Parole decision reversed Griekwastad killer to remain behind bars

A Correctional Supervision and Parole Review Board has overturned an earlier decision to release the man convicted in the 2012 Griekwastad murders, meaning he will remain in prison while prescribed corrective measures are imposed.

Parole reversal and ministerial review

In December last year a parole board had approved the offender’s release. Correctional Services Minister Pieter Groenewald referred that decision to the parole review board, and the review body has now replaced the original parole placement decision.

“The minister confirms that the original decision to place an offender on parole has been replaced by the Correctional Supervision and Parole Review Board in terms of section 75(8) of the Correctional Services Act,”

the minister’s spokesperson Euné Wessels said.

Wessels said the minister made the referral after receiving numerous representations from the community and after requesting and considering all relevant documentation pertaining to the parole placement decision. Following the review, the offender “will therefore continue serving his sentence and must comply with prescribed corrective measures within a specified timeframe before his suitability for parole placement can be reconsidered,” she added.

The murders that shocked Griekwastad

The killings occurred at the family farm, Naauwhoek, in the Northern Cape on Good Friday in 2012. The now 29-year-old man, who cannot be named because he was a minor at the time, was convicted in March 2014 of the triple murders, rape and defeating the ends of justice, and was sentenced to an effective 20 years in prison.

What the court found

Judge President Frans Kgomo described how the then-15-year-old went to the police station shortly before 7pm to report that his parents and sister had been killed at the farm. Kgomo said officers testified the boy appeared very emotional, with bloodied hands and a fresh scratch on his neck.

Kgomo found that the firearms used in the murders a .357 revolver and a .22 rifle were the property of the victims and had been taken from a safe in the home. He concluded forensic evidence showed the three victims were initially shot in the body and then fatally shot in the head, and that the sister was assaulted before being killed.

According to Kgomo’s judgment, the police found the house’s front door bolted and chained and the backdoor open, with the TV playing. He rejected the defence account that an intruder had entered unnoticed and also rejected the offender’s explanation that he had found his family already dead and taken the firearms to the police for safekeeping.

Forensic evidence and courtroom findings

The court record states blood spatter analysis indicated the blood on the offender’s clothing was impact spatter, which the state said meant he had to have been standing over the victims when the shots were fired, and not cradling them as his defence claimed. The state used ballistics and blood-spatter evidence to challenge the defence version of events.

According to IOL, court documents said scratch marks on the sister’s body, along with DNA matching her brother found beneath her fingernails, proved she had fought back during the assault.

Aftermath and next steps

The offender has already served about 12 years of his sentence. With the review board having replaced the earlier parole decision, he will remain in custody while required corrective measures are set and completed; his suitability for parole placement may be reconsidered after those measures are met.

Reporting draws on court judgments, parole board statements and IOL reporting.