On the fourth day of sentencing proceedings in the Johannesburg High Court, which coincided with her birthday, Amber Lee Hughes returned to the witness stand, where she was cross-examined by state advocate Rolene Barnard.

Southern Courier reports that the court heard exchanges relating to messages Hughes sent during the period of her relationship with Elie Challita, as well as her claims about the welfare and schooling of four-year-old Nada-Jane.

Proceedings continue as the court considers factors relevant to sentencing.

@southern.courier

On the fourth day of sentencing proceedings in the Johannesburg High Court, which coincided with her birthday, Amber Lee Hughes returned to the witness stand, where she was cross-examined by State advocate Rolene Barnard. The court was referred to a report compiled by social worker Carina Wolmarans regarding Hughes’ employment. Full story on southerncourier.co.za

♬ original sound – Southern Courier

‘What I did was incomprehensible’

During cross-examination, Barnard referred Hughes to messages she sent on the day of an argument with Challita, including one in which she wrote: “I can’t apologise anymore because I know what I did was incomprehensible. I didn’t leave in peace, but I will leave you in peace now.”

When asked what she meant by ‘incomprehensible’, Hughes told the court that she and Challita had argued after she confronted him about alleged infidelity and that he wanted her to leave the house.

@southern.courier

During cross-examination, Barnard referred Hughes to messages she sent on the day of an argument with Challita, including one in which she wrote: “I can’t apologise anymore because I know what I did was incomprehensible. I didn’t leave in peace, but I will leave you in peace now.” When asked what she meant by “incomprehensible,” Hughes told the court that she and Challita had argued after she confronted him about alleged infidelity and that he wanted her to leave the house. In another message shown in court, Hughes wrote: “I tried to hurt you because you hurt me.” Full story on southerncourier.co.za

♬ original sound – Southern Courier

In another message shown in court, Hughes wrote: “I tried to hurt you because you hurt me.”

Barnard put it to her that the message suggested a motive linked to emotional hurt. Hughes confirmed she had sent it but denied it meant she intended to harm the child. She also denied ever telling him she would ‘burn his heart’.

@southern.courier

The State questioned Hughes about her claims that Nada-Jane had been neglected. Hughes testified that she had concerns about the child’s schooling and said both she and the biological mother had raised complaints when the child was removed from Baby Steps Early Learning Centre and later attended a school linked to Edenvale Child Welfare. Full story on southerncourier.co.za

♬ original sound – Southern Courier

Dispute over Nada-Jane’s welfare

The state questioned Hughes about her claims that Nada-Jane had been neglected.

Hughes testified that she had concerns about the child’s schooling and said both she and the biological mother had raised complaints when the child was removed from Baby Steps Early Learning Centre and later attended a school linked to Edenvale Child Welfare.

She alleged that Challita had interactions with Edenvale Child Welfare and claimed he paid social workers, an allegation that prompted the state to caution her against introducing bad character evidence.

Messages shown in court revealed that she enquired several times about meetings with social workers. In one message she wrote: “I hope the social workers see how amazing my boyfriend is as a dad. They are going to love Nada and see how well you’re raising her.”

When asked about the contradiction between that message and her testimony that the child was being neglected, Hughes said at the time she was still getting to know Challita and would not have discussed welfare matters in text messages. She maintained that conversations about the child’s well-being took place in person.

Employment concerns raised

The court was referred to a report compiled by social worker Carina Wolmarans regarding Hughes’ employment.

According to the report, concerns were raised about her emotional state and her ability to continue working at the school. It stated that she was regarded as a danger to the children at the school and was requested to resign.

When asked whether she wished to change any aspect of her previous testimony, Hughes said she did not.

Sentencing proceedings continue.

Breaking news at your fingertips… Follow Caxton Network News on Facebook and join our WhatsApp channel.

Nuus wat saakmaak. Volg Caxton Netwerk-nuus op Facebook en sluit aan by ons WhatsApp-kanaal.