Rohde appeal dismissed

‘State led convincing evidence throughout’

CONVICTED wife killer Jason Rohde’s application for leave to appeal was dismissed in the Western Cape High Court yesterday.

He was convicted of killing his wife, Susan, and defeating the ends of justice.

National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Eric Ntabazalila said: “The State led convincing evidence throughout the trial that the only person who killed Susan Rohde was Jason and that he tried to cover his tracks by pretending that she hanged herself.

“We carried through that argument as we opposed his application for leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence. We convinced the judge that no other court could come to a different conclusion.

“They have hinted they will approach the SCA. If they do, we will oppose their application as we are convinced, based on evidence we have tabled in court, that he is the killer.”

Meanwhile accused wife killer Rob Packham had not mentioned in his police statement that he was browsing for a new car for his wife Gill Packham.

This emerged when his cross-examination continued in the Western Cape High Court yesterday.

He is on trial for Gill’s murder. She was found in the boot of her burnt BMW at Diep River train station. He also faces a charge of defeating the ends of justice.

Packham has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

On his second day of testimony, Packham blamed police for not noting in his statement that he had been browsing to buy a new car for Gill as a surprise birthday gift.

Packham, during a heated cross-examination, confirmed he had given his statement to police the day after his wife was found dead, and said he “must have told” the investigating officer he was browsing for a car but could not explain why this information was not included in a signed statement to police.

“I spent four hours at the Diep River police station. Three people tried to type (my statement). I am not surprised it’s in a condensed form. I also cannot explain why they are missing that information,” said Packham.

Prosecutor Susan Galloway put it to Packham that the statement he made was read back to him and he agreed to it, which was why he had signed it.

“Yes, I signed it. I was quite content if they were happy with the statement,” said Packham.

Galloway said Packham had tried to give the impression that he was at work when he had asked his colleague, Lodewyk Janse van Rensburg, to “lie” on his behalf by saying he was at the plant since 8.30am if anyone called.

“When you saw that wasn’t going to work out, you chose the version of buying a car,” said Galloway.

Packham retorted: “I hear you, but that is not true.”