Trial Discussion Thread #45 - 14.07.3, Day 36

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
G.bng said:
I already posted a page or two back saying I thought the video re-enactment part within this "documentary" is one the defence have had made to support their final arguments, i.e. to show how everything OP claims he did is possible and the possible time line involved.

And you could be right that the defence now don't want to use it but I respectfully can't believe that is because of OP changing his story, which is arguable, since if we ever get to see the re-enactment part I think you will find OP is not on stumps as he is pulling Aimee out of the toilet but has his prothesis on just as he stated in testimony (I can't find it just now but there is a screen grab showing this I saw not an hour ago).

No. IMHO, I think the re-enactment part of the video was made for final arguments and the reason the defence is trying to stop it being aired today, if they are actually trying to because the reports about this are confusing, it is because it would be clearly be disrespectful to Judge Masipa and her team that it was aired publicly before it were presented to the court.
jmhosnnfs,i,or
Click to expand...

Take it from me, he is 100% on his stumps when he is pulling Aimee out of the toilet.
 
G.bng said:
No. IMHO, I think the re-enactment part of the video was made for final arguments and the reason the defence is trying to stop it being aired today, if they are actually trying to because the reports about this are confusing, it is because it would be clearly be disrespectful to Judge Masipa and her team that it was aired publicly before it were presented to the court.
jmhosnnfs,i,or
Click to expand...
Snipped

if the DT think this is good evidence for them, I can't imagine why they would have saved it til last. They've been scraping the bottom of the barrel of defence witnesses, most of whom have turned in a lamentable performance. How could Roux just produce this in final arguments, thus denying Nel the opportunity to x examine whoever made it, and took part in it, namely OP himself?
 
04009margaret said:
Video styill available via https://twitter.com/DavidDadic
Click to expand...

bumping for those who are on Twitter. I can't view the video but maybe because I'm not on Twitter. I can see that you should be able to play it from the Twitter account though.

04009margaret said:
We need someone to record it then upload to you tube unless Seven upload it themselves, as a lot of their stories are already on you tube.
Click to expand...

I've got it on my laptop but have no idea how to upload it without giving away personal information to Google.
 
Val1 said:
Haha! You really think the "rules" would stop any corresponding between them, after they knowingly secreted OP's phone and sent it out for whatever it is they did to it before handing it over to the police, let RS's handbag be stolen from the crime scene by OP's sis, etc? I seem to recall they managed to get some reason to speak with Dixon during his cross too, or was that one of their other witnesses...
Click to expand...

After Dixon testified, he met up with Wolmarans at a bar prior to Wolmarans giving his evidence. Someone obviously taped the conversation with their mobile phone and put it on You Tube together with a request for someone to transcribe it and send it to Nel. Dixon was telling Wolmarans that he manoeuvred something (don’t know what) and Wolmarans took him to task over this. Dixon replied that he hadn’t done anything wrong and that he’d forensically manoeuvred it. Wolmarans also asked what he should say if asked a particular question and Dixon told him. I don’t remember what the question was as it was some time ago but I don’t recall it being anything of consequence.

While this conversation was highly unethical, I can honestly say I didn’t Dixon say he did anything improper. I transcribed the first 5 minutes but there was so much background noise that the rest was inaudible.
 
kaos said:
I've been looking at the first video a bit closer as somebody suggested you couldn't make out if he was on his prosthetics and think I have to change my mind :blushing: I've tried screenshotting it but my images keep turning to black when I try and upload them here :(

At around 9 seconds into the clip you can see OP manoeuvring around (where the woman's arm is extended over his shoulder) and if you look directly across from where the right hand front leg of the table is, you can make out the 'bandage' bit of the prosthetic and what looks like the sock from the prosthetic can be seen right next to the white box under the table.
Click to expand...

You can see the covering sock, but not his "leg", so unless they did some photo shop magic in their video I'd say they did more than one clip and we're seeing bits of them all mixed together.

OP had said he put his "legs" on to break down the door to get RS out, although he had made a specific reference to looking for his socks first which I found odd. I really don't believe the bit about breaking down the door for a few reasons(sore shoulder but shoulder charges it, kicking to open a door that opens out with prosthetics that could shatter, yea right ... I'm pretty sure he broke the door first scaring her half to death trying to get her to come out after having already hit her[re bruises on back of leg etc unrelated to the shooting, maybe even accidentally but she would have none of it], lost his ***** and in anger got his gun and shot at her, then just pulled it apart to get at her after he realized he'd actually probably killed her, that that made it look like he had been desperately trying to get to her after the fact just made it easier to call it an accident(still think the keys look like spares from his drawer and that he may have actually been the one to lock her in there, if it had even been locked at all).

I also think he may have already had his "socks" on when he went down the passageway the first time, just not his "legs". As new as their relationship was, I doubt he was yet comfortable to run around with his bare stumps in front of RS and would have kept the socks on, possibly even in bed. Kind of like how overweight kids will wear a t-shirt in the pool.

Anyway, I don't think he actually put his "legs" on for the trip downstairs with RS until he'd already pulled("battled") her out of the toilet room and left her bleeding out while he made his phone calls etc, then put on his actual prosthetic legs and carried her downstairs.

I do think it's possible he'd put his "socks" on for the quick run down to crack open the door(possibly thinking of disposing of her body) if he didn't already have them on, grabbed his work cell phone and possibly spoke to Frank as well(you were sleeping, right Frank?!), at which point he would have realized he was "stuffed" and then went to make calls to Stander, Netcare, etc before donning his legs for his grand descent and confession.

What I would have liked to have seen were the "socks" he had been arrested in(not the ones Dixon looked at), were they bloody inside his prosthetics, were the inside cups of his prosthetics bloody, showing he'd been wearing just the socks in the bath/toilet room before donning the legs?
 
Nausicaa said:
Too late folks. The truth is out of the bag and there ain't no way they can get it back in. The world now knows that the last witness produced by the DT in a desperate effort to save the day was not only grossly misleading the court but was doing so on a point concerning which the DT had ample access to the full truth. He didn't just misrepresent the facts about OP's physical capacities when on his stumps, that was the essential thing he came to court to do.

It looks strongly to me as though we now have either perjury or contempt of court - in addition to murder of course. And every chance that the judge will look at it the same way if the issue is raised, though I suspect she may be the only person involved who is conscientious enough not to be following the case via the media.
Click to expand...

Good luck if they want to speak to someone. I rang hours and hours ago just for clarification on the time it was due to start and the operator basically told me that it's the weekend and there was no-one I could talk to. My guess is they want to get an injunction to stop it going to air. Even if they were successful in doing this, the whole world knows about it now and I'm sure Nel will be raising it one way or another.
 
Apparently a quiet Sunday night with the kids in bed asleep is a good night to watch a DVD. I have suggested channel 7 instead but surprisingly that was vetoed. I'm recording it though, and will hopefully watch it later tonight.
 
Judgejudi said:
I must be missing the point. This video is irrefutable evidence that he was lying so how would bias come into it? It's just the same as ballistics evidence or anything else that proves he lied.
Click to expand...

Not just OP either... he didn't do this on his own.
 
vansleuths said:
Still doesn't work me with 3 different browsers (IE, FF, Chrome), but....

Here's something interesting. When I saw the video this morning before it was blocked, I seem to recall that the people standing around OP were blurred.

If you go to the channel 7 website, there in an image where the person's faces are not blurred out. Anyone recognize him?

View attachment 54161
Click to expand...

I bet NIKE just loves the shirt he is wearing here. :facepalm:
 
Now it brings us back to why the Evidence Room team would show OP on his stumps trying to move Reeva when his testimony states after he shot at the door, he ran back on his stumps to the bedroom to search for Reeva, went onto the balcony to shout for help. The he puts his prosthetics on, runs back to the bathroom to kick the door. Runs back to the bedroom on his prosthetics to get the bat and tries to bash the door down. And now according to what we're seeing, he then must take off his prosthetics to go into the toilet??
 
G.bng said:
IMBW but don't you think the first video shot in that very formal setting of the first snippet which has now been pulled could well be the hall at the Chambers where Roux and Oldwage work from? IDK, but I've been in a lot of barrister's chambers over here and no more than see it I was immediately reminded me of how they tend to be set up and decorated. And it's certainly not the same setting as the re-enactment parts of the new promotional stings. Just pondering...
Click to expand...

Possibly but I'm leaning more towards OP's Uncle's home. Who has a bidet in their office toilet room? Plus I doubt OP's sister would want to be draped over a toilet in someone's office, even for her brother, let alone dragged around the floor and then carried precariously down that flight of stairs and put on the floor. Besides, I've never seen Roux's office... :)
 
Interested Bystander said:
Does anyone from Australia know from which territory in Oz Channel 7 is broadcast ? The time differences vary between 8 and 11 hours, depending on territory. So UK time we are looking at somewhere between 9.30 am to 12.30pm tomorrow morning. I have been trying to find a link from which I can watch the program but have been totally unsuccessful. It may, of course, be impossible and I shall have to wait for Yahoo to upload it.
Click to expand...

I can only speak from where I am - Sydney, NSW. It's due to start, according to Channel 7, at 8.40pm tonight.
 
Judgejudi said:
Good luck if they want to speak to someone. I rang hours and hours ago just for clarification on the time it was due to start and the operator basically told me that it's the weekend and there was no-one I could talk to. My guess is they want to get an injunction to stop it going to air. Even if they were successful in doing this, the whole world knows about it now and I'm sure Nel will be raising it one way or another.
Click to expand...

According to the time zone converter, I believe it should be starting in about twenty minutes, for anyone able to get the Aussie stations....
 
kaos said:
Now it brings us back to why the Evidence Room team would show OP on his stumps trying to move Reeva when his testimony states after he shot at the door, he ran back on his stumps to the bedroom to search for Reeva, went onto the balcony to shout for help. The he puts his prosthetics on, runs back to the bathroom to kick the door. Runs back to the bedroom on his prosthetics to get the bat and tries to bash the door down. And now according to what we're seeing, he then must take off his prosthetics to go into the toilet??
Click to expand...
Agree it makes no sense at all. OP stated in his first affidavit read out at the bail hearing in feb 2013 that he'd put his prosthetics on to kick down the door, so by inference he still had them on when he pulled RS out of the cubicle (and he's never said he took them off). Even if The Evidence Room hadn't appreciated that at the time of making the video, surely OP would have corrected them? Could there be any reason for getting him to do this without his legs on, contrary to his account?

It is, of course, the prosecution's case that OP hit the door with the bat while still on his stumps, contrary to OP's version.
 
vansleuths said:
Just thinking about this a bit more, I don't think they could use the new video ( https://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/video/watch/24393536/exclusive-pistorius-video/ ) that turned up today.

The reason I say this is that the defence fought tooth and nail saying that the Zombie Stopper video was trial by ambush. Eventually, they said they would not fight against it being viewed provided that this was the first and last time that the PT would do this. This would seem to imply that the PT would not be able to show the new video.

Someone prove me wrong pls because I'd like to see the video shown in court on Mon.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but it's online globally, reported on TV, newspapers etc and if it couldn't be passed on to the court, that would make the court and South Africa a total laughing stock in the eyes of the world. I just can't imagine that would happen.
 
Is the programme streamable for Australians?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 122 more.
Total: 2,672 (members: 123, guests: 2,549)

Online statistics

Members online
123
Guests online
2,549
Total visitors
2,672
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,368
Messages
18,155,420
Members
231,713
Latest member
TRussell
Back
Top