Roux: You cannot do that. The third point that we will deal with that the state said the accused was not confronted as a anxious person.
Roux: The state made a submission that it was a good evening and there was nothing to be anxious apart. All we are saying if that it will in the sub-conscious level. It all depends on the anxiety and on the evidence.
Judge: Was that the evidence?
Roux: Yes, it was given in evidence.
Roux: Then on the acoustic, if I may just make this point. We must determine the difference between intelligible and audible. Then the state that we were unfair saying that the state did not call the accused a liar.
Roux: We have the page numbers, ......., .............., 1685.1621 and 1743, were the states said "you are lying".
Roux: Then when the state submitted that the state is not there to play chess against the state.
Roux: Van Staden and Van Rensburg did their best to create the impression that they were alone at the crutial stage of the investigation.
Roux: So it is not just to say you don't have to call a witness. It is a situation where the state is in possession of affidavits of other policeman saying that they were there.
Roux: That is where the problem came in, to try and call other witnesses. We also know that the other policeman that was there was Hilton Botha. When we asked if the state was going to call him, we were told that they do not know if they were going to.
Roux: To demonstrate to you the serious nature of this state. "Who would take the fan and move it?"
Roux: Page 1684, line 16 to 25.
Roux: It was repeatedly put to the accused and the accused accepted it.
Roux: That is where the accused said I agree but that is not where it was. Page 834, he says he was in the bathroom , then in the bedroom and then walked to the balcony.
Roux: He says in re-examination, he does not know if the fan was on.
Roux: How my lady, would he have walked there if the fan was there. It was moved.
Roux: I can understand that, that is not all the accused was saying. Van Staden tells us that he picked up the carpet.
Roux: We know things like this happen. The state is saying that we are coming with a conspiracy theory.
Roux: My lady, I will show you another example. The extension cord that is missing.
Roux: We asked the state to please show us a photo as to how the plug was plugged into the extension cord.
Roux: They did yesterday, and it was seen that the extension cord was in fact longer then originally thought. It stands at the foot of the be.
Roux: Col. Van Staden states that he did not touch anything, I asked him if he is sure. He stated that he is. Then we show him a photo sitting with his hands on the clipper.
Roux: His answer to the photo was that he was testing the extension cord.
Roux: What he doesn't tell us what the position was of the multiplug, we don't know as we cannot find the time on the photo. We know that the curtains were moved.
Roux: The second part is this, we tried to understand the states case. The states will on the one hand say that Van der Merwe heard a female voice and then the shots.
Roux: The state will also then say that the other witnesses say they heard screaming and then the shots. That cannot be because then Van Der Merwe was wrong.
Roux: Van Der Merwe was not sleeping it was translated incorrectly. She stated that "sy het op gestaan" (she got up / or stood up). She was not sleeping.
Roux: On page 13 dealing with count 3 dealing with the shooting in the restaurant.