Prosecutor Louis van Niekerk had talked about whereas cross-examining Perumal that no faeces was discovered on Susan’s robe.
He mentioned state pathologist Dr Asmal Coetzee-Khan, who visited the scene and did the primary post-mortem, had famous faecal soiling within the buttock space however no staining to the again of the lavatory door or to the robe.
ALSO READ: Defence pathologist agrees Susan Rohde’s neck accidents may have been brought on by throttling, guide strangulation
Van Niekerk gave the impression to be testing the model of her husband Jason Rohde, who testified that Susan had not been nude when he discovered her corpse suspended from a hook behind the resort toilet door in July 2016.
“I should be clear: Susan was not bare. She was sporting a robe,” the adamant businessman testified on the time.
Though her demise was regarded as a suicide, Rohde was later charged for her homicide and accused of staging her suicide.
He has pleaded not responsible to the fees.
‘Contamination’ solely possible rationalization
Primarily based on the findings of Coetzee-Khan, the State is of the view that Susan was smothered and strangled.
Perumal mentioned that one of many outcomes of asphyxia [deprivation of oxygen] was incontinence.
He mentioned faeces was unlikely to have been discovered on the again of the door if Susan had a robe on.
ALSO READ: Jason Rohde: Defence accuses State of ‘character assassination’ of its pathologist
“The robe would have been stained relying on the quantity of faeces there was.”
“Contamination” was the possible rationalization he may consider for faeces being discovered subsequent to the physique, on the entrance to the lavatory door and on the entrance to the resort room.
Van Nierkerk requested if it was additionally potential that faeces was transferred due to Susan’s physique being moved from the bed room to the lavatory.
Witness adamant Susan was bare
“I’m not positive. If there was soiling current on Mrs Rohde and she or he was carried and dragged over this space, then it could have been transferred in that style…if the deceased had stool within the buttock and she or he was dragged.”
He mentioned her buttock space must be uncovered on this situation.
Lodge upkeep man Desmond Daniels was adamant in his testimony that he had seen Susan bare after unlocking the lavatory door for Rohde.
Quizzed on the marks round Susan’s neck, Perumal instructed Van Niekerk that there was a distant risk of a pre-existing harm from a finger on the neck with an overlying ligature mark.
ALSO READ: Jason Rohde: State highlights circumstances the place court docket rejected defence pathologist’s testimony
Van Niekerk questioned if Perumal, having been employed by the defence, subconsciously leaned in the direction of Rohde’s model when drafting his report.
Perumal mentioned he stood in court docket as knowledgeable and scientist expressing an opinion.
“I do not suppose any particular person can say there is no such thing as a bias that may creep [in] right here. However all the things I’ve mentioned right here I’ve mentioned purely on the science and logic.”
The trial continues.