WHAT THE LEGAL EXPERTS SAY
Forensic testimony will be important and might help determine whether it was suicide or not, says Llewellyn Curlewis, a senior lecturer in criminal procedure law at the University of Pretoria.
He says the state pathologist’s testimony might make or break the state’s case.
“If the pathologist’s findings are inconsistent with the accused’s version of events the accused will be in trouble.”
André Kirsten, a Cape Town lawyer specialising in criminal law, believes Susan’s broken ribs could be difficult for the defence to explain if the court accepts Coetzee-Khan’s forensic evidence.
“In relation to a suicide it means the lady would’ve had to put a cord around her neck and hang herself but she’d have had to do it while in unbearable pain and coughing up blood,” he adds.
Some of the aspects that have left Kirsten puzzled are Susan’s extensive injuries, the load-bearing capacity of the door hook on which she allegedly hanged herself, the load-bearing capacity of the curling iron cord and also the marks on Susan’s neck.
“The pathologist has insisted there are no friction marks [from the cord] around Susan’s neck,” Kirsten says.
Another thing that intrigues him is the issue of the bathroom door lock, which testimony has revealed could easily be opened from the outside with a coin.
“For me that’s a big question mark. If it’s really true that the door was so easy to open, why did the accused go and search for someone to help him open the door instead of opening it himself?”
But in his testimony Jason claimed he isn’t technically minded and had no idea it was so easy to open the door.
Kirsten thinks Jason comes across quite well on the stand. “His answers seem mostly direct and to the point and he doesn’t appear arrogant. Some of his responses seem quite scripted though.”