The Griekwastad Murders. The Crime that Shook South Africa

347 Pages·2014·3.37 MB·English

by  Jacques Steenkamp

Published by Zebra Press
an imprint of Random House Struik (Pty) Ltd
Reg. No. 1966/003153/07
Estuaries No. 4, Oxbow Crescent, Century Avenue, Century City, Cape Town, 7441
PO Box 1144, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa www.zebrapress.co.za
First published 2014
New edition published in 2014
Publication © Zebra Press 2014
Text © Jacques Steenkamp 2014
Cover images © Mary-Ann Palmer/Foto24
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.
PUBLISHER: Marlene Fryer
MANAGING EDITOR: Ronel Richter-Herbert
EDITOR: Ronel Richter-Herbert/Bronwen Leak
PROOFREADER: Bronwen Leak/Ronel Richter-Herbert
COVER DESIGNER: Monique Oberholzer
TEXT DESIGNER: Jacques Kaiser
TYPESETTER: Monique van den Berg Set in 10.5 pt on 15.5 pt Minion
ISBN 978 1 77022 817 7 (print)
ISBN 978 1 77022 818 4 (ePub)
ISBN 978 1 77022 819 1 (PDF)
Contents
Acknowledgements
Foreword
1 “They are all dead”
2 Naauwhoek
3 Mourning
4 A new family
5 At the scene
6 The arrest
7 Meeting the locals
8 The bail hearing
9 For the prosecution
10 Incarcerated
11 Outcast
12 The appeal
13 In the dock
14 Hope for the defence?
15 The in loco inspection
16 The trial heats up
17 The postponement
18 The money runs out
19 Calling in the witnesses
20 The cellphone analyst
21 Trial within a trial
22 What the autopsies revealed
23 The evidence mounts
24 Blood always tells a story
25 The accused takes the stand
26 The verdict
Epilogue – The sentencing
To Nadia, Wyatt and Jared, because you are my light of love and hope
in this often dark, cruel world
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to thank my beautiful fiancée, Nadia Venter, and
our two children, Wyatt and Jared Steenkamp, for putting up with me during this
trial and for understanding that I had to spend many months away from home. It
was not always easy, but we made it.
Secondly, I would like to thank Marlene Fryer, Ronel Richter-Herbert,
Bronwen Leak, Kim Taylor, Amanda van Rhyn and everyone else at Random
House Struik and Zebra Press for believing in me, especially Ronel, for always
understanding that my day job kept me busy. Thank you all very much.
I would like to thank Bokkie Gerber, Waldimar Pelser, Herman Jansen, Liezel
de Lange, Joyrene Kramer, Gavin Prins, Jana van der Merwe, Pieter-Louis
Myburgh and the rest of my former Media24 colleagues who believed in me and
supported me over the years. We had good times while it lasted.
At the SABC, I wish to thank Angie Kapelianis and Foeta Krige for their
amazing support and for allowing me to attend the final part of this trial. I also
wish to thank the team at RSG’s Monitor and Spektrum for welcoming me into
their midst with open arms.
This book would not have been possible if not for the conversations and
guidance I received from Anastasia de Vries, Johannes Bertus de Villiers and
Hanlie Retief, who were my colleagues and are published authors in their own
right. Thanks for pointing out the correct path that I needed to take to get where I
am today.
I would also like to thank everyone mentioned in this book, especially the
hard-working advocates Hannes Cloete and Quinton Hollander, as well as
Colonel Dick de Waal and his team. You proved to the world that justice still
reigns supreme. The people of Griekwastad, you know who you are, but I would
especially like to thank Anton and Elsa van Niekerk, Bob, Henriëtte and Louise
de Villiers, Henriëtte Truter and Rina Liebenberg. You made my stayovers in
Griekwastad enjoyable and always kept the conversation going at Proviand.
A special mention for the armchair detectives on the Posklip Forum, along
with its founders, Dominic du Plessis and Layndon Wright. It was always
entertaining to read how you dissected each and every aspect of the case.
I would also like to thank my very first editor, Retha Fitchat, for seeing my
potential as a reporter long before I ever did.
And thank you to all my anonymous sources who provided me with valuable
information throughout the duration of this case.
Thank you to the families and friends of the deceased for always taking my
calls and for taking the time to talk to me. I hope you can find peace knowing
that the right person is behind bars.
Lastly, I hope such cruel and brutal incidents can be avoided in the future.
Deon, Christel and Marthella, although you will never know it, you touched
hundreds of thousands of lives with your story. This book is proof that you will
never be forgotten. May you rest in peace now that justice has finally been
served.
JACQUES STEENKAMP
JOHANNESBURG
APRIL 2014
Foreword
In South Africa, children under 10 years of age are irrebuttably presumed to lack
criminal capacity. Children or youths between the ages of ten and fourteen are
rebuttably presumed to lack criminal capacity, and for children over fourteen,
there is no presumption of lack of capacity, as the test for determining their
criminal capacity is the same as for adults. Section 7 of the Child Justice Act 75
of 2008, which came into operation on 1 April 2010, has repealed the traditional
common-law rule in this regard. Thus the youth of the accused may even serve
to exclude criminal capacity in certain circumstances.
This marked a significant change in the scope of criminal liability and even
greater change in the treatment of young offenders in South Africa (by
providing, for example, for “diversion” of offenders under the age of eighteen
[and in some cases twenty-one]). This essentially assists young offenders to steer
away from the rigours of the criminal justice system and into a process based on
restorative justice principles aimed at assisting child offenders in taking
responsibility for their own conduct, making amends and being reintegrated into
society. The law in this regard is voluminous and cannot be summarised here in
one or two pages without dwelling on academic arguments, case-law, or issues
where the substantive law and the law of evidence overlap.
Sometimes, however, the law should be strict, especially where the crime(s)
is/are so repulsive that the court should strongly censure an accused if found
guilty. The various judgments in the past, where minors were involved, often
reveal fairly widespread judicial and academic dissatisfaction with the treatment
of juvenile offenders. The same criticism could be levelled at our legislature in
that it seems as if society excuses those juvenile offenders most in need of
reformative or corrective measures. Society often cries out for retribution and a
total abolishment of too-lenient an approach. Of course, in all criminal cases, the
prosecution would still have to prove mens rea on the part of the young accused,
even if the young offender cannot rely on either the presumption of incapacity or
the defence of incapacity.
In law, the preliminary investigations into capacity always precede the inquiry
into fault (or mens rea), whether the fault required is intention or negligence.
The test of criminal capacity incorporates the capacity to appreciate the