Vermeulen: It could have been, my lady.
Roux: Mr. Mongena was in charge of the door at that time.
Vermeulen: I really cannot shed more light on this matter, my lady.
Roux: It is really that you asked about it. Let's take it one step further, the door arrived in the evidence bag on the 8 March at the scene. There we see the bag open, we see the door, the panels, and we can see the missing pieces.
Vermeulen: My lady, just to clarify. The piece of wood we saw on the picture yesterday, was in the middle of the passage. That I can remember now.
Nel: My lady, I object. Mr. Roux is putting the photographs of the 8 March to the witness. He did not show these to the witness before.
Roux: My lady, I will get the photos, in the mean time I will show the photo's of the body bag. It is AA.
Nel: I object, it cannot be AA. It cannot be put to the witness.
Roux: I withdraw that from the witness.
Roux: You saw the photo AA, what bag is that there?
Vermeulen: It looks like a body bag, my lady.
Vermeulen: I would not be able to say whether it is the same body bag as the body bag on the photo of the 8 March 2013.
Roux: You know which one I am talking about?
Vermeulen: Yes, it was the one you showed to me yesterday.
Roux: Now, we know there is a bag on the 30th, there is a door and there is missing pieces?
Roux: Your evidence, you spoke about the height of the door from the floor. So "When we put up the door at the balistics room, I did not go back to the house".
Vermeulen: Yes, at the house, my lady.
Roux: No, at the balistics room. May I read your evidence again. "So when we put up the door again, there at the balistics, It was no necessary for me to go back to the house"
Vermeulen: My lady, that is not what I meant. Mr. Mongena called me to come and see once the door had been put up.
Vermeulen: My lady, I am confident that when Mr. Mongena gets up on the stand, that he will say that the door was already put up on the stand.
Roux: I understand that. But let's look at the evidence. When you were confronted about the missing pieces. I asked you, when you arrived on the 30 April, you helped to put up the door. You then changed your version and said that the door was already put up. Did you change it?
Vermeulen: On the 30, the panels were not held up like it is now. It was kept in place with sellotape, if I remember correctly.
Roux: Can I understand you. That as far as you can remember the door was already in position.
Roux: Now, you told the court that. I want to take you to the precise place. That including you, that you are as much in the service to the accused as to the defence.
Vermeulen: That is correct, my lady.
Roux: And that was even so after you had read the version of OP at the bail application?
Vermeulen: I did not read the version of OP at the bail application. I said specifically that I only read it last week.
Roux: I said the version at the bail application.
Roux: But now you have read the version, now what now?
Vermeulen: My lady, the reading of it was not to acustom myself to it.
Roux: You say you saw the version at the bail application. You said, it was in general discussion at the court where the bail application was. You said "It that OP's version".
Vermeulen: My lady, I read through was was available to me. That I could see.
Roux: Could you not see in his version that he kicked the door?
Vermeulen: No, I did not see it, my lady.
Roux: Coming back, you were only focused on the marks that could have been caused by the cricket bat?
Vermeulen: Yes my lady. It was not my intention to investigate those marks.
Roux: Because you were solely focused on the marks on the door?
Roux: What about the prosthesis?
Vermeulen: I was intent on the mark on the shin.
Vermeulen: I was not requested to do analysis on the foot of the prosthetic foot, my lady.