GUILTY South Africa - Susan Rohde, 47, murdered, Stellenbosch, 24 July 2016 - #2

New Posts

PrimeSuspect said:
Well said!
I'm currently watching and loving Salie-Hlophe's detailed account of Susan's last day alive. I didn't realize the room was on ground floor, she says if JR couldn't break down the door, he could, at least, break the window. He showed no desperation at all to get to Susan!
She had such a beating before her death, JR is a brute and murderer! Good riddance!

I also recommend everyone to watch, the best I've seen yet! I like the way she screws her nose up when she reads out JR's questionable and unsavoury behaviour!
Click to expand...
I think I read that all the rooms are on ground level.

This site is really playing up for me at the moment.
 
Tortoise said:
I think I read that all the rooms are on ground level.

This site is really playing up for me at the moment.
Click to expand...
ahh ok.
I'm having trouble on the site too, it kicked me out and a message said there's site maintenance but I'm back on now. *cross fingers* it lasts.
 
Tortoise said:
1:01:55 in -

"his initial report had failed to mention that a bloodless [ ] neck dissection could not be repeated at a subsequent autopsy, although he conceded that during his testimony. He had also failed to either mention or interpret a number of crucial injuries such as the scratch marks to the jaw and a great number of other injuries most of which are normally associated with defensive type injuries. This in my view calls into question his non-partisan-ness, his credibility and the reliance this court can place on his evidence."
Click to expand...
wow, he was obviously covering for JR. He must have been paid money or he doesn't think domestic violence should be noted, it should be whether it's murder or not! :mad:
 
PrimeSuspect said:
wow, he was obviously covering for JR. He must have been paid money or he doesn't think domestic violence should be noted, it should be whether it's murder or not! :mad:
Click to expand...
Exactly! How can he leave out anything at all. That is not honest in my view, and neither does he come across to me as honest. It stinks IMO.
 
Tortoise said:
1:01:55 in -

"his initial report had failed to mention that a bloodless [ ] neck dissection could not be repeated at a subsequent autopsy, although he conceded that during his testimony. He had also failed to either mention or interpret a number of crucial injuries such as the scratch marks to the jaw and a great number of other injuries most of which are normally associated with defensive type injuries. This in my view calls into question his non-partisan-ness, his credibility and the reliance this court can place on his evidence."
Click to expand...

I would like to add here what the Judge said about the other pathologist for the Defence, Dr. Loftus

"... He was the only one who did not see the actual body; instead he, in my view, attempted to mislead the court to believe he had contacted a virtual autopsy..."

Justice and common sense prevailed in this case, not money and tailored evidence submitted by hired experts. Thank you Judge Gayaat Salie-Hlophe!
 
I suppose for completeness we ought to quote what she said about that awful woman who conducted the psychological autopsy of Susan - the one who got kicked out of court. I could say a few choice words about her - but I'll leave it at what the Judge said, for politeness' sake.

I'll write it up later for the thread.
 
Tortoise said:
I suppose for completeness we ought to quote what she said about that awful woman who conducted the psychological autopsy of Susan - the one who got kicked out of court. I could say a few choice words about her - but I'll leave it at what the Judge said, for politeness' sake.

I'll write it up later for the thread.
Click to expand...
48:05 minutes -

"Doctor Panieri-Peter a forensic psychiatrist had been called by the accused's legal team to conduct a psychological autopsy of the Deceased as well as a psychiatric assessment of the Accused. Of concern in this matter is that in drafting her psychological autopsy Panieri-Peter drew her findings from a very limited supply of available material, according to her, as she principally consulted persons closely linked to the Accused. She also clearly misconstrued some information, some of her sources were unidentified - they sounded like no more than ghosts - leaving the Court to guess their veracity. She also included "evidence" not testified to by the Accused himself. The above calls into question the reliability of this witness's evidence and the court cannot therefore accept same.

"To the extent that she had done a psychiatric assessment of the accused I accept that until this weekend the Accused did not demonstrate or show in the past a history of violence or physical threat to the Deceased. But on his own version, as well as other evidence, this weekend was different, for he did become a physical threat to her. He physically assaulted her. And so that must be seen in context with the view by Dr Panieri-Peter that the accused was not a physical threat, or his behaviour was not congruent to spousal intimate homicide."
 
I just noticed that Jason, after having returned to the court room to hear whether his bail would be extended or not, did not have his tie on. Is that standard procedure? You know, it had to be removed so that he would not hurt himself? Anyone know?
 
It is as he may be a suicide risk. Oh the irony
Dora in the field said:
I just noticed that Jason, after having returned to the court room to hear whether his bail would be extended or not, did not have his tie on. Is that standard procedure? You know, it had to be removed so that he would not hurt himself? Anyone know?
Click to expand...
It is standard procedure as he may be a suicide risk. Oh the irony.
 
Dora in the field said:
I just noticed that Jason, after having returned to the court room to hear whether his bail would be extended or not, did not have his tie on. Is that standard procedure? You know, it had to be removed so that he would not hurt himself? Anyone know?
Click to expand...
Yes there was another one recently and I'm trying to remember who it was. Had his belt removed when he came back up from the cells. I'll have a think and see if I can remember, I don't think it was van Breda but it may have been.
 
Tortoise said:
Yes there was another one recently and I'm trying to remember who it was. Had his belt removed when he came back up from the cells. I'll have a think and see if I can remember, I don't think it was van Breda but it may have been.
Click to expand...
Ah I've remembered it was a US case, Tex McIver, had his belt taken off him as he was led from the courtroom after conviction.
 
Tortoise said:
Aww, thank you to both of you. I am, very proud of him. He got a First class Honours.

(sorry for the off-topic everyone)
Click to expand...

Through these threads, we get to know one another.
It's great.
Shows what a great parent you are, to have such a hard working, dedicated son.:):):)
 
lilmac said:
It is as he may be a suicide risk. Oh the irony

It is standard procedure as he may be a suicide risk. Oh the irony.
Click to expand...

They probably removed his shoe laces and belt too.
Great if his pants fell off, as that got him into trouble: his lover.:D:D:D
Loved the Judge referring to his lover, several times.:):):)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 163 more.
Total: 3,804 (members: 164, guests: 3,640)

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
3,640
Total visitors
3,804
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,842
Messages
17,959,888
Members
228,622
Latest member
crimedeepdives23
Back
Top