Dean Charnley was shot and killed in a road rage incident in Kloof last year allegedly by Anthony Edward Ball who is on trial charged with the murder in the Pinetown Magistrate’s Court. Facebook
Durban — After being adjourned on Monday the murder trial of a pensioner – alleged to have shot and killed a man in an apparent road rage incident – would sit again in a little over a week in the Pinetown Magistrate’s Court.
The actual murder trial has been paused as the defence battles the State for access to the investigating diary in the docket.
When the matter resumes again on November 28 the State would argue in the application and the defence would reply.
Anthony Ball is charged with the murder of Dean Charnley, who was shot and killed last year in a road rage incident on the Everton Road turn-off from the M13 in Kloof.
In his not-guilty plea, Ball’s version is that he was on his way home, and while on the M13 Charnley tail-gated him.
On Everton Road Charnley stopped his Nissan in front of Ball’s Subaru and got out.
Charnley allegedly came towards Ball shouting and hitting the roof of his car with his hand violently.
A warning shot was fired out of the Subaru’s open window by Ball before Charnley reached him.
Ball alleges that Charnley grabbed him through the window and partially opened the car door grabbing the gun, which he still held on to, and the second fatal shot had gone off inadvertently during a scuffle.
In August, the defence said it would be bringing an application before court, after cross-examination of a State witness, Timm Wegmann, where it emerged that Charnley’s wife had access to the witness’s statement and that this statement had been made to police a month after the incident.
Arguments in the application are based on Ball’s founding affidavits asking for access, and an answering affidavit by State prosecutor Rowen Souls refusing access. Ball’s replying affidavit to the refusal is dated November 3.
The court also has before it short heads of arguments on behalf of Ball setting out case law in terms of the application as well as the State’s heads of arguments dated November 9, 2023.
Senior State advocate K Singh is acting on behalf of the State for this application.
In his arguments on Monday, advocate Gideon Scheltema SC, who is instructed by attorney J Botha, said they are asking for appropriate relief for access to the diary in the docket.
He said that there were a series of disputed facts in terms of what Ball is saying versus what the State was saying.
“The State disputes that a blood alcohol test (relating to Charnley) would have had a bearing in this case, and we say different.
“Souls said statements were obtained late from the witness (Wegmann) due to the police’s workload, but there is no affidavit saying what this workload was. We can get this from the diary and not have Mr Souls telling us this from the bench.
“The doctor testified that she was not asked to retain blood specimens … That is poor investigation, that is why the diary is so important,” he said.
According to the affidavits before the court, part of the reasons why the State refused the defence access to the diary was that the identity of informants, state secrets, and investigating techniques as well as co-operation between different law-enforcement agencies may be disclosed.
“I cannot fathom why no investigating officer would not put up a statement in the matter. If this diary is revealed too late it creates serious fairness issues,” said Scheltema.
WhatsApp your views on this story to 071 485 7995.
Daily News