Counsel clash as Panayiotou docket bid moves to high court

IN A move that saw counsel in the Christopher Panayiotou murder case bump heads in fiery arguments yesterday, the murder accused’s lawyers abandoned their application for copies of the docket, saying they would instead go straight to the high court for relief.

A certificate of urgency was then filed with the high court.

Panayiotou, 28, wants the police file so he can bring a bail application based on new facts.

The state is opposing this, claiming its investigation is not yet complete.

Panayiotou sat quietly in the Port Elizabeth Magistrate’s Court yesterday as Advocate Terry Price SC clashed with state advocate Marius Stander, at one stage telling him he was “not that important”.

Price, on instructions from lawyer Alwyn Griebenow, had approached magistrate Abigail Beeton in hopes she would order Stander to hand over details of his investigation, but then an issue of jurisdiction arose.

Panayiotou is accused of orchestrating the murder of his 29-year-old wife, Jayde, in April.

It is alleged he paid a former employee to hire hitmen to kill the Uitenhage schoolteacher.

Yesterday, the court was set to hear argument on whether or not Beeton had the jurisdiction to hear the application for copies of the police docket.

However, Price immediately asked the court to strike the matter from the roll, saying he would instead approach the Port Elizabeth High Court on a basis of urgency on Tuesday.

In response, Stander said it had been agreed between counsel, and discussed in chambers, that a bail application would proceed that day no matter what the court decided about the docket.

“Mr Griebenow said come hell or high water a bail application would proceed in this court on December 1.

“The high court roll was then reshuffled to accommodate this accused,” Stander said.

“December 4 is my last day at work [before going abroad]. All parties were aware of that all along. It was discussed in chambers that the application needed to be finalised by December 4, or alternatively stand over to January 11.”

Stander said if the defence planned to approach the high court on December 1, it was unlikely a bail application would conclude by December 4.

He said if a bail application did not proceed on Tuesday, then it should be placed on record that it was the accused who was not ready to proceed.

This caused Price to retort with: “This reminds me of the young man who murdered his parents and then used the fact that he was an orphan as a mitigating factor.

“The delays are the state’s fault. They have been holding their cards close to their chest throughout this case. We are trying very hard to get everything done as quickly as possible.”

They had since realised they had been wrong to bring the application to the magistrate’s court in the first place.

“If I read between the lines, Advocate Stander is implying we are delaying for him not to be here for the bail application. Well he is not that important.

“I do not want a situation where the application is brought with him out of the country, but we are talking about a human being’s freedom and if it must be done then so be it.”

Price said once they had perused the docket, if they felt the state’s case was as strong as it alleged, then he would advise his client not to proceed with the bail application.

“But if it is not as strong as Mr Stander suggests, which we believe to be the case, then we will go ahead with the application.”