Roux: You cant ignore it.
Roux: The moment you find that you cannot reject his version that he thought it was an intruder, then you must ask what was that thought process.
Roux: So how can it be conflicting. It is not, it depends on the interpretation.
Roux: We say with that in mind, I sum up to a large extent.
Judge: You spoke about the "slow-burn" how does it apply to this case?
Roux: I am going to explain it but it is explained in the head.
Roux: You grow up as a little disabled boy, you know that you cannot run away from danger. You have a fight or flight response.
Roux: As per Prof. Derman stated the fight or flight response becames heightened.
Roux: OP can pretend his is fine with his legs on, that is why we see the two OP. We must understand the 'Slow-Burn"anxiety.
Roux: The moment you are confronted with perceived danger, then you are compromised. Because the 'slow-burn' will come into play.
Roux: So we can say, like that woman who picked up the gun said "I have had enough". In that sense my lady.
Roux: His thing is when he gets that startle, it gives way to three things, flight/fight or freeze.
Roux: My lady, may I show you exhibit D, pages 26 and 28.
Roux: I will read it to you. What the state did to this accused was they told him that he committed a pre-mediated murder. What the states does to this accused, 3 to 4 days after this incident,
Roux: He hears that he got up from his bed, put on his prosthesis, armed himself and went to fire his gun.
Roux: The accused was told that he wanted to shoot, that is the cold facts. He then gets Mr. Botha to come and give evidence that the accused put on his prosthesis and stood in front of the door and killed the deceased in cold blood.
Roux: When asked where did he get that information from he said "He got it from the forensic team". When I spoke to Capt. Mongena about this, he stated that he could not say at what distance OP was standing.
Roux: If you think that the accused is not apprehensive after what the state was doing to him. It was plainly false.
Roux: When I spoke to Mr. Botha he then changed his story, he stuck to the 1.5 meters in front of the door. Botha then said it was an unfair question as forensic / ballastics have not told me anything yet.
Roux: We need to expose this to the court my lady.
Roux: Please that, that those questions where coming form the same person who stated that in cold blood he fired his gun.
Roux: I am not trying to justify what has happened but please consider this when we leave the court.
Roux: My lady, and I mean well. Can I read the Heads of argument, paragraph 1 by Mr. Nel. I have a lot of respect and regard for this person.
Roux: He ignores the first shot, he ignores the cricket bat. He ignores Mrs. Van Der Merwe who says she heard screaming.
Roux: What he is saying to you is, there could be an argument, there could be. If you combine everything, then you can get a conclusion.
Roux: But you g=have to look at the inferences.
Roux: The defence will argue that 90% of all the messages were of a loving manner.
Roux: You cannot quote a radio and say this is radio. This is law. We showed a clip of a loving couple and the court corrected me.
Roux: You will have to show this as an inadmissible, we cannot have the law according to Jacaranda.
Roux: That tells you something, that the hole is too deep. That he had to resort to this. My lady, with your approval, I am going to be very short. I am going to sum up the crucial points.
Roux: It is all in the 'Heads". May I make a very short submission then I am done.
Roux: You cannot over rule your own submission. What the state was doing was to go and fetch other cases to try and make their case stronger.
Roux: So what I am going to do is go and fetch other cases and use those findings in this case. You cannot do that.
Roux: Count 2 is the sunroof incident is when you consider, please also consider Mr. Fresco in count 2 further.
Roux: He contradicted himself. When he took a photo of a speedometer of over 200km and then said it was the accused. When corrected, he said "Oh it was me".
Roux: It came out also that he was assisted by Mr. Wits and another.
Roux: I don't find that the accused asked him to take the blame. So when you ask for the 204, you ask for the offences, it was not there.
Roux: He was all other the place. Why he stopped, the crumbling of the ticket. His evidence in chief, he was not only a poor witness.
Roux: Miss. Taylor she had more motive. The accused cheated on her. It is not good enough to say "I don't know". The reason for the shooting, she says she doesn't know.
Roux: They all agree that there was a shooting through the sunroof, but clearly the other two were contradicting in their statements.
Roux: There is a huge difference.
Roux: The third count - the discharge at the restaurant. 1 he pulled the trigger, 2 his finger hit the trigger by mistake and 3 there was a mechanical error.
Roux: Capt. Mongene did not test this weapon. Mr. Fresco did not indicate as to when last his weapon was checked.
Roux: He should never have handled that firearm, he should never had asked for it.
Roux: He says that he was negligent, he says he made a mistake.