From the moment three members of the van Breda family were found murdered in 2015, the public’s interest in finding out exactly what transpired hasn’t abated.

Last week saw the wheels finally set in motion, and whilst the use of live video streaming is still under appeal there has been no shortage of drama.

Court has been adjourned for the week, and will resume on Monday at 10AM, but let’s take a look back at some of the details that have come to light.

Front and centre is Henri’s account of what transpired that day, which boils down to a mystery attacker wielding an axe who laughed during the attack. Read Henri’s full version HERE.

Then the first officer on the scene, Sergeant Adrian Kleynhans, told the court what he found – including smelling alcohol on Henri’s breath. That account can be found HERE.

Everyone then headed to the house the family were living in at the time, where an in loco inspection took place.

Later on the court saw photos from the crime scene, and whilst the public was not privy to that it’s clear that the crime scene was a horror show (HERE).

Under cross examination from the defence Sergeant Adrian Kleynhans appeared to falter, Van Breda’s lawyers saying that he was misleading the court (HERE).

All of this leads us to today in court, where security guard Edgar Wyngaard took the stand. This below from News24:

Wyngaard, the night shift commander on January 26, 2015, was called as the State’s third witness on day six of Henri van Breda’s trial.

He said he drove past the family home six or seven times during patrols and everything was in order.

He received no complaints from residents, who acted as an additional set of eyes and ears.

When later asked to check the fence and camera footage, he found nothing unusual…

Wyngaard’s testimony revolved around the strict security measures in place at the upmarket estate. These included electric fences, bloodhound patrols and registration processes for visitors.

He told prosecutor Susan Galloway that any builders who wanted access had to register at reception, and offer their IDs and fingerprints.

They were only allowed to work until late if the owner gave permission. This permission was noted on the system and security made sure that they were escorted off the property when done.

He believed it was impossible for anyone to gain unauthorised access.

Under cross-examination, he was asked by Matthys Combrink on the likelihood of someone jumping over the electric fence using insulated material.

Wyngaard felt it was either impossible or very risky.

You can bet that Henri’s team is going to nitpick the hell out of every last detail, and I know that’s how and why the law works, but given what we know so far it’s very difficult to find any explanation other than Henri as the attacker being plausible.

Such is the law, I suppose.

[source:news24]