Inge Lotz Murder: Defence calls for discharge
Monday, July 3oth, saw the resumption of the Fred van der Vyver trial. Advocate Dup de Bruyn began arguing for his clients discharge at the end of the states case against him.
Dup de Bruyn said that there was no evidence that Fred had any motive to kill Inge Lotz. He also had no plan or opportunity to have committed the murder. De Bruyn went on to say that there was no evidence that Fred had a guilty conscience after the killing.
He told of how Fred had collapsed in tears when told about the murder, how he kept the alleged murder weapon in his bakkie and even told the police about it. He further mentioned that Fred had willingly taken a lie detector test and had complained that the police were not acting quick enough.
In terms of the evidence, de Bruyn said that there was no evidence of blood or genetic material on the hammer and that the state had not proven that there was any link between the hammer and the murder at all.
The bloody shoe print was also brought up which de Bruyn described as a ‘a mess’.
His major motivation to the court in having the case discharged was that even if Fred presented no evidence at this stage, there could never be a finding of guilt based on any of the evidence given by the prosecution.
Dup de Bruyn was also highly critical of the police and said that they had been determined to nail Van der Vyver “come what will”. In regards to the fingerprint on the DVD case, he cast doubt on the fairness of it as the evidence had not been kept by the police and that further evidence had deliberately been witheld by them.
“In fact, it could be argued that there was fraud involved with the print.”
The State will reply to the defence application on Wednesday.
———————————————————
Comments:
As I said in an earlier article, I agree with what Dup de Bruyn said. The State made a huge mess of this case and I really can’t believe that they felt that they were even close to be ready for trial.
The lack of evidence in this case is really startling. As I have covered in the previous articles, there is not one bit of tangible proof that Fred was involved in the murder at all.
The farce over the shoe print was also startling. Did the State think that the defence would not check on the evidence and speak to the experts? To blatantly lie and try to deceive the court is unforgivable in any justice system. I sincerely hope that there is retribution for this.
As I have also said previously, this case has not been about whether Fred is guilty or innocent. Rather it has been about whether it was possible or impossible for him to have done it. The result is that even though this case will probably be ruled in Fred’s favour, there will always be that small part of doubt in my mind. Imagine what it would be like for the Lotz family.
At this stage I think that the State should just admit defeat and end the case against Fred. There is no logical reason why they should continue as it has been clearly obvious to all observers what the final result will be. Why waste tax payers money pursuing something that was lost long ago?
Let’s wait and see what Wednesday brings …
Related Posts:
Loading ...
July 31st, 2007 at 12:42 pm
What is sad about this trial is the way that the media covers it. If you read IOL updates, written by Karen Breytenbach, you would believe he is guilty. Read Die Burger updates, you actually get a more objective feel to it, where the prosecution blunders are actually reported.
If you read the very first reporting’s on the case by Rapport, you would have concluded immediately that Fred is the man!
You also have to ask to what lengths the police will go, in order to save face and not lose their jobs.
I have heard of a police “urban legend”. The legend has it that you “plant” evidence when you believe you have the culprit. The planted evidence is then used to obtain a search warrant, the warrant being used to get the actual evidence that would be used in the prosecution. The planted evidence is then not even presented in court.
Hmmm…….sounds a bit familiar doesn’t it? The only problem is if you eventually don’t find anything else. You are then left to defend the “planted” evidence as far as possible and scrap together anything else you can get.
Previous instances of manipulation or “planting” of evidence (in order to reach targets) was even confirmed in court by a fingerprint expert. He commented on other staff members that were prosecuted for this practice.
Did the state make a huge mess of the case? You said it!
Was it intentional? Only a few will know fore sure.
And what if Van der Vyver did not have the financial backing to dig as far as possible, as far as they could?
Would any of the clear blunders made by the investigators, ever have been brought into the open?
And what happened in other similar cases where the accused was perhaps innocent, but did not have the means to properly defend themselves?
As you commented, even if Fred is discharged, there will always be doubt in the hearts of the broader public, former friends and colleagues as well as his would have been “second familyâ€.
I personally, am of the opinion that Fred is innocent.
But Fred will definitely not be the winner, whatever the outcome…………
August 1st, 2007 at 12:12 pm
I agree that the reporting was poorly done, always putting doubt in the readers mind.
As Fred was growing up before us (friends of his parents), we got to know his heart. This we said from the beginning and we stick to it: He definately did not and could not commit this crime - he is innocent.
What is sad is that the real criminals is still out there, hiding their evidence as the state pursue Fred.
Is it police ego that stood in the way of the truth …..
We constantly pray for Fred, who lost the love of his life, and his parents, as you all should do too.