An versuchten Verwirrungen, ist auch schon Roux jämmerlich gescheitert. Nicht umsonst hat Nel dem Gericht ALLE Fotos präsentiert und sich DAS EXTRA von der Verteidigung bestätigen lassen. ;-)
Van Staden vs Motha. Let's look at what we know.No further questions!
We have Van Staden's original, unaltered, sequential photographs. Verified independently.
We have no such record for Motha. All we have from Motha are a few images cherry picked by the defense in an attempt to test Van Staden's reliability and credibility.
Van Staden, as the official photographer, presented his evidence in court. He was cross examined in court. His evidence was tested. Motha did not testify. He was never cross examined. His photographs were never presented to the court as the official record, never mind tested.
Because Van Staden was the official photographer, and Motha was not, there is a chain of evidence for Van Staden's photographs. But no such chain of evidence for Motha.
Because Motha was not the official photographer he had no reason to ensure the date and time on his camera was correct. But the date and time of Van Staden's original photographs were independently verified image by image by the admin clerk. So we have proof that Van Staden's camera's time and date was correct. Not so for Motha.
If the metadata of an official image is incorrect, that metadata can not be used as evidence in court. During Van Staden's cross the defense questioned him about a photograph. Nel said: Look at the metadata. Van Staden didn't take this photograph. Then Nel laughed and said that the year was incorrect. So no further questions.
We have no verified record of Motha's metadata. The metadata of every single image Van Staden took were verified by the admin clerk.
Van Staden had no reason to lie about being alone. He was the official photographer and it was his decision to be alone. If he was a liar why didn't he just lie and say he wanted Motha there?
Nels Lachen ist ansteckend. :-)
Konnte ja selbst der Gerichtssaal nicht widerstehen.