Key ruling awaited in Schiefer trial

DOUBLE murder suspect Romeo Schiefer can expect to hear on July 27 whether an alleged confession that he made after being arrested over the murder of his parents will become evidence in his trial.

Schiefer’s trial in the High Court in Windhoek was postponed for five weeks yesterday, after Judge Naomi Shivute had heard the last arguments in a trial within a trial on the admissibility of an alleged confession that Schiefer made to a Police officer on the day after his parents’ violent deaths.Schiefer is accused of murdering his parents, Frans and Francina Schiefer (both aged 50), in their home in Windhoek’s Khomasdal residential area on the evening of January 18 2008. He is denying the charges.Schiefer’s father was killed with a single gunshot to the head. His mother was stabbed with a knife or knives and shot at least nine times.The evidence on which the prosecution is basing its case against Schiefer includes a statement that he made to a Police officer, Chief Inspector Gerrit Viljoen, on the day after the double murder.Defence lawyer Winnie Christians has however objected to the use of the statement, which is claimed to be a confession by Schiefer.His objection resulted in a trial within a trial to determine the admissibility of the statement. The trial within a trial is set to culminate in Judge Shivute’s ruling on July 27.Christians argued before Judge Shivute last week that Schiefer, who was not yet 19 years old at the time of his parents’ murder, did not properly understand the explanation of his rights that was given to him before he made the statement to Viljoen.If Schiefer knew that he had the right to have a legal representative present to assist him before he made the statement, and if he had been informed of the seriousness of the charges he was facing and of the serious consequences that a confession could have for him, he would have exercised the right to first consult with a lawyer, Christians argued.He also argued that the court had to be cautious, when there is little other evidence against an accused person, to allow a confession to be used as evidence against the person.During the trial within a trial Schiefer also claimed that one of the Police officers involved in his interrogation had instructed him what to say in the statement that he made to Viljoen.Deputy Prosecutor General Belinda Wantenaar argued that Schiefer was a poor witness who contradicted himself on several points in his testimony.She argued that the statement contained personal information about Schiefer – such as that he had failed Grade 10, that he had gone to Namcol to get his examination results before his parents were killed, and that he had consulted a psychologist as a child – which the Police would not have known about and thus would not have been able to instruct Schiefer to relate to Viljoen.She asked the judge to reject the claim that Schiefer was forced or pressured into making the statement.Viljoen testified that he informed Schiefer of his rights – such as the right to legal representation and the right to apply for legal aid, and that he was not obliged to make a statement – before Schiefer told him that he preferred to make a statement on his own and that what he was about to say would be the truth, Wantenaar also recounted in her arguments.Schiefer has remained in custody since being arrested on January 19 2008.