Apologising for her sarcasm‚ state prosecutor Susan Galloway asked Henri van Breda on Wednesday if his description of the alleged attacker who wiped out three of his family members was not suspiciously “stereotypical”.
“It boils down to an unknown black man wearing a gloves and balaclava‚” she said.
Van Breda‚ who turned 23 on Wednesday‚ stands accused of murdering his parents and brother in a frenzied axe attack at their luxury home in Stellenbosch in January 2015.
When asked‚ “How did you know he was black when he was so covered up?”‚ he replied‚ “The deep contrast between the whites of his eyes and the skin around his eyes.”
He also claimed that his statement said “a black man” in the sense of how Australians use the word “black” to mean any person of colour‚ as he had been living Down Under with his family and had adopted this way of speaking.
“Why didn’t you just say‚ ‘I saw so little I couldn’t determine his race’?” asked Galloway.
Van Breda claimed he had said that‚ but that Colonel Deon Beneke — who took his statement — “was not happy with ambiguous answers”‚ and that was when he then labelled the attacker as “black”.
The exchange followed a gruelling morning of cross-examination in which Galloway highlighted several differences between Van Breda’s plea explanation and his statements in court.
Was he in the bathroom or the bedroom?
Previous statements by Van Breda had him in the bathroom‚ watching the attack on his parents‚ brother and sister from a “slightly open door”.
When blood spatter expert Captain Marius Joubert testified for the state‚ however‚ the question arose as to how blood spatter from family members could have ended up on his shorts if he was mainly behind the door.
Also‚ pointed out Galloway‚ there was a distinct “lack of blood spatter around the bathroom door”.
On Wednesday‚ Van Breda claimed he “stood in the corner of the room and was definitely outside the bathroom” as the attacks unfolded.
Galloway pointed out that in his statement to the police he had said‚ “I then stood there afraid” and did not mention leaving the bathroom because he was “frozen” in fear.
When Galloway pointed out that his latest description contradicted this‚ he put it down to a “mistranslation” by Beneke.
Judge Siraj Desai pointed out that it could not be a “mistranslation” since Van Breda was speaking English‚ and Beneke was writing in English.
Contradictions about the whereabouts of family members
In his initial plea explanation‚ Van Breda placed his sister‚ Marli‚ in front of the television with the other family members. However‚ in his statement to police she was in her room for most of the evening.
He also initially said he was “unsure” where his mother was‚ but in his statement he gives details of her being on the phone to her brother‚ who was celebrating his birthday.
There is also a discrepancy about whether he drank whisky that night. On why his versions differ‚ he said: “I was overwhelmed by the authorities and didn’t dispute what they put to me.”
What happened to Rudi’s laptop?
Van Breda described how his brother Rudi lay in bed for around “15 to 20 minutes” looking at his laptop before going to sleep.
“What did he do with his laptop when done?” Galloway asked Van Breda.
He said he was “not sure”‚ and Galloway said she had gone through “all photographs of the exhibit”‚ and “couldn’t find any laptop on or around Rudi’s bed”.
Smoking inside the house
Galloway questioned the manner in which Van Breda had smoked inside and left ash and cigarette butts on the floor when his parents did not even let him smoke inside.
“Is it because your parents were now dead so it didn’t matter if you smoked inside the house or not?” asked Galloway.
Van Breda said he was smoking to be “able to communicate on the phone with emergency personnel because [I] was struggling to speak and was breathing heavily”.
Throughout the cross-examination‚ Botha objected‚ but Desai said at one point: “This is going to be a long cross-examination. Your objections must be legitimate.”
Dad Martin’s wounds not consistent with Van Breda’s descriptions
Van Breda re-enacted what he said was the manner in which Rudi was hacked to death‚ and he was later asked to do the same regarding the murder of his father.
He did so‚ showing a chopping motion from the right shoulder down to the left.
But‚ said Galloway‚ “The wounds on his neck are parallel to shoulders – how could he have done that with the motion you are describing?”
As Van Breda gave different explanations‚ Galloway pointed out that it still did not add up.
Van Breda lost his smooth demeanour at that point‚ got choked up‚ and had to stop to drink some water.
Why didn’t he help?
Describing the timeline and sequence of events‚ Galloway said Martin was attacked while trying to help Rudi‚ and that mother Teresa and Marli were attacked when they came towards the unfolding crime scene.
“This attacker you speak of didn’t need to find his victims. They all approached him. Except for you – you were in the same location in the same room and he practically ignores you until he has attacked the rest of the family‚” she said.
Also‚ she asked: “Why didn’t you help? You were the only family member who matched the alleged attacker in size.”
Van Breda replied: “I wasn’t thinking clearly.”
