Thursday, December 6, 2018

Fred van der Vyver vs Heinrich van Rooyen


Investigating Officer Director Attie Trollip (unfortunately dead otherwise …) and Adv Christenus van der Vijver prosecuted Fred van der Vyver in the Inge Lotz murder and lost because Fred’s defense team could show that the forensic evidence had been tampered with to ensure that Fred was found guilty.   Fred was found innocent.   They had to save face, so a week later, when they prosecuted Heinrich van Rooyen’s case, the same two, Director Trollip and Christenus van der Vijver fabricated and tampered with evidence because they HAD to find him guilty.  Unfortunately, the Judge (Nathan Erasmus) also allowed evidence which was glaringly incorrect to be ignored and Price, his defense, did the worst job possible – completely ignoring glaringly obvious forensic contamination and fabrication and accepting the state’s evidence without asking a single question when it was most important.   Any first-year law student could have done a better job.   The real difference between the two cases was money!

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

Strange Evidence collection in Heinrich van Rooyen's trial

I am in possession of the court records of Heinrich van Rooyen, accused and found guilty of the murder of two girls in Knysna in 2005. In an affidavit used in court by Inspector Jullies - he collected evidence samples for the forensic laboratory he states that on 15/11/2005 he found hair and a black elastic band at the crime scene of Victoria Stadler and then FOUR DAYS LATER, on 19/11/2005 he found a pair of panties and a pair of ladies long pants AT THE SAME crime scene? He found something so small on the 15th but missed the large items and only found them four days later??  And the panties and long pants were lying THREE metres from where the body of Victoria had been lying.
Now look at this:   On the 17/11/2005, Heinrich van Rooyen was arrested as a suspect for both murders.  On the instruction from Trollip, Heinie’s blood was drawn “for DNA testing”.   He was released on the 19th 
Did Trollip contaminate the pair of panties and the pair of ladies long pants with Heini’s DNA and then place them at the crime scene so that it could be found FOUR DAYS AFTER the crime scene was investigated and on the day Heini was released?  

Another strange situation is that Peter McHelm and Victoria Stadler were booked on the same docket as having gone missing on the same day.  McHelm’s body and that of Victoria were found in the same vicinity.  How could Trollip separate the two crimes and let one Kamoeti and Moses go to prison for McHelm’s murder but pin the murder of Victoria on Heini?   Kamoeti tried to take an author to court for having used his name in his book (calling him a murderer, which he was) but Moses wrote an affidavit confirming their involvement in the murder of Victoria.  It was thrown out of court and Moses was poisoned a short while later.  One does not have to be a rocket scientist to realize who orchestrated the murder of Moses.    

Monday, November 5, 2018

Information regarding Lotz Murder Deserves Attention

Die Burger newspaper – Saturday, 03 November 2018.
(Western Cape)

Letter:  “Information regarding Lotz-murder also deserves attention.”

“It is good that new information received after the appearance of the sensational book The lost boys of Bird Island, is receiving further attention from the police.
            It surprises me however that another book, Broken & Betrayed, by former-detective Alan D Elsdon, enjoys no publicity. There was only one article in an Eastern Cape newspaper (the Daily Dispatch).
            Elsdon has since 2015 conducted continuous research into the murder of Inge Lotz and has discovered shocking new information and evidence.
            In my opinion, Elsdon has done outstanding detective work and the new information should also be brought to the attention of the police.
            Perhaps, at last, there will be justice for Inge Lotz.”

Schulza Rall – Sonstraal, Durbanville.
(Translated from Afrikaans)   “Inligting oor Lotz-moord verdien ook aandag”


Note:   Although this letter does not mention the Knysna Murders, persons who read Broken & Betrayed become aware of Heinie’s plight and the need for his cases also to be re-opened and investigated by the police.

Sunday, October 28, 2018

Latest on the Inge Lotz Murder


Latest 


Inge Lotz – Latest (2018)
____________________________________________________________________________

On Saturday morning 27 October 2018, Thomas Mollett held a Talk at the Library in Paarl. The subject was the murders of Inge Lotz, Reeva Steenkamp, Anni Dewani and the recent “Axe Murders” (Henri van Breda). Unlike some of his previous talks the once 200 audience was reduced to a mere 32 persons, 7 being members of the local police.

At his last meeting months ago in Milnerton, Thomas spoke of an “injury” that Inge had on her left hip. He added that it was in the form of an arrow. At the time of her death, at the autopsy and even over the past 13 years, no-one made any mention of the arrow “injury”. It is in fact a cut so thin and precise, probably a scalpel was used to cut the perfect arrow which points downwards towards her genitals. How did Thomas suddenly become aware of this so-called “injury” – as he plays down the gory message left on her mutilated body by one of the killers?

This was one of the reasons I attended the Paarl Talk, to ask that question and a second. The other question was to ask Thomas to explain how Inge’s “To Do” list she wrote on the day of her murder, had changed from the original when it appeared on his 2014 Truth4Inge site and changed again in his 2015 book “Bloody Lies Too.” This is nothing less than defeating the ends of justice – on a document that should have been handed to the police.

Thomas started the talk with Inge’s murder and an hour later, was still drivelling on about Fred’s fingerprints on Folien#1, which the police claimed came off a DVD cover Inge had rented the afternoon of her death. In court the fingerprint evidence was trashed by the defence and shown to have probably been deliberate fabrication of evidence. Late Director Attie Trollip was the police overall co-ordinator in the murder investigation.

From the audience, Schalk Burger senior (SA rugby legend), asked Thomas to stop misleading the audience and to concentrate on real issues in the murder, like the role played by Director Trollip behind the scenes. Thomas lost his composure and resorted to his well-known cocky attitude which had Schalk tell him just to get past the nonsense and talk some sense.

Thomas was clearly flustered and turned his attention to me in the opposite back corner. He pointed at me and said “Mr Elsdon” he shouted, “Why did you not Email your intention to be present and request a seat? Because ... you are not welcome here!” This drew a few piercing glares from some present, probably mostly those from “rent a crowd.”

Schalk stood up, as big a man I’ve ever seen and warned Thomas not to become personal in a public library forum. He challenged Thomas to try and book a seat at his own meeting using the Information site of Piquette Books. Schalk said trying to book a ticket was a hopeless exercise and waste of time.

Thomas ignored the challenge and looking at me and waving his hand to the door shouted, “Out ... out ... you are not welcome!” I asked him why he waited until then when he could have asked me to leave before he started his talk. Keeping the attention on me, Thomas told the audience, “He (Elsdon) has written a book that nobody wants to buy ... because it is not based on proven science.”

By then Schalk had had enough and told Thomas he thought he was coming to learn something scientific about the murders. Instead all he had heard was a load of nonsense from someone who cannot control his emotions. With that, Schalk stood up and left the room.

Thomas pointed at me again and yelled. “Out ... out ... now!” Just then the lady managing the presentation pushed a button. On the overhead, the magazine with a few drops of blood that lay across Inge’s feet when her body was found, appeared.

“Wait ... wait ... Mr Elsdon,” Thomas called, “How many drops of blood are there on these two pages.” After I thanked Thomas for allowing me to stay a few more seconds, I told him that whether it was three or four drops made no difference. What was important, is that they were drops ... not spatter, as one would have expected to find a metre away from the nearest wound (unless the “crime scene” was staged!).

Thomas shouted his last “Out” and I stood up at the same time pulling a copy of my book “Broken & Betrayed” from a plastic packet. I stood up and held it in the air for the audience to see and said, “Read this if you want to know the truth, Broken and Betrayed – Inge Lotz.”

Showing signs of an imminent heart attack, Thomas shouted, “Don’t you use my platform to advertise your book!” With that, Thomas came charging towards me like a mad bull. I sheathed the book just as he stopped within sweat-smelling distance from me. All I said to him very calmly was, “Don’t touch me ... DON’T touch me.” With that I walked to the door where I stopped, turned around and said, “Good Luck”, before I walked out the room.

At the exit, I saw Schalk who, when he saw me, just shook his head. We shared introductions and went to a nearby coffee shop. There we had an interesting chat for more than an hour. At the same time Thomas was completing what he is paid to tell the world ... the lie that Fred van der Vyver alone murdered Inge Lotz. This of course is calculated to HIDE the truth, that Inge was murdered by persons very close to her ... because she was going to expose their dark secrets, also, the horrors of her young life.

At a guess this will probably be Thomas’ last public Talk ... the Paarl Talk was reduced to free entrance, as were the drinks, snacks and his books – unless he pays the audience to attend his next Talk. The DPP probably will refuse my pending request to reopen the Lotz murder – despite massive new factual evidence to show a police cover-up, including four new suspects who lack in alibis, cellphone activity and other areas, the day Inge was murdered.

Submitted by Alan D Elsdon



Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Very suspect Evidence in Van Rooyen trial

I am in possession of the court records of Heinrich van Rooyen, accused and found guilty of the murder of two girls in Knysna in 2005. In an affidavit used in court by Inspector Jullies - he collected evidence samples for the laboratory. How is it possible for this to have happened. On 15/11/2005 he found hair and a black elastic band at the crime scene of Victoria Stadler and then FOUR DAYS LATER, on 19/11/2005 he found a pair of panties and a pair of ladies long pants AT THE SAME crime scene? He found something so small on the 15th but missed the large items and only found them four days later?? The number of glaringly obvious mistakes in court shows that the cops and prosecutors wanted Heini to be guilty and his defense was worse than pathetic.

Tuesday, October 2, 2018

Why is the Third Knysna Murder Never Mentioned

I have just read the affidavit from the court documents by Mashidiso Petrus Mokgosi, Snr Superintendent of the SAPS. It was made inadmissible in court (who decides what is admissible and what is not admissible?) but contains some valuable information regarding the link between the murders of Peter McHelm and Victoria Stadler. Why has so little emphasis put onto the murder of McHelm and so much on Victoria? Was it because they wanted Heini to be the serial killer of the two girls in Knysna? Was it because they found McHelm's car in Moses' possession so they automatically assumed that Moses was the murderer of McHelm and completely ignored the possible link between the two murders?
This is my opinion after reading this affidavit a number of times.  Moses and Kamoti asked a girl (allegedly by the name of Lucinda/Candace Damons) to lure Victoria Stadler to them.  Moses, Kamoeti and Peter McHelm had been drinking and driving his Polo VW which he had hired from Avis.  At some time he parked his Polo.  (Remember that Mavis from the garage had seen Victoria Stadler with three men in her golf in the early hours of the morning putting R50 fuel in the tank)
Moses, Kamoeti and Peter McHelm raped Victoria and murdered her.  They thought Peter McHelm would go to the police so he had to be murdered as well.  From the document I understand that the girl Candace or Lucinda Damons was the informer who would only speak with a specific policeman but later spoke to the Snr Superintendent above,  and was wearing Victoria’s earrings at the time of the interview by the above-mentioned Snr Supt.
The affidavit also mentions that Heini was the prime suspect (how did he know) and that the others who had been interviewed were not suspects (again how did he know)   


Friday, September 28, 2018

Witness Statement Discrepancy in Jessica Wheeler Murder

Heinrich van Rooyen - framed 
Alan D Elsdon’s book, Broken & Betrayed  (pg 279 – 282) describes the affidavit and the witnessing by JP of Victoria’s murder.  JP is the son of Mr Kobus Mienie, the bakery van driver who allegedly saw Heini at the churchyard in town in the early hours of the morning of the murder.  According to affidavits and cell tower reports, Heini was at home at Hornlee at 2.25am on the morning of the murder so could not have been at the crime scene at the same time.  According to JP, his father murdered Jessica.  Heini allegedly held Victoria’s legs while Kobus pinned her to the ground on her stomach, with his knees in her lower back and his hands on her head.   Thereafter, he made a phone call at around 3am in the morning.  Now if this call was made at 3am, and Heini was at home at 2.25am, he cannot have been at the crime scene.    JP did not take a polygraph test.  Heini also allegedly had a red top on.  He actually wore a grey Nike top.  His red jacket he had forgotten in the nightclub “Stones”, which he collected the next day.  JP was 14 years old at the time and the affidavit taken by Alan was ten years after the fact.  JP also did not do a polygraph test and it is a known fact that JP is a drug addict and has a criminal record that is fairly long. 
JP’s statement contradicts the car-guard, Jaco Kiewiets’ statement and who passed a polygraph test according to the first private investigator on the scene, Christain Botha, in his book, Search for Truth. 
Franklin van Rooyen actually introduced Alan to JP and JP never said anything to Franklin that Heini was at the crime scene at the church yard.   JP's father, Kobus Mienie and Inspector Burmeister (SAPS) are family and he knows everything about JP and Kobus’s involvement in the drug-trade.
In 2010 an inmate also gave a sworn statement in front of a magistrate in Mosselbay confessing his involvement with the Victoria Stadler murder in Noetsie forest and the police and NPA dismissed it as well.