Shaun Oosthuizen and John du Plooy, the pair convicted of the murder of Barbara Fenton, which took place on September 1, 2018, appeared three times in the week of December 2 for the conclusion of their trial and again on December 9 to hear the judgment against them.
Last State witness
On December 2 the State called their last intended witness to the stand to complete their evidence.
The State called the pathologist who performed the post mortem of the deceased to testify about the injuries the deceased suffered.
The witness testified that during her investigation she found bruises on both sides of the neck of the victim indicating that hands and fingers were used to strangle the victim.
In her autopsy she discovered that the hyoid bone, the horseshoe shaped bone located in the front of the throat, was fractured.
According to the pathologist this fracture necessitates that a large pressure needs to be placed on the neck for the bone to fracture in this manner.
The pathologist concluded that the cause of death was manual strangulation, meaning strangulation by using hands.
The pathologist testified that a cloth was found in the mouth of the victim tied with a ligature in the form of electrical cable.
This ligature left severe marks in the back of the deceased’s head, but the witness indicated that this was not the cause of her death. Further injuries the witness testified to were a severe abrasion mark on the back of the victim’s shoulder and blunt force trauma wounds to her arm and thighs.
She concluded from these injuries that a large amount of force was used against the victim. Following her testimony the State closed its case.
Oosthuizen states his case
Following the evidence of the State, the defence indicated the intention to call both of the accused to give their case.
Oosthuizen was the first to take the stand and recounted his version of the events that happened on September 1.
According to Oosthuizen he and his fellow accused left Munsieville in Krugersdorp, which the accused described as a white squatter camp.
Oosthuizen stated they received a message from a Tannie Marie on Facebook indicating that she has goods that she would like to donate to them.
He reportedly borrowed the white Nissan 1400 bakkie that the pair was using on the day, picked up Du Plooy and left for Alberton, which he states is a 45-minute to an hour drive from their residences.
According to du Plooy they were looking for unit number three where Tannie Marie said that she lived.
They arrived at the first location in Raceview where the gate was opened for them and they went to the house of the second witness.
Oosthuizen said they were looking for Marie, but the witness informed them that she was not Marie but Marié.
According to Oosthuizen she directed them to another nearby complex.
There he said they met the deceased who went to look, in what he believed to be a residents’s book for Tannie Marie.
Reportedly they asked her to charge their phone.
Du Plooy then followed her to the bedroom for a charger and Oosthuizen followed shortly after.
There he said that he saw jewellery lying on a cupboard and decided on the spur of the moment to grab Fenton from behind and rob her.
Oosthuizen said that there was a scuffle between him, du Plooy and the deceased, which may be where the marks on her body came from.
He said that he tied her legs with a piece of cloth that was lying around and held her down as du Plooy tied her hands and gagged her.
According to him he then left the room to look throughout the house for more valuables, leaving his co-accused with the deceased.
Oosthuizen said that he then returned to the room and left the house with du Plooy, locking the front door and leaving the complex with the deceased’s keys.
In cross examination Oosthuizen denied strangling the victim.
Oosthuizen did admit that if it was not for them then Fenton would still be alive.
The State requested access to the Facebook message from Tannie Marie but Oosthuizen stated he does not have access and that they received the information from family members.
Du Plooy called to the stand
On December 3, John Du Plooy was called to the stand to state his case.
Du Plooy confirmed that the evidence of Oosthuizen was the correct version according to him and denied ever having strangled the victim.
In cross examination the State asked du Plooy whether it was in fact Oosthuizen who arranged the bakkie, pressed the buttons at the complex gates and did most of the talking.
Du Plooy confirmed that this was the case.
The State further asked du Plooy if Oosthuizen was influencing him as his uncle and he denied that he is.
The prosecutor asked what Du Plooy was doing when he was alone with the victim.
He said that he went to look through other cupboards in the room to check for more jewellery.
He denied again strangling the victim indicating that the marks on her neck might have been from the struggle before tying her up.
The defence closed their case following du Plooy’s testimony.
State and defence arguments
The State brought an application to reopen their case that was granted by the court.
The State recalled the daughter of Fenton who testified that the cloth stuck in the mouth of the deceased was always in the laundry and not in the bedroom.
The State then closed their case again.
On December 5, the accused appeared again for the State and the defence to deliver their arguments.
The State led their argument with that the most logical conclusion to be drawn is that the accused strangled Fenton.
They argued that time is against the accused, with the event happening minutes after Fenton’s daughter left and that the conclusion is that they came upon the residence standing open, and for them it was a jackpot.
The State argued that the accused attacked Fenton in the laundry where the cloth that was in the victim’s mouth is usually kept. Further they said that the principal of common purpose means it does not matter who specifically strangled the deceased.
Their next argument was that the tale of Tannie Marie was merely a cover story created after the fact.
The argument indicated that they were looking for soft targets and fishing for a place to rob.
The State requested that the court reject the version of the accused and find them guilty.
The defence in their argument stated that the only explanation that they can put forward is that during the scuffle in the robbery it might have happened that one of the accused accidently strangled the victim.
The defence’s argument was that there was an appointment to collect donations and that it was just on the spur of the moment that the accused decided to rob the victim.
Final verdict
On December 9, Shaun Oosthuizen and John du Plooy heard the guilty verdict in their case of the murder of Barbara Fenton on September 1, 2018.
The judge found the pair guilty on both counts, one for murder and one for robbery with aggravating circumstances, stating the principal of common purpose means the court does not have to determine who in fact committed the final deed of murder.
In his judgment the judge said that he finds the version of the accused to be false.
Their version is contradicted by their actions which the judge described as fishing for a victim and upon entering the complex of the accused, and seeing her door open was the opportunity they were looking for.
The judge drew upon the testimony of the state pathologist to indicate the severity of the assault on the deceased, stating that just tying the deceased up as they did should have been enough for then to complete their intended robbery.
The court indicated that a decision on who exactly committed the manual strangulation of the deceased, was unnecessary due to common purpose.
Common purpose states that when two or more suspects act with common purpose before the murder takes place then the other suspects can be held responsible for the actions of the one that committed the crime.
Thus the court found both suspects guilty of murder due to common purpose.
The sentencing of the convicted Oosthuizen and du Plooy will take place on December 11.
ALSO READ:
Fenton murder trial postponed to December 2
John du Plooy and Shaun Oosthuizen plead not guilty to murder
