Triple-murder accused Henri van Breda was arrested with his girlfriend, Danielle Janse van Rensburg, in Table View on Tuesday September 6 for alleged drug possession.
Mr Van Breda, 21, was out on R100 000 bail at the time. He has been charged with the murders of his parents, Martin, 54, and Teresa, 55, and his brother, Rudi, 22, at De Zalze golf estate in Stellenbosch on, January 27 last year.
He is about five months away from the proposed date for his murder trial. Now he will also have to fight a drug possession charge.
Western Cape spokesman for the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), Eric Ntabazalila, said Mr Van Breda had been granted R1 000 bail in the drug-possession case. Ms Janse van Rensburg is out on R200 bail. The matter had been postponed to Wednesday October 12 for further investigation. It was then postponed again to April 11 next year.
Mr Ntabazalila said Mr Van Breda had not violated any of his murder case bail conditions by being arrested for drug possession.
Mr Van Breda will be in court on Friday November 18 for a pre-trial conference. He faces three counts of premeditated murder, attempted murder and defeating the ends of justice, the latter stems from allegations that he fed police false information.
The Weekend Argus reported that the NPA had revealed on Friday September 9 that the allegations against Van Breda were not the same as they were when the investigation started. So the court case could hold a few surprises for Mr Van Breda.
“The indictment sets out clearly what is in the State’s case, contrary to what it was when it was still under investigation,” said Mr Ntabazalila.
Mr Van Breda’s sister, Marli van Breda, who survived the attack, was hospitalised with life-threatening injuries and underwent extensive surgery, from which she has now recovered. However, Mr Van Breda may not make contact with any of the State witnesses, including his sister.
He has been forbidden from leaving the Western Cape and has to notify the investigating officer of any change of address. The court papers state that there were no signs of forced entry and no items were removed that could have suggested robbery.
“It is believed that after the commission of the crimes, the accused tampered with the crime scene, inflicted injuries to his person and supplied false information to the police in order to mislead police as to the true identity of the perpetrator,” stated the court papers.