Fire accused in battle to explain varied accounts
Man whose family died in blaze called a liar in court
A PHOENIX man charged with the murders of his family members, who died in a fire that he started while allegedly trying to kill himself in the room they rented, could not account for the material differences in his plea statement and his evidence in chief.
Senior State prosecutor advocate Krishen Shah in the Durban High Court yesterday questioned the 59-year-old Kista Chetty during cross-examination over these differences.
“If one reads your plea explanation the sequence is very different from your evidence in chief.
“In summary, I submit that you have lied to the court, and have not told the truth. You deliberately set the fire and killed your wife and children; you did this because you were angry at being chased from your house,” said Shah.
Chetty is on trial for the murders in 2021 of his wife Elisha Naidoo, 39, his 13-year-old daughter Jadene, his 9-yearold son Jordan, 8-year-old daughter Aarav and his 3-year-old nephew Aldrin.
At the time of the incident, the family lived in a bedroom that they rented at a house on Kidstone Place in Phoenix.
Chetty’s brother-in-law, Deon Naidoo, and others lived in the lounge of the same house. There were 12 of them in total living in the house.
Chetty has pleaded not guilty to the five counts of murder and six attempted murders levelled against him by the State.
Chetty had previously told the court that he had taken a 5-litre container of petrol and poured some of it into the cap of the container and emptied the contents of the cap on to his stomach, over his shirt.
He said that he then lit his shirt from the bottom and his wife screamed that he was on fire and he quickly took his T-shirt off and threw it on the ground without realising it had landed on the 5-litre container that had the petrol in it.
His testimony was that the fire moved quickly, while his wife and his children stood on the other side of the bed, which had caught alight.
He said he picked up the burning bed and screamed for them to get out, adding that this was how he sustained burns to his hands and face.
During his cross-examination, Shah suggested that his version was improbable and simply not true.
“If you had done as you have said you would have burns to your neck, chest and forearms. Your story is a lie, your injuries are not consistent with your story. In your plea explanation, you say nothing about being burnt on your hands and face when you picked up the double bed.”
Shah said that another material difference from Chetty’s plea statement and evidence led while on the stand was where he said he had poured the contents of the petrol cap on his body.
“In your plea explanation, you say you poured the mixture on to your chest. I want to suggest why there are material differences in the version; it’s because you want to account for the burn wounds on your stomach on account of there being none on your chest.
“Another puzzling aspect of your evidence is that according to you, the only reason you took off your T-shirt is because your wife told you that you were burning, which is highly, inherently improbable.”
He said that another aspect of Chetty’s evidence led in court that was “tailored” was the fact that he lit his shirt from the bottom.
“It was never put to Dube (fire expert) that you did this, your statement says you lit the spot on your chest.
“When we started the case, Chiliza read out the statement where you pleaded not guilty, and you confirmed its correctness and that you had signed it.”
The trial continues on Wednesday.