This emerged at the Western Cape High Court on Monday when Kirstenhof police officer Reece Harvey painted a timeline of events where Packham’s cellphone activity placed him in the vicinity of the scene where Gill’s body was found on February 22 last year.
Harvey said he had analysed cellphone data on Packham’s phone after he was “initially requested to analyse data and determine calls between Packham, Gill, Packham’s daughter, Nicola, and the (Springfield) school” at which Gill worked but did not arrive on the day of her disappearance.
Her body was found in the boot of her burning BMW at the Diep River train station.
“I was provided with call data from the accused’s phone over a specified period,” he said.
Harvey then constructed a timeline of suspected events from the cellphone data received from Packham’s “main and discreet phone”.
The State yesterday wrapped up its case and the defence will today present its case.
Two police officers are set to give evidence on “formal aspects of giving affidavits”, said defence attorney Craig Webster. Previously, Packham’s defence team argued that his arrest was illegal as there was “no arrest warrant”.
Packham is expected to take the stand after court comes back from recess next month.
He has pleaded not guilty to the murder of his wife and maintains that despite his having had a three-year affair, the couple were “working on their marriage” as they attended marriage counselling.
His former mistress, who cannot be named per court order, told the court last week that she and Packham continued with their relationship after his wife’s disappearance but she had terminated their relationship on March 25 last year.
The police’s forensic unit found evidence on the driver’s side door of the accused’s vehicle and blood in the en suite bathroom of their bedroom.
Packham is also accused of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by calling a colleague and asking him to say he was at a meeting at 8.30 the morning Gill went missing.