Inge Lotz Murder: The Werner Carolus Story
Not much has been written about the other suspect, Werner Carolus, in the case. Information on his claims etc are also hard to come by. Luckily with a bit of investigation, I managed to get a small amount of information on it.
Below is the news article which was written in Die Burger newspaper. You can also see the IOL version of it HERE.
I have changed strategy a bit here and printed the actual article, along with my comments below each section. I did it in this case because of the small amount of information available, but also to play the devil’s advocate on what was said in court.
It is up to you to decide on what or who you believe.
Please comment on this story!
Man ‘confessed’ to Inge murder
08/05/2007 22:16 - (SA)
Marelize Barnard, Die Burger
A criminal from Springbok confessed to being involved in the bloody killing of Stellenbosch student Inge Lotz, more than a month after her death.
Investigating officer Deon de Villiers said in evidence on Tuesday during the murder trial of her boyfriend Fred van der Vyver, that he had been told on April 19 2005 of Werner Carolus’s confession.
De Villiers said Carolus’s confession concerned "a young woman who regularly bought drugs from us" and whom they had followed.
(Not true. There is no indication in any of the documents in the Carolus docket that the young woman bought drugs from them.)
De Villiers said in his testimony in the Cape High Court that Carolus had pointed out the Shiraz complex in Welgevonden, Stellenbosch.
(According to some sources he also pointed to the entrance to Inge’s flat)
"He could point out the complex but not the flat."
(In dispute - see above)
Knife, pair of scissors seized
After interviewing Carolus, said De Villiers, he had come to the conclusion that there was no link between whatever Carolus may have done and the murder case that he was investigating.
(That is De Villiers’ opinion. De Villiers had a motive to cover up the Carolus confession as the fingerprint fabrication happened under his tenure as investigating officer)
De Villiers said he had interviewed everyone implicated by Carolus - including a woman named Eleanor, who was implicated when Carolus witnessed a crime.
(Of course they may lie if they were guilty or had something to hide.)
Their fingerprints were nowhere to be found in Inge’s flat.
(This is true BUT only eleven fingerprints were lifted in the entire flat – only one of which belonged to Inge! How thorough was the search? See previous article HERE)
Carolus had indicated that the murder weapon was hidden in Krige Street, Stellenbosch, and a search was conducted.
A knife and a pair of scissors were seized and a certain Jaco Swanepoel’s car was searched for leads, said De Villiers.
A remote-control mechanism that De Villiers had seized and taken to the people who’d been involved in the Shiraz development, did not correspond with the mechanisms that opened the gate or unlocked the complex.
(Once again this is De Villiers’ story. There is absolutely no proof that the remote control which they tested is the one confiscated from Swanepoel’s car! De Villiers could have swapped the remote controls, and taken a different one! Do they have a chain of custody in place?)
De Villiers testified that he had discussed the matter with director Attie Trollip, who was co-ordinating the murder investigation.
(Can you smell a ’suspicious meeting’?)
Carolus later confessed that he had lied about it.
(This ‘confession’ about his ‘lies’ was only taken after they had already arrested Fred van der Vyver.)
Concocted a pack of lies
"Now why would someone lie about something like that?" asked Judge Deon van Zyl.
(A very good question!)
De Villiers said it appeared that Carolus had been involved in a drug deal and that, after being assaulted, he wanted to get revenge on someone.
(He implicated himself as an accessory to murder as well. Why would he do that? So who would he have revenge on?)
Carolus is serving time in jail at present.
(Not sure whether this is true or not. Convenient though)
According to De Villiers, Carolus had concocted a pack of lies in his sworn statement.
(Carolus’ statement does contain a lot of rambling, but then again he is 17, not in school, unemployed, and a self confessed Tik abuser.)
Once the Inge Lotz case had been finalised, there would have to be a further decision about whether or not the police would go after Carolus for obstructing the course of justice.
(I am waiting to see what happens with this!)
In the testimony given in February by sergeant Peta Davitsz, a police forensic expert, the court heard that there were traces of blood of another possible suspect on the knife, and that person’s house had been searched by the police.
(If the knife was used for a second stabbing, then the primary blood could have been lost. They could have washed the knife between stabbings.)
Van der Vyver’s defence team had placed it on record that the knife had been found.
During cross-examination by advocate Dup de Bruyn SC for the defence, he put it to the investigating officer that other people had made statements to the effect that Carolus had admitted to murdering Inge.
(What happened to these statements?)
De Villiers replied that Carolus had not killed Inge, "but a person".
(Word play. I also wonder who is this mysterious ‘person’ and why hasn’t Carolus been charged for this murder?)
"But a student in the complex? asked De Bruyn.
De Villliers replied that it was not stated that Carolus had killed Inge.
(True. Carolus stated that he did not kill her, but he was with the group who did. Still, just an evasive play on words)
Witnesses went home to Mozambique
The last witnesses to have seen Inge at her flat were employees of Quick Con Construction, but they could not be traced by the police.
(Why the hell not? They were important to the case and also in most crimes of this nature, the last people to see a victim alive usually become suspects!)
De Villiers said on Tuesday that the company had been liquidated and that the temporary employees had returned to Mozambique.
(Conveniently)
According to the defence, they had important information, because they could give the time that Inge was at her flat.
(
Absolutely!)
The case continues.
Related Posts:
Loading ...