Weekend Argus (Saturday Edition)
Expert expects hefty sentence for Van Breda
THE expert opinion of a state pathologist could jail Henri van Breda for life for the axe murders of his brother, father, mother and the attempted murder of his sister.
“If Judge Siraj Desai finds Henri van Breda’s wounds were self-inflicted it will be very challenging for him to find grounds to acquit him of multiple murder,” said attorney Tracey Stewart.
She has been following the trial which this week entered its 66th day as the State wrapped up its reply to the defence’s final argument.
“The accused’s wounds were something that bothered Desai,” Stewart continued.
“Not just during Van Breda’s evidence in chief, but also during final argument where he more than once asked defence advocate Pieter Botha for guidance on this aspect, saying if he finds the wounds were self-inflicted then what follows then.
“Desai also seemed puzzled why the defence did not call an expert to rebut the State’s witness, Dr Marianne Tiemensma, who was very credible and very compelling.”
Last year, when asked during cross examination if she had ever witnessed a knife attack, Tiemensma responded she had seen the aftermath of thousands of cases and knew a genuine knife wound when she saw one.
Stewart said: “In fact, Desai went as far as telling Botha it would have helped his case tremendously if he had called his expert pathologist, Dr Reggie Perumal, to testify that his client’s wounds were not self-inflicted.
“I didn’t find Botha’s explanation very convincing, especially when he told Desai that he didn’t mandate Perumal to give an opinion on his client’s wounds because he didn’t have the budget to do so.
“In reply to Botha’s final argument, State advocate Susan Galloway diplomatically pointed out that the record of Tiemensma’s cross examination showed that Perumal had in fact advised the defence on self-inflicted wounds.
“She agreed with Desai it was therefore difficult to understand counsel’s submissions regarding not calling Dr Perumal.”
Botha’s arguments focused on Tiemensma’s bias and the fact that she had not examined Van Breda personally, but instead had relied on photographs taken in the back of an ambulance to make her diagnosis.
Addressing why Van Breda’s wounds were superficial, Botha said: “Injuries sustained during any altercation where the initial intended victim gains the upper hand over his assailant and survives to tell the tale, will inevitably be of the not-life-threatening variety, and non- lethal in nature, otherwise the victim would not have survived.”
On the issue of Van Breda’s wounds not resembling the deep axe wounds sustained by his family, Botha said “whether it was through happenstance, or due to a miscalculation by his attacker or the fact that the accused (a young, tall, strongly built individual) was the only one who actually had the opportunity to anticipate and fend off the attack, it follows that from the moment when he got hold of the attacker’s axe hand, the accused was never going to sustain the same injuries as the rest of his family”.
Desai has set down judgment for April 23. If found guilty, Van Breda could face life imprisonment.
He would only be eligible for parole after 25 years if he admitted guilt.