the head was tested for blood. Hitchcock indicated that he tested for touch DNA. Botha said that the axe appeared to be the weapon, why not swab the blood? Hitchcock said he sent the axe to the lab but made note of the touch DNA. Hitchcock sent it to the lab, then to his office in Worcester for fingerprints and blood swabs. Hitchcock can’t confirm if he lifted more than one spatter. He only took one swab from the head of the axe, and from the blunt side. But he can’t confirm how. Botha then asked whether Hitchcock can remember if between the when the video was recorded and the photos were taken if the knife was moved by anyone. Hitchcock said he definitely did not move it. Botha referred to a photo of the knife sticking out from under the bed. Hitchcock said he placed it on the bed and swabbed it. (this seems contradictive to me from what he just said) Botha then said but there would be DNA on the bed that would affect the knife. Hitchcock said it could. Hitchcock can’t say which one of the numerous droplets on the knife he swabbed. Botha then referred to mark on a door at the back of the house which looked like blood. Botha asked if they looked there for blood. Hitchcock said that they searched for everything they could find. (as vague as it comes.) The state had further questioned which got postponed until tomorrow. Officer Lorraine Nel will be called as well as a DNA expert.

It's a pleasure. I like talking about the trial so the more I know the better. And what better way to know more than by posting in depth updates. [emoji1] Sent from my SM-G955F using the Platinum Wealth app