Van Der Vyfer Ruling Overturned

LazyLion

LazyLion

King of de Jungle
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
107,423
Reaction score
9,942
Location
District 9
The police ministry has won an appeal against Fred van der Vyfer, who successfully sued the State for maliciously prosecuting him for the murder of his girlfriend Inge Lotz.

The Supreme Court of Appeal on Thursday overturned an earlier finding by the Cape Town High Court that the ministry could be held liable for damages following Van der Vyfer's prosecution for Lotz's murder in 2005. He was acquitted in November 2007.

The appeal court found Van der Vyfer failed to prove malicious intent on the part of police officers investigating the crime.

It was "far more probable" that police had made a mistake with fingerprint evidence than that there had been a "complicated fraudulent scheme" by officers against Van der Vyfer.

It set aside the earlier ruling with costs, finding that since Van der Vyfer's civil or constitutional claim against the police was based on the same premise, those could not succeed either.

Lotz was found beaten and stabbed to death in her Stellenbosch flat in 2005.


Source : Sapa /ef/hdw/th/jk
Date : 28 Mar 2013 14:04
 
Wow he is going to be pissed off he would have scored a fortune
 
alf101 said:
Well, it's general knowledge that he was at work at the time.


http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-afr...t-1.297208?ot=inmsa.ArticlePrintPageLayout.ot

http://www.legalbrief.co.za/article.php?story=20110420082144672
Click to expand...

marine1 said:
Seem to remember something on Carte Blanche about it but thought they , the so called experts said, that it was without doubt him, and that the fingerprint expert for the accused basically lied.
Click to expand...

There is always that little niggle of doubt: according to the security cameras at his office, he did not leave. He never left the building according to the card system for exit and entry. That makes it highly unlikely that he left the building in that time period. We all know of course that these systems could be dodged but for that you would have to have done some serious pre-planning.

And then there are the private detectives that are of the opinion that one of Inge/Fred's friends killed her.
 
blunomore said:
There is always that little niggle of doubt: according to the security cameras at his office, he did not leave. He never left the building according to the card system for exit and entry. That makes it highly unlikely that he left the building in that time period. We all know of course that these systems could be dodged but for that you would have to have done some serious pre-planning.

And then there are the private detectives that are of the opinion that one of Inge/Fred's friends killed her.
Click to expand...

I worked in the building for a few years, and yes it is possible to get out and back in undetected.
But very risky if he got spotted on either trip.

Leaving Mutual at 15:30, you'll take an hour just to get to the N2, no way he had enough time for that.


Just way to many stuff could go wrong.
 
alf101 said:
I worked in the building for a few years, and yes it is possible to get out and back in undetected.
But very risky if he got spotted on either trip.

Leaving Mutual at 15:30, you'll take an hour just to get to the N2, no way he had enough time for that.


Just way to many stuff could go wrong.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Just playing devil's advocate.

alf101 said:
Did he make calls on it?
What did the records show?
Click to expand...

I don't know what happened to my book I had read on the case, I think I borrowed it to someone! It contained detailed info such as this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X