The #1 Reason Why Susan Rohde DIDN’T Kill Herself

Jason Rohde’s defence has two explicit goals: firstly to make the case that Susan was suicidal, and secondly, to cast reasonable doubt on the prosecution’s theory of events.

If we invert the defence case and pretend Van der Spuy is the prosecutor, and Susan’s ghost is on the stand accused of murdering her self, could Van der Spuy get a conviction based on Jason’s and Dr Peter’s testimony [assuming the latter was admissible]?

In true crime, God and the devil are in the details. But often, especially in fairly simple cases like this one, the court gets sucked into the forest, and once deep within the verges of the treeline, we no longer see the wood for the trees. Once we hover outward and upward, like I drone, higher and higher, what do the woods reveal that ultimately decides this case on way or the other?

It’s quite simple. The vast majority of people who commit suicide suffer from depression. The number is about 2/3rds. That ought to be enough, but allow me to sharpen the details of the depression forest, and how it ties into a genuine suicide scenario.

  1. More than 66% of people who succeed in killing themselves have severe depression at the time of their deaths.
  2. One out of every 16 people [6.25%] diagnosed with depression, go on to kill themselves.
  3. People with major depression are 20 times more likely to kill themselves than the general population. 20 times more likely it’s twice, or three times or fives times more likely. 20 times more likely is a LOT more likely, like saying you’re more likely to die of a car accident near a road than away from one.
  4. Those who have had multiple battles with depression are at a greater risk.
  5. Depression and drug addiction of any kind raise the odds of suicide even further.

In order to make the psychological case for Susan committing suicide, we need proof that she had depression. Not that she was depressed. Depression. Depression is a totally different ball game to a temporary mood swing. A depressed person can feel better when circumstances change, someone in a depression is stuck and can’t fix, ameliorate or escape their malaise, no matter what they do.

The University of California provides the following colloquial definition of depression:

Everyone feels down at times. The breakup of a relationship or a bad grade can lead to low mood. Sometimes sadness comes on for no apparent reason. Is there any difference between these shifting moods and what is called depression? Anyone who has experienced an episode of depression would probably answer yes. Depression, versus ordinary unhappiness, is characterized by longer and deeper feelings of despondency and the presence of certain characteristic symptoms (see below). This distinction is important, because in severe cases, depression can be life threatening, with suicide as a possible outcome. Depressed people may also fail to live up to their potential, doing poorly in school and staying on the social margins. Depression is frequently ignored or untreated; the condition often prevents people from taking steps to help themselves. This is unfortunate, as effective help is available.

I realise the above definition isn’t very scientific, but it’s adequate for our purposes. There is a huge difference between feeling depressed and depression. Someone suffering from depression may clearly feel depressed, going through different coils of darkness and mental misery. Although a depressed person can become someone who suffers from depression, being depressed isn’t the same thing as depression.

suicide-records-1933_500

In 1929, the Great Depression [economic depression mind you] struck America and the world. People didn’t commit suicide immediately, in 1929, following the stock market crash. It took a few years for the economic depression to addle the mind – men lost their jobs, felt crap, fought with their wives, felt crap, lost their homes, and then once the depression set in and became severe hopelessness, that’s when tens of thousands of Americans elected to kill themselves. Suicide fever peaked in America in 1932, 3 years after the crash, at 23 000. The rest of the world also showed a similar rising tide.

the-great-depression-2-19-638

It’s a like comparing a cough or a sniffle to having the flu. It might become the flu, or it might now. When you begin to have symptoms of a cough, that’s different from actually having the influenza and being bedridden, completely taken over by the symptoms. Clearly there is a link between the cough and the flu, and someone with flu may cough.

What we want to know is where along the spectrum was Susan. Depressed, or suffering from depression? Coughing, nose running, feeling tired, or head aching, fever and a full-on debilitating mental flu that overcomes the whole body – mind, energy, motivation etc.

The above quote suggests that depression involves “long and deep feelings of despondency.” Did Susan have long and deep feelings of despondency? Clearly, she did. So clearly she had depression, didn’t she?

I don’t think Susan had depression, though she had good reasons to feel depressed and despondent. There is subtlety in the idea of “long feelings of despondency”. What that means is these feelings persist, they endure for a long period of time and eventually these anxieties begin to swarm and chew away at one’s resilience, gnawing away at one’s spirit, one’s esteem, one’s identity and one’s natural state of bliss.

Depression is difficult to beat precisely when the message of the depression is self-evident. It’s difficult to bullshit depression. Depression has a good reason for being there, and is an urgent message to the Life Force saying “please stop doing this to me, you’re killing me by continuing to go down this path…”

In order to disprove Jason Rohde’s version that Susan was suicidal, we have to know how depression works, we have to understand the psychological mechanism, we have to know ourselves and the circumstances of the case. Once again, we can appreciate all of this from the perspective of the drone hovering over the woods, rather than getting lost in the trees. What we want to know is how severe was Susan’s malaise? Was it very severe, severe, or severe but okay? What is the extent of her woods, the woods of her depression? Does it cover endless hillsides, or is a forest in a particular area? Is it a tall forest, a thick forest or an overgrown copse here and there needing to be tended to?

If Susan’s depression was severe she wouldn’t be able to face a fucking convention. She wouldn’t be able to travel. She would be on social margins, not drifting through them, flirting, dancing and confronting. If Susan’s depression was severe, she may have reached the stage where she’d begun to neglect herself and no longer seek treatment. Or she might become addicted to her medications. None of these things were happening with Susan. Depression makes a person unable to seek help for themselves, and yet we see Susan was talking to her psychologist while she was at the convention!

One strong argument the defence was able to introduce was that Susan sought help after attending a talk on depression and suicide. Does that mean Susan was depressed and suicidal?

Clearly, it means it could. But using the same cough-flu analogy, calling the doctor [a doctor who specialises in treating influenza] when you have a sniffle doesn’t necessarily mean you have the flu, although it could. It’s a great argument to introduce doubt, but it doesn’t make the argument that Susan had depression. There’s no argument that Jason’s affair depressed or, or that it was extremely depression, especially that weekend. The argument is, could a depressing moment cause a distressed woman to suddenly commit suicide. Again, this is like saying, can a cough lead to flu. It can.

The fact is, the suicide narrative doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The other side of the equation is Jason. When we add that aspect to the narrative, still using the flu analogy, then what we have is this: could someone with a cough get the flu, or did she already have the flu when she was in a room filled with people with the flu. The answer to that isn’t that Susan was suicidal, but that the flu that inflected her came from someone in her environment.

From the same University of California source we get these signs of depression:

  • Loss of pleasure in virtually all activities
  • Feelings of fatigue or lack of energy
  • Frequent tearfulness
  • Difficulty with concentration or memory
  • A change in sleep pattern, with either too much or too little sleep; the person may wake up in the night or early morning and not feel rested the next day
  • An increase or decrease in appetite, with a corresponding change in weight
  • Markedly diminished interest in sex
  • Feelings of worthlessness and self-blame or exaggerated feelings of guilt
  • Unrealistic ideas and worries (e.g., believing no one like them or that they have a terminal illness when there is no supporting proof)
  • Hopelessness about the future
  • Thoughts of suicide

Susan in some way or another suffered from all of these signs, but let’s face it, many of us do too. You can feel hopeless thoughts [for example about the future of South Africa, or at the prospect of going to work after a weekend, or when Elton Jantjies comes onto the field] without necessarily feeling depressed whatsoever. Having feelings of fatigue or lack of energy may be completely normal after a long day at work. It may have nothing to do with being depressed. A change in sleep pattern doesn’t make one feel happier, but may have to do with issues besides being depressed.

In other words, those signs of depression are almost worthless except to say in SEVERELY depressed people, many of these symptoms are not only present, but severely and permanently present. One could say some of these symptoms individually could become life threatening, such as weight loss, or sleep deprivation. In one area above all, Susan did have severe problems, and that was with sleep deprivation.

Overall, Susan had many of the symptoms and Jason knew she did. Wasn’t he counting on the evidence to work in his favour, assuming that Susan was depressed enough to reasonably make a case for a suicically depressed person [someone with depression]?

In sum then, this case is about whether we’re able to discern the difference between actual depression and something else that’s a few trees but not quite a wood. Can we tell the difference?

When you examine the #Rohde “depression” thread on Twitter there are a few indicators that Susan either was on the cusp of developing severe [suicidal] depression, or had just begun to develop it. That may work for the accused’s case, but even someone who has just developed depression isn’t necessarily at risk of suicide. It’s like saying just at the moment the flu hits you, do you take sick leave, jump into bed and shut out the world? Typically there is a period of resistance and denial, of fighting back, especially in the initial stages of the more severe malaise.

The fact that Susan was receiving treatment actively, right to the time of her death, clearly shows she wanted to beat the thing. Compare that to someone infected with deadly bird flu – H5N1 – who is so compromised they can’t gurgle to a doctor for help because they’re already in the process of dying.

The difficulty for the Judge is that there is a niggly sense that there just possibly is an argument [not in terms of the evidence, but in terms of the psychology] for Susan being depressed and having depression.

I would argue that that niggly sense isn’t enough. It’s unconvincing. It’s a clear cough, but it’s not becoming the flu, not until that cough is a lot worse. The irony is that incredible as it sounds, there is more evidence Jason was severely depressed than that Susan was.

BBITPV3download (3)unnamedeb846d3eb36641f4b967ebc73e4217e0

We’ve already seen. however, that Judge Salie-Hlophe didn’t fall for these shenanigans, which portends well for her not falling for the suicide narrative.

It must be said, if Jason Rohde did have severe depression in February this year, he made a full recovery within weeks, perhaps even days. There’s no sign of that depression now, if it was ever genuine to begin with, and there was none when he was on the stand in late May [just two months later] either.

Now, real depression doesn’t work that way. It doesn’t turn on like a switch, just as one doesn’t just suddenly get the flu. It doesn’t turn off quickly either, just as flu doesn’t disappear quickly. It’s a process.

The expert psychiatrist who’s entire narrative was thrown out diagnosed Susan with major depression. Again, I’m not sure if Susan could go from being depressed before the weekend to MAJOR DEPRESSION over the course of three days, or one particular evening, at Spier. In Jason’s version, Susan effectively went from depressed to MAJOR DEPRESSION between 03:00 and 07:00/08:00 on July 24th.

In order for depression to wear you down and make you suicidal, it needs time to infest and body and mind. It needs to push out the vital aspects, and spread its spiderwebs of malaise. Susan’s risk of suicide was higher, but so is anyone’s immediate after a break-up.

In the end, the #1 reason Susan didn’t have depression, let alone severe depression, at the time of her death is laughably obvious. If she had depression she would have been using anti-depressants. I had my ears pricked for that one word throughout the testimony. I was gratified when Dr. Peter listed the many medications Susan was on. Anti-anxiety this, sleep-remedy that, this and that but absolutely no anti-depressants.

You’d think someone with depression, and someone receiving treatment from it actively, and especially someone with MAJOR depression would be on the most obvious depression-related medication. Antidepressants. But she wasn’t. Why wasn’t she? Antidepressants don’t make you happier, they make you less sad. In some way they aggravate the original symptoms, such as loss of energy and fatigue. Susan was a fit and healthy woman. She wouldn’t want to mess up either her libido or her fitness by choking her body with toxic mind benders. Antidepressants are in that field of medication, just like flu medications, that can actually alter your mood, actually make you feel sick if you took them when you were healthy to begin with.

In the end, what we want to know is what Susan’s ghost would say on the stand if she could speak. If Van der Spuy asked her if she murdered herself, if she was suicidal, if had depression, the simplest response to dispel all this is one we already know. Susan herself didn’t think she had depression, and neither did her psychologist, otherwise she would have been on anti-depressants. She wasn’t. Susan Rohde didn’t kill herself.

Sue-Decor

The Rebecca Zahau case is a fascinating parallel to the Rohde case, and vice versa. My book on Zahau, the definitive book on this famous American case which also involved the death of a six-year-old boy, is available at this link.

Zahau

Jason Rohde: It’s a shame there was no livestream today. Here’s why [Analysis]

I arrived about 5 minutes late for the Rohde trial. As I stepped into court I was flushed with peak hour traffic stress. The hair on the back of my neck was still up. My heart was beating a mile a minute and suddenly, that square box all of of watched on our various screens…I found myself in that box. Suddenly there they all were – and there was Rohde, in his last hour on the stand. He was explaining that he wasn’t aware that he was bleeding that night. Day 44 of the Rohde trial was doozy, the irony is, on this day of all days, the livestream was gone – seconded by the all-absorbing Van Breda case, down the hall in Court 1.

Late as I was, the timing wasn’t bad. Van Niekerk was about to ask Rohde to demonstrate the gown. How had Susan been wearing it when she died. Court 22 is a helluva lot smaller and more intimate than Court 1. It also all happens on one level, whereas Court 1 has huge shelves for chairs, and an upstairs gallery that makes the whole room feel like a ship from Jan van Riebeeck’s era. Court 22 is so small, and there is such a small handful of people inside, it’s hard for them to not look at you. I’ve sat in on weeks of the Van Breda case and made eye contact…I can count the number of times on one hand [including today]. On Day 44, Rohde’s 6th day on the stand [his 4th under cross-examination as far as I know] there were fireworks.

For starters Rohde had his back slightly turned to the prosecutor as Van Niekerk addressed him, a habit he’d initiated since the day before. What you can only see when you’re there, is how it all fits together, and so, I was surprised that when Rohde answered, he didn’t address anyone.  He didn’t look at anyone. He sort of looked into the no man’s land below where the Judge was sitting, and slightly to the right of her. It was very bizarre. His shrugging, eyebrow wiggling and involuntary blinking was excessive today, perhaps the most of the entire trial.

Van Niekerk poked Rohde full of holes, asking him, for example, if he possessed a screwdriver [the tool the handyman used to open the bathroom door]. When Rohde answered that he thought he did, but wasn’t sure if he’d ever used it, you could hear a toilet flush. It was Rohde’s credibility going down the drain.

At one point, the Judge was stern with Rohde, cutting in and telling him to answer the question as it was put to him. I noticed her lips clenching slightly in frustration. It’s a pity this moment wasn’t captured on the livestream either. It was a very sharp and stern rebuke from the Judge.

There were a bunch of moments worth highlights from Day 44, but since I’m writing a book on Rohde, I’ll highlight just 2.

  1. The Gown

20180605_212857-1

You might recall from yesterday’s testimony that Rohde was adamant that his wife was clothed. Rohde claimed she was clothed [normal], but the handyman said she was naked. Both are somewhat true, based on the crime scene photos I saw. Susan was clothed in a gown, in the sense that she was lying on it. But she was naked in the sense that her breasts – everything – was visible. Why is Rohde so pedantic about whether she was dressed or not? Simple. If she was naked, it speaks to murder, to being killed in a way that one has no control over, and what’s more, the murder is so violent, one is “stripped” of what one is wearing. It’s also possible Rohde may have taken off her clothes himself, after murdering her, and washed traces of himself from her body. Then added the gown afterwards.

20180605_095651

On the other hand, if Rohde was clothed [in the gown] then the narrative that she got up and consciously decided to end herself gains a little more credibility.

During court today, Van Niekerk basically told Rohde, you said she was clothed – okay, show us how she was clothed… I was pretty gobsmacked that he basically just put the white gown sample onto the model as if it was everybody’s business – there you go. Gown on. Not even hanging off one shoulder? For Rohde it was no big deal. Susan was wearing a gown; so he puts a gown onto the model.

IMG_20180605_094710

But there’s a problem. Besides the belt being in the other room, there’s the potential problem of bloodstains not on the inside of the gown, but the outside. This could be seen when photographing the gown up close during the adjournment. This suggests that the gown was worn inside out. If so, then who is more likely to have pulled the gown onto Susan inside out, Susan, or the murderer trying to cover up her murder, and dress her, but not paying attention to the little detail of whether the robe was inside out or not?

2. An Emotional Moment?

Van der Spuy was also very flustered during Day 44. He asked for an adjournment, then seemed to ask for an extension on the adjournment. I left the court briefly as Rohde’s father was about to enter it. We had one of those moments where I’m moving left to allow him to pass, but then he moves the same way, and we end up sort of checkmating one another. I didn’t know the man was Rohde’s father, or the woman behind him his mother, I was informed a few moments later. But it puts things into a different perspective to know his parents are there, listening to him, believing him, evidently supporting him no matter what. Susan’s family, however, don’t appear to be in court.

1-IMG_6473

In the above image, it’s the man and woman standing in the corner, the man has a reddish sweater on, the woman a cream-colored jacket. The pair seemed a little haggard, or perhaps they’re just elderly. When I took the photo [above], the man seemed aware of it, and turned to avoid the camera.

1-IMG_6453

I was just returning to my seat, after photographing the front of the court, when Rohde entered the door. We ended up passing one another in the carpet space between the door and the dock. It’s a chilling moment, walking by a man accused of murder.

When Rohde was in the dock, I took a few photos of him. I don’t know whether he was nervous, trying to purposefully ruin the photo or involuntarily pulling a face, but as I photographed him his face – as far as I could see – contorted and gyrated dramatically. And then he looked at me, or glared, as it seemed to me.

But the real emotional moment seemed to come a few minutes later. The Judge had remained absent throughout, while various cliques started talking amongst themselves. I was chatting to a News24 videographer who wanted to know if I could speak Afrikaans. He wanted to know the Afrikaans word for “gown”.

Then, a moment later, Rohde disappeared. He was in the dock, obviously, but it was impossible to see him. I stared for a short while, wondering what was going on. Just then, a grey-haired fellow sauntered by the dock, leaned over and greeted Rohde like they knew each other. Rohde gingerly sat up straight, looking as if he’d gotten out of bed. I could be wrong, but my impression was he had keeled over to have a private moment, perhaps he was in tears, perhaps he was simply feeling overwhelmed. That was the last thing I saw before I ducked back into Court 1.

On Day 45 I will attend the Rohde trial exclusively.

More than likely the livestream will also be available.