Kotzé psychological report scrutinised
2013-04-22 13:04
Pretoria - A psychological report on the so-called
"Modimolle monster" Johan Kotzé is subjective, the North Gauteng High
Court in Pretoria heard on Monday.
Clinical psychologist Tertia Spangenberg initially said the
report was not subjective, as Kotzé did not know the criteria for dissociation,
and had merely answered her questions.
However, Judge Bert Bam put it to her that the report was
based on what Kotzé had told her. She agreed.
Kotzé is accused of orchestrating the gang-rape of his
former wife Ina Bonnette and of murdering his stepson Conrad, 19, in his rented
home in Modimolle on 3 January 2012. At the time, Bonnette was still married to
Kotzé, but lived in her own flat.
Kotzé's co-accused, Andries Sithole, Pieta Mohlane, and
Frans Mphaka are accused of kidnapping, assaulting, repeatedly raping, and
attempting to murder Bonnette that day.
Not accountable
In her report, Spangenberg found Kotzé was not accountable
for his actions.
"I am of the opinion that Mr Kotzé was not accountable
for the alleged actions of which he stands accused," she said.
"It is my opinion that the combination of Mr Kotzé's
narcissistic personality disorder, superimposed on traumatic psychological
injuries, combined with an unmanaged, long-standing, major depression and
untreated and unresolved acute stress disorder, resulted in a state of
psychological dissociation during his alleged criminal acts."
Bam asked her on Monday when this dissociation started and
ended.
She said the dissociation would have started during an
argument between Kotzé and Bonnette on 3 January.
Bonnette presented him with the couple's vibrator and told
him to use it on his next wife.
However, Spangenberg could not say with certainty when it ended.
She testified that Kotzé appeared to remain dissociated when he was in his car
after the attack.
Diminished capacity
Bam put it to her that Kotzé testified he had known he had
committed an offence when he left the house.
Spangenberg said Kotzé did not tell her this during their
evaluation.
She earlier told the court Kotzé's case was the first she
had done involving diminished capacity.
The defence for Kotzé's co-accused requested that it
cross-examine Spangenberg after the State, as it needed a report on Kotzé which
another psychologist compiled last year.