Trial Discussion Thread #3 - 14.03.08-09, Weekend

[minor4th]

Oh, you mean Mrs Van Der Merwe. Right. This lady:



That's a very flawed piece of reasoning, if I may say so. We don't know that it was Oscar at all. We know that her husband thought it was Oscar, but he might be mistaken. There is no proof here that he "screams like a woman" (when did Mr Van der Merwe hear him screaming?!) and no reason to think Mrs VDM is lying. She described what she heard.

So everyone who has an account that could possibly benefit the defense is mistaken and anyone whose testimony benefits the state is credible and truthful and not mistaken?

 

[Trooper]

oh it is 5 minutes past the hour of 6 o'clock AM in South Africa now..

so that's 3 hours and 25 minutes from now. Wherever you are.

I forgot to include my own daylight savings time. which I am on, and South Africa isn't Doh!.. .

 

[minor4th]

Again I ask people to think for themselves and not necessarily accept either side at this point.

W.o. presentation of more witnesses, but especially forensics and ballistics, there could still be some shockers coming.

E.g., I used to think there were 3 possible events in a certain sequence as far as gun shots and "bat shots". I.e., 2 volleys of gunshots where first volley may have been just 1 shot (and heard with echoes by 1 or more witnesses--standard given the physics of these events).

The smashing of the door with the cricket bat, I used to go with OP's affi as being the last thing. Several things make it possible to me now that it may have come before any shooting. And also that this may not have been heard by neighbors at all—certainly not the more distant ones. I have given many reasons for the obvious differences in batshots from gunshots.

So there are still many possibilities, and I think some shockers and horrifics are coming.

I agree wholeheartedly - wait for the evidence. My mind has changed on certain things several times since the trial started.

As far as whether the gunshots came before or after the cricket bat smashing the door, I ask you to consider why there are only 2 bullet holes in the door.

 

[minor4th]

Great Sorrell.
If that's the case, I'll give you a chance to learn some of my thinking and writing.

You (or others) wlll have to come up with the answer to the following:
People assume Oscar was in a rage state. And that may well be true.
But I think he was also or instead in a different anomalous state during the final half-hour of events.

What do you think that was?

Medicated?

 

[Trooper]

So everyone who has an account that could possibly benefit the defense is mistaken and anyone whose testimony benefits the state is credible and truthful and not mistaken?

Haven't heard any account from a defence witness as yet.. not you, not me, not anyone, hasn't happened.

the only defence THEORY so far presented , and that by Roux and no one else is that ALL witnesses so far presented are mistaken.


Whoa for the Australians.. Paul Mulvilhill has been found guilty of murder.. verdict has just come down.

 

[minor4th]

Let's be careful about this "one witness". She never said "screams". She heard what she thought was arguing, esp. a woman'a voice. This started at at about 2 am. She just wanted to sleep, put a pillow over her head, etc. Then about an hour later, she heard four loud bangs. Then silence. Then CRYING, which she thought was a female crying. But then her husband said it was OP crying. Crying is not screaming.

That's true. Her whole testimony has me scratching my head. Like, how did her husband know it was Oscar?

And as I've mentioned, the State retracted her first police statement for some reason - and I am really curious about that.

 

[Feynman]

excerpted quote:

That's true. Her whole testimony has me scratching my head. Like, how did her husband know it was Oscar?

She said her husband had talked with Oscar in the past; she hadn't.

 

[minor4th]

Haven't heard any account from a defence witness as yet.. not you, not me, not anyone, hasn't happened.

the only defence THEORY so far presented , and that by Roux and no one else is that ALL witnesses so far presented are mistaken.


Whoa for the Australians.. Paul Mulvilhill has been found guilty of murder.. verdict has just come down.

We heard Merwe testify that her husband identified the loud crying as Oscar. The post I was responding to suggested that he was mistaken

 

[minor4th]

excerpted quote:
She said her husband had talked with Oscar in the past; she hadn't.

That still seems insufficient to identify his loud cries in the middle of the night. They did not even know the sounds were coming from Oscar's house at that point. There must be more to this story.

 

[MeeBee]

That still seems insufficient to identify his loud cries in the middle of the night. They did not even know the sounds were coming from Oscar's house at that point. There must be more to this story.

When did the cries that confused these two happen? After the last "volley" of sounds? Because if so then she must have been mistaken. Bat or gun, Reeva was dead and it had to have been Oscar crying. And if Oscar's cries can be mistaken for a woman's maybe his screams can too?

 

[Trooper]

So everyone who has an account that could possibly benefit the defense is mistaken and anyone whose testimony benefits the state is credible and truthful and not mistaken?

Haven't seen anyone state that EVERYONE who has an account that could possibly benefit the defence is mistaken.. what has generally been stated is that SO FAR there doesn't seem to be much that IS of benefit to the defence..

Haven't seen anyone state that anyone who's testimony benefits the state is credible and truthful. What has generally been stated is that the witnesses heard so far appear to be agenda-less, and unbiased and testifying to what they saw and/ or heard..

point of order, argumentative statement.

 

[lisasalinger]

I wouldn't rely on WAT (wildabouttrial) to post complete archived versions of the trial proceedings. I have just spent the better part of an hour (or more) searching through Day 4 (Thursday, March 6) of the trial, and Dr. Stipp's testimony during direct examination by prosecutor Nel is apparently missing.

I finally found what I was looking for on youtube.

Oscar Pistorius Trial: Thursday 6 March 2014, Session 2 - YouTube

After Dr. Stipp rendered what medical assistance he could and realized he couldn't do anything for Reeva because her injuries were too serious, he went outside. He said Mr. Stander was outside and he asked him "Is the ambulance was on its way?", and Mr. Stander said, No, he hadn't called the ambulance yet.

So Dr. Stipp called a hospital's ER and asked them to send an ambulance & was told by them that he needed to call an ambulance service, which Mr. Stander then did, and then Stander handed Stipp the phone & Stipp spoke with the dispatcher, described what happened, the nature of the injuries, and an ambulance was sent out.

Dr. Stipp stated that he was unaware that it was OP's house, and also said that Mr. Stander referred to OP as "Oscar".

While outside waiting for the ambulance to arrive, Dr. Stipp was at one point talking to Mr. Stander, and he stated that at one stage Mrs. Stander arrived. He said Mr. Stander's daughter was also on the scene at that time. They were all outside talking, but Dr. Stipp doesn't remember the specifics of what they were talking about, only that they were concerned about what happened, and Dr. Stipp said that Mrs. Stander said she hoped "This doesn't get out in the papers".

The ambulance arrived a short while after that.

Dr. Stipp said to Stander "I'm of no use further to anyone". They exchanged phone numbers; Dr. Stipp got in his car and drove back home.

Dr. Stipp went on to testify that about 4:17 a.m. that same morning his phone rang. It was Mr. Stander notifying him that OP's lawyer may be calling him.

BBM

Just had a thought... I wonder if Oscar was wearing pants? Dr. Stipp saw Oscar kneeling next to Reeva, he also saw him walk up and down the stairs. If Oscar was wearing shorts, surely he would have noticed the prosthetics and realized it was blade runner (knowing that he lived somewhere in the complex). And here we are, back to what they were wearing. What is the likelihood that Oscar wore pants to bed?

 

[zqtpie]

Great Sorrell.
If that's the case, I'll give you a chance to learn some of my thinking and writing.

You (or others) wlll have to come up with the answer to the following:
People assume Oscar was in a rage state. And that may well be true.
But I think he was also or instead in a different anomalous state during the final half-hour of events.

What do you think that was?

Well. if it wasn't rage (but I think it was), another possibility is that Oscar is very child-like (narcissistic, used to getting his own way, petulant, etc) so maybe Reeva was ready to break off with him and he just couldn't deal with that...the old, if I can't have her scenario.... I sure don't buy the burglar in the bathroom story. G'night peeps. Love you all!

 

[minor4th]

And let us not forget that Stipp testified that he has prior military training, so his belief in hearing what he identified as two sets of gunfire is credible, IMO. In fact, upon hearing the 2nd set of sounds, he warned his wife to get out of the way.

I think it's possible that both the State and the Defense may have the sequence of events (gunshots and cricket bat) out of order.

After all, the State has already withdrawn their early claim (supposedly after the ballistics forensics came back) that OP was wearing his prosthetic legs at the time he shot and killed Reeva. They should have never made that claim unless they could back it up with evidence. This fact has caused me to be less than confident in the State's ability to successfully prosecute this case, even though I believe they have other solid evidence. But, at the start of this trial, Nel said something to the effect that the evidence was "circumstantial".

Mind you, most evidence is considered circumstantial (even DNA, in some instances)) as opposed to direct evidence.

Direct Evidence
Evidence that directly proves a fact, without an inference or presumption, and which in itself, if true, conclusively establishes that fact.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Direct+Evidence

In addition, prosecutor Nel didn't ask Pieter Baba any follow-up questions during his direct examination of Baba regarding what he may have observed about the clothes OP was wearing when he was carrying Reeva down the stairs. Mr. Baba testified that he was trying to see what type of clothes OP was wearing. It could be that Mr. Baba hadn't been able to ascertain that, so there was no point in Nel asking him. I hope that was the reason, and not that Nel had forgotten.

ETA: As for Mr. Roux, I think he'll say anything in an attempt to persuade a State's witness to change their testimony and agree with him (and, by extension, OP). So far, his tactic hasn't worked. I think his main goal is to create confusion in the mind of the Judge, but I've noticed that My Lady takes copious amounts of notes. If Roux actually produces all the documents and evidence he claims to have, I suspect they won't be nearly as eye-opening as he claims them to be.

I'm looking forward to tonight's trial proceedings.

Do you think there were 2 set of 3 gunshots, 10 minutes apart?

 

[Trooper]

I see that Darrin Fresco is a prosectution witness.. hehe.. something about Darrin intrigues me.. from all the press reports, from Samantha's testimony and from Kevin Larena's testimony he sounds as nutty as a Snickers bar... I saw a picture of him among the list of witnesses.. a force to be reckoned with, by the looks of it.. a sort of rebel without a cause..

I suspect that even Darrin hasn't a clue as to what he'll testify.. he looks like a bloke who wings it as a matter of nature..

 

[lisasalinger]

I'm interested to hear what OP says he did in the minutes between the time the 1st call to Stander and once Dr. Stipp and Stander arrived. Granted the timeline we have may not be accurate but if we go by OP's affidavit and the phone calls, OP was running back in forth quite a bit during the first 2-3 minutes of the shooting which occured . He accomplished quite a bit but what did he accomplish during the next 5-10 minutes? Let's review OP's Affidavit:

"I battled to get her out of the toilet and pulled her into the bathroom. I phoned Johan Stander ("Stander") who was involved in the administration of the estate and asked him to phone the ambulance. I phoned Netcare and asked for help. I went downstairs to open the front door.I returned to the bathroom and picked Reeva up as I had been told not to wait for the paramedics, but to take her to hospital. I carried her downstairs in order to take her to the hospital. On my way down Stander arrived. A doctor who lives in the complex also arrived. Downstairs, I tried to render the assistance to Reeva that I could, but she died in my arms."

It makes it sound like this took only a few minutes but the timeline is indicating it was closer to 8 minutes. Perhaps he was on the phone with Netcare or perhaps he was trying to stop the bleeding or resuscitate her. Maybe he was in shock. Still, it seems quite a long time if you are trying to get someone to the hospital.

BBM in red

I thought Mrs. Stander opened his front door? Of course, I'm sure that Roux will argue that "open" means to unlock.

 

[shane13]

Well. if it wasn't rage (but I think it was), another possibility is that Oscar is very child-like (narcissistic, used to getting his own way, petulant, etc) so maybe Reeva was ready to break off with him and he just couldn't deal with that...the old, if I can't have her scenario.... I sure don't buy the burglar in the bathroom story. G'night peeps. Love you all!

Thanks for trying.
None of the above. (other than the possible rage aspect.)

 

[lisasalinger]

So we know that when Baba called Oscar, Oscar told him "everything is fine."

When Baba sees Oscar for the first time, he is carrying Reeva downstairs.

Knowing that security called him, Oscar knows that someone is coming. He probably also presumes that other people will have heard the gunshots. In short, he knows that PEOPLE are coming.

Oscar picks Reeva up and takes her down the stairs.

JMO but I think he did this b/c he did NOT want SEVERAL witnesses to what position Reeva was lying in, what was the position of the cricket bat, gun - general state of the bathroom.

He wanted to avoid people coming into his home.

JMO.

BBM

I think that's a fair theory. I tend to agree.

 

[minor4th]

I wouldn't rely on WAT (wildabouttrial) to post complete archived versions of the trial proceedings. I have just spent the better part of an hour (or more) searching through Day 4 (Thursday, March 6) of the trial, and Dr. Stipp's testimony during direct examination by prosecutor Nel is apparently missing.

I finally found what I was looking for on youtube.

Oscar Pistorius Trial: Thursday 6 March 2014, Session 2 - YouTube

After Dr. Stipp rendered what medical assistance he could and realized he couldn't do anything for Reeva because her injuries were too serious, he went outside. He said Mr. Stander was outside and he asked him "Is the ambulance was on its way?", and Mr. Stander said, No, he hadn't called the ambulance yet.

So Dr. Stipp called a hospital's ER and asked them to send an ambulance & was told by them that he needed to call an ambulance service, which Mr. Stander then did, and then Stander handed Stipp the phone & Stipp spoke with the dispatcher, described what happened, the nature of the injuries, and an ambulance was sent out.

Dr. Stipp stated that he was unaware that it was OP's house, and also said that Mr. Stander referred to OP as "Oscar".

While outside waiting for the ambulance to arrive, Dr. Stipp was at one point talking to Mr. Stander, and he stated that at one stage Mrs. Stander arrived. He said Mr. Stander's daughter was also on the scene at that time. They were all outside talking, but Dr. Stipp doesn't remember the specifics of what they were talking about, only that they were concerned about what happened, and Dr. Stipp said that Mrs. Stander said she hoped "This doesn't get out in the papers".

The ambulance arrived a short while after that.

Dr. Stipp said to Stander "I'm of no use further to anyone". They exchanged phone numbers; Dr. Stipp got in his car and drove back home.

Dr. Stipp went on to testify that about 4:17 a.m. that same morning his phone rang. It was Mr. Stander notifying him that OP's lawyer may be calling him.

I just have to thank you again for finding that video. It seems to have all of the trial and it is very clear and audible - unlike the others I have seen.

 

[Madeleine74]

Right now Eastern Daylight Time in the US is 12:46am. And according to Google, South Africa is 6:46am.