[imagesource:here]

It would be fair to say that forensic pathologist Professor Johan Dempers isn’t completely on board with Henri van Breda’s version of events, with yesterday’s demonstrations in the Western Cape High Court doing little to convince the expert.

The demonstrations centred around how Henri might have ended up with wounds that were so much different to those of his family, with this below from News24:

[Dempers said] that in his line of work he was taught to “never say never”, but the difference in the level of violence in inflicting the wounds on the Van Breda family to the injuries sustained by Henri showed no reason why the “assailant” would be “fighting differently” with Henri…

[Defence advocate] Botha put it to him that the two cuts on either side of Henri’s chest could have been caused by his assailant aiming for his neck and being pushed away, resulting in the uniform wounds being caused by one slicing action.

Dempers pointed out that it appeared that the cuts came from different directions, due to the curvature.

“If there was a slash, it would be very difficult to impossible for them to be exactly the same depth or morphology. They have the same appearance and same depth. The likelihood of this is very, very rare,” he testified.

From a second News24 article, an infographic showing the exact injuries Henri sustained:

Dempers further examined the possibility that the wounds were self-inflicted:

He pointed out that the knife wound was on the left side of the body, making it more possible that it was inflicted by someone using his right hand.

Van Breda is right-handed, and the fact was not contested.

Dempers also said he found it strange that Van Breda supposedly hit the assailant with the axe on the opposing shoulder to the hand holding the knife.

“The arm was there. It doesn’t fit in with what is expected to happen in a fight or flight situation.”

He told the court he believed the injuries to Van Breda’s arms and chest were more likely self-inflicted, and that the wound in his abdomen may be too…

Botha asked if it was possible that someone may have caused the injuries.

Dempers responded: “Yes, but the victim would have to be standing still. The depth and characteristics of the cuts are not in keeping with an attack.”

The idea that the wounds were self-inflicted was also backed up by clinical forensic specialist Dr Marianne Tiemensma, who testified last week.

The defence is also seeking to have Henri’s statement to police on the day of the murders inadmissible, saying that he “had not been informed that he was a possible suspect and had a right to legal advice”.

Innocent until proven guilty, but it’s tough to look past the most obvious scenario.

[sources:news24&news24]