News24

Cellphone evidence heard in Chanelle case

2012-02-15 13:24

Pretoria - The former Nigerian Olympic athlete accused of hiring the killers of a Pretoria mother phoned her estranged husband's best friend 55 times the week before the murder, the Pretoria Magistrate's Court heard on Wednesday.

Cellphone forensic analyst Francois Moller told the court there had been 55 calls between Nigerian Ambrose Monye and Andre Gouws and another 34 calls from Monye that Gouws ignored.

Gouws had phoned Monye 26 times in the week before November 8, when Chanelle Henning was shot dead.

Moller was giving evidence in a bail application by Gouws, who is also accused of arranging Henning's murder.

She was shot dead by two men on a motorbike after dropping off her child at a nursery school in Faerie Glen.

Moller said that all records on Gouws's handset detailing calls between him and Henning's husband Nico prior to the murder had been deleted.

Calls to Monye had also been deleted, but cellphone records had shown the deleted call records.

Henning and her husband were separated and were involved in a custody battle over their child.

Comments
  • Tracey.KitKat - 2012-02-15 13:32

    No hiding from technology these days even if you delete things it can still be traced and leave a nice trail.

  • sarah.bouttell - 2012-02-15 13:35

    hmm. bet Andre'Gouws is not feeling very friendly towards his "best friend", who seems to be doing a good job of "deny, deny, deny", while Gouws sits in jail thinking about how he was played...

  • Leroy - 2012-02-15 13:37

    only thing that proves is they talked?

      Marion - 2012-02-15 13:43

      Depending on the links that can be established between the calls it proves more than that they talked. I phone you, you phone John, John phones Peter, Peter phones John, John phones you, you phone me? Sequence of events...

      Henning - 2012-02-15 13:46

      Coincidence? I think not! So many calls between these suspect so close to the murder. Even I don't call my best friend more than 26 times a week, not to mention 55 times in a week. It might be circumstantial, but it sure as hell doesn't make them look innocent.

      Merven - 2012-02-15 14:01

      Yes, but not looking innocent isn't enough to proof that you are guilty. Hope justice prevails. If they must get off on technical points, it is going to be very sad.

      Leroy - 2012-02-15 14:01

      I see your point, it just seems like a waste if corruption charges can be dropped faster than light when there is lacking evidence. How are they going to get these charges to stick? i sure hope justice is served! Murder should never be taken lightly! South Africa needs to up the budget for Crime investigation, currently it is pathetic!

      Henning - 2012-02-15 14:48

      Lighten up guys...maybe a little positivity won't hurt eh. Remeber there might be a lot of other hard evidence that we don't know about due to the fact that the case is obviously still under investigation.

      Merven - 2012-02-15 15:18

      What bothers me is the fact that nothing is pointing to the husband yet, except a 'best friend', or does the court hope that the friend will spill the beans? The question is, will the other guys take the rap if the husband is the brain behind the murder? That said, if the husband is involved, but who got more motive than him?

  • Lee - 2012-02-15 14:12

    Surely they will not sit for the father/ex-husband. Unless it was arranged that a large sum will be waiting for them if they keep quiet, especially since our criminals get away with all sorts or sit for a short time.

      Merven - 2012-02-15 15:21

      Money is always a good motivation. If you are dirt poor, will you sit in jail for 20 years knowing for an example that your son will have access to college etc?

  • Schmee - 2012-02-15 14:13

    How can cellphone records show the deleted call records for one person but not for the other?

  • J-Man - 2012-02-15 14:14

    Yup - it doesn't help deleting your calls or wiping your browsing history... Big Brother is a mofo! ;)

  • Bernice - 2012-02-15 14:30

    I hope and pray that the father had nothing to do with this. But unfortunately the proof is in the pudding as they say. My heart breaks for this innocent child and Chanelle's family who are left behind with so many unanswered questions. Should the father be found to have had a hand in this, then this poor child has lost a mother and a father in such a senseless murder.

  • Herbert - 2012-02-15 14:37

    Gaan haal maar vir Pappie!

  • cosmos.ndebele - 2012-02-15 14:44

    This sounds like Discovery channel s FBI files!!!

  • Joao - 2012-02-15 14:44

    @Leroy : You are right. The charges cannot "stick". @Marion : "Sequence of events..." It does not prove anything other than "that they talked". Neither Gouws, nor Henning deny this?

      Marion - 2012-02-15 15:26

      Not disputing the facts that they don't deny talking to each other. Just pointing out that by the sequence of events, with technology, it can be proven who talked to whom and when. Truth is stranger than fiction so possibly Gouws had been spurned by Chanelle and arranged the hits himself... after all he was spying on the marriage counsellors office... anything is possible. As I recall there was a guy convicted of murder in SA based mostly on circumstantial evidence and even though the body was never found. So sometimes the charges do 'stick'...

  • Anne - 2012-02-15 19:04

    If they can retrieve the details of the the calls made between Gouws and the Nigerian why can't they retrieve the calls made between Gouws and Henning. Did it ever cross anybodies mind that it might not be Henning. Why will Gouws put his own ass on the line for someone else. Maybe Chanelle Henning knew something and threaten to talk and it has nothing to do with Henning at all. There are a lot of couples in custody battles that last for years and if the one die is the other automatically guilty? I think there's more to this case than meets the eye.

      Andre - 2012-02-15 19:49

      AG is the mastermind !

  • Shaun - 2012-02-16 10:36

    The husband has to be the one who instigated the murder - can only be him and nobody else and he will literally get away with murder if ignored in this investigation

  • pages:
  • 1