awaiting sentencing phase

[homegirl]

This was the smoking gun imo, not sure how it did not lock up an easy murder conviction. Nel listed 5 items that the police must have moved in order for OP's story to be true, something which is just not reasonably possible, especially considering the matching blood splatter on the jeans, and carpet, plus the fans coincidently being moved to block the balcony door, as if they were never moved. Since this proves OP is clearly lying about a core aspect of his story, then how could it not prove guilt?

BBM
I agree that the fans never moved. Another obstacle OP would have had to contend with, as he checked the floor curtain for Reeva, on his stumps, with gun in hand, screaming away in the dark, and again when he went onto the balcony to scream help x3 was his prosthetic legs. He said that they were at the end of the bed, on top of one another, pointing at the fan in order to air them out. Pretty nimble for such a disabled person. This is something I did to test out various versions.

 

[sleuth-d-]

This was the smoking gun imo, not sure how it did not lock up an easy murder conviction. Nel listed 5 items that the police must have moved in order for OP's story to be true, something which is just not reasonably possible, especially considering the matching blood splatter on the jeans, and carpet, plus the fans coincidently being moved to block the balcony door, as if they were never moved. Since this proves OP is clearly lying about a core aspect of his story, then how could it not prove guilt?

for me nel also clearly showed the tailoring aspect by using the method 'what is wrong with this photo?' [photo 56 i believe]

op should have noted then that there was only one fan; the fan position; there was no space for a second fan plug; the duvet position. but as op was 'adding detail to fit the questions', he could not do this before the questions had been posed.

all the lies then surfaced when op was taken into his description of duvet position, fan position etc

 

[sleuth-d-]

Agreed, JudgeJudi, and here are a few more to add to your list:

- She permitted Derman to read out in his evidence in chief the emailed hearsay evidence of some woman in England right up until Nel objected.

- She failed to admonish Roux for repeatedly calling eleventh hour 'expert' witnesses without giving adequate notice of the content of their reports to the State.

- She omitted to ask questions about the photographs, especially those showing damage to the bath panel and bedroom door.

- She failed to criticise the Defence re the broken chain of custody in respect of the missing phone.

- She failed to make any adverse comment re the removal of Reeva's handbag from the scene.

- She failed to pick up on Carice Stander's comment, 'What happened to the lady?' (As did Nel, unfortunately).

- She failed to engage with the State's suggestion that the bat may have come first.

I'm sure there are a lot more...

25:05 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSftrFfKhA
i wondered why she didn't question henke's absence from the witness box in her judgement on count four. from both pt or dt point of view, surely he was pivotal to this - to verify or otherwise.

 

[sleuth-d-]

This will have certainly crossed the minds of the prosecution legal team. If there was the slightest chance that Frank had any involvement in the case he would have been subpoenaed - without a doubt. This will have been gone over with a fine tooth-comb by the prosecution team.

There will be a perfectly valid reason why Frank wasn't called as a witness, the fact that we haven't heard about it makes no difference one way or the other. You only get information about those witnesses that are called to trial during a case. Surely nobody expected to hear an advocate to say 'We wanted Frank as a witness but...' ? This wouldn't be allowed I'm afraid and would make a mockery of the legal system if the court could comment on those who have not been called as witnesses.

bbm
can we apply this logic to henke's absence - re count four? he was pivotal to count 4.

i have taken the liberty of using your words... with a little search/replace substitution:

[This will have certainly crossed the minds of the prosecution legal team. If there was the slightest chance that henke had any involvement in the case he would have been subpoenaed - without a doubt. This will have been gone over with a fine tooth-comb by the prosecution team.

There will be a perfectly valid reason why henke wasn't called as a witness, the fact that we haven't heard about it makes no difference one way or the other. You only get information about those witnesses that are called to trial during a case. Surely nobody expected to hear an advocate to say 'We wanted henke as a witness but...' ? This wouldn't be allowed I'm afraid and would make a mockery of the legal system if the court could comment on those who have not been called as witnesses.]

 

[sleuth-d-]

Per OP, Reeva had changed from her street clothes to his clothes (her PJs) just before he arrived home on the 13th... she left the jeans she arrived in on the bedroom floor.

Where did she leave the black "tank top" she arrived wearing? Was that on the floor, too, or neatly packed in her suitcase?

Was it ever stated where her "tank top" was found??

i have seen no mention of where the tank top was found. in her bag, or otherwise.
i have said before that it was quite possible she was still wearing it. [see photo and compare with the mini security entrance video]

no mention either of whether 'fully clothed' meant just OP's basketball shorts and HER tank top. no mention of knickers... were they also neatly packed in amongst her fresh laundry???

if she was wearing his basketball shorts, they would have had similar hole/damage in the upper thigh/hip area... has anyone seen this to verify it?

 

[LinasK]

June, it's not over yet, we still have Oct 13-17 for sentencing, then who knows what will happen after? There is no direct physical evidence that Reeva didn't scream BEFORE she was shot, there were ear witnesses who heard a woman screaming, and the evidence she may not have screamed after being shot is still disputable.

I will ignore your last sentence because telling people to stop posting on a sleuthing site and querying our minds is against the rules, but I'm sure you know that.

Agreed! Common sense says that it was more likely to be Reeva screaming for her life and in pain, rather than Oscar mocking her.

 

[LinasK]

The 'intruder' story is as old as the hills and, as a matter of fact, I just saw a story on Friday which showcased it yet again.
The case was about Seth Techel, 23, who was recently found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison following the shooting death of his recent bride, Lisa Caldwell Techel.
They were married only seven months and she was four months pregnant when he shot her as she slept, (so he could date a co-worker,) and then tried to blame the killing on an intruder.
He put on a good Pistorius-like performance during his call to 911 and for the attending police and EMS personnel.
Some of the “acting” is sampled in the following brief clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa_0zjjzFvc

Undoubtedly Masipa would have been convinced of his innocence, because surely he couldn't have been "play-acting, merely to delude the onlookers."


The clip was taken from a two-hour Dateline episode:
http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/dateline-full-episodes/full-episode-dawn-n213106

Watched it! The ridiculous part is that they conveniently blamed it on the crazy neighbor who supposedly used their shotgun, rather than his own.

 

[ApplesInMyBra]

JM and the assessors totally ignored the original photos IMO.

Photo 55 'PROVES' beyond all doubt that OP is lying...................not a doubt about that at all.
Nel also made the point several times to OP that the photo disproved his version of events and that his own defence did not even question it in XE. OP agreed !

By ignoring this one very significant fact JM and her assessors are saying the police and in particular the photographer are all liars............each and every one of them.
Why should the police bother taking photos in future if Judges are going to totally reject them and disbelieve their evidence?
It truly does beggar belief...............she should stand down immediately and the prosecution should demand a mistrial.

What is photo 55? Can you please provide a link to it? Thank you!

 

[44ALLAN]

No need to resist anything, I'm happy to be questioned or challenged on any of my posts. Have you ever read such nonsense of a mocking voice being heard 150 metres away, ever, by anyone? If you cannot give me a single example you certainly cannot portray this to be typical of DV. It really is as straight-forward as that.

I never indicated that Burger said the screams were a mockery - please re-read the original post.

BIB................In your opinion............................
Is photo 55 a true reflection/as in TRUE/ of the way the state/police and photographer found the bedroom that morning after the 'murder' ?
Yes or no will suffice thanks for your valuable time.
And I'll say again..................In your opinion nobody elses.
Thanks

 

[Figuring]

I'm referring to the mocking tone of 'help, help, help'. Do you seriously believe that this was directed in a sarcastic tone towards Reeva, yet was heard the length of two football pitches away? These words were obviiously screamed at the top of his voice, intending to attract attention. This is the exact opposite of a manipulative DV perpetrator, who's actions would be specifically directed at their partner, making conscious effort to conceal his/her manipulative ways from those outside of the relationship.

If people are going to quote typical DV patterns of behaviour, as they did frequently during the trial in an effort to validate their theories regarding OP, then it would be interesting to do likewise with this particular action, and see if this appears on any of the websites. I suspect you know the answer without needing to look.

It feels disingenuous for this, the supposed male mocking, to be the one note being hammered on. The state's case did not hinge on this--why does yours?

The remarks you've made about what you consider "typical DV behaviour" are absolutely anecdotal--you are doing the very thing you are trying to discredit in others. Additionally, many of us can testify that these comments are flat out wrong. And thoroughly offensive.

This is an anecdote. I have a lady neighbour who, over the course of this summer, broke her leg, met a man in hospital, and married him. He is abusive. He fights with her every night on the balcony, calling her a c-word and a liar, and worse. He mocks everything she says, even mocks her gestures. He told her last night to shut up or he'd stab her. He screams all night, from 6-12 or so. He makes no secret of it.

So I just want to be clear: am I lying, when I say I can hear them across a courtyard? Does this behaviour not "count" because it doesn't fit within your schema? Is it not "real" because I didn't pull a supporting fact from a website?

WS is supposed to be a victim friendly forum. The comments you made above don't only minimize Reeva's suffering (both actual and probable), but trivialize the lived experiences of many WS members.

 

[44ALLAN]

Indeed. It is not just the present case or OP's sentence, but it is SA society at stake here. So appeal they must. It would be difficult to find a case more straightforward (in the sense of there being overwhelming evidence supporting guilt) than this, and in all cases then, the accused will have to be set free. I hope the judge and the assessors realize the graveness of what they have done.

But surely that is the whole point of the discussion since the verdict?
They cannot possibly realise 'what they have done' !! or 'the graveness' of the decision.
How can they?
They came to a decision they all agreed upon........................we think they were wrong.................they obviously think they were correct.
It's now up to the state,after sentencing,to decide whether to challenge them on their findings.

I say death sentence should be applicable for what he did.....................they say he was a naughty boy and too exuberant but hey.... who am I to decide !!!!

 

[AW2B]

There were two instances of a help help help cry as I recall. One was before the shots, if you believe Reeva was screaming. She cried help help help, and Oscar echoed it. Then later Oscar again screamed help help help. If you believe that all the screaming was Oscar's then he called help help help three times, once in a falsetto.

I believe they had an argument..so witnesses heard both voices at one point..then it was ONLY Reeva screaming possibly before AND during the shots were heard..then Pistorius went into a panic when he was heard shouting for help. he just killed Reeva in COLD blood..who wouldn't panic afterwards? He knew he was in deep trouble..he realized the horrible thing he did. Then he went into "what should I say" mode. That's exactly why he told the security guard that everything was okay..he wasn't ready with his complete story yet..
I do not believe that Pistorius said "help..help..help" just to confuse witnesses or mock Reeva..

 

[44ALLAN]

How can people STILL be talking about Reeva screaming when direct physical evidence proves it can't have been her? When does this stop being about Oscar and start being about the minds of others?

I'm definitely not being the first person to respond to your question......................no way.

I do however truly and wholeheartedly agree with your opinion your entitled to it.

 

[delilah]

Question for steveml. Are there any aspects of Masipa's verdict you don't agree with?

Would genuinely be interested in your view.

 

[foxbluff]

i have seen no mention of where the tank top was found. in her bag, or otherwise.
i have said before that it was quite possible she was still wearing it. [see photo and compare with the mini security entrance video]

no mention either of whether 'fully clothed' meant just OP's basketball shorts and HER tank top. no mention of knickers... were they also neatly packed in amongst her fresh laundry???

if she was wearing his basketball shorts, they would have had similar hole/damage in the upper thigh/hip area... has anyone seen this to verify it?

Wow... believe it or not this is the first time I've seen this official photo !! Imo it clearly shows a tank top exactly like one she was wearing when she entered the security gates. Hopefully, somebody here has a better eye than I do in judging whether this top is the right size to fit Reeva or right size for OP.

Like you, I pause each time I see the words "she was fully clothed" as it makes me wonder if that means she was wearing undergarments as well as top and shorts. (Actually, the very first time I saw the "fully clothed" statement, it made me think she was wearing shoes, too.)

I've never seen a photo of the basketball shorts... only the description that they showed the bullet marks from where she was shot in the hip...denoting that they were in normal wearing position when she was shot.

 

[delilah]

This court has already found that the accused cannot be guilty of murder dolus eventualis either, on the basis that from his belief and his conduct, it could not be said that he foresaw that either the deceased or anyone else, for that matter, might be killed when he fired the shots at the toilet door. It also cannot be said that he accepted that possibility into the bargain.

Snipped

I really can't understand what sort of 'clarification' masipa made on 12 sep. The addition of the phrase "or anyone else for that matter" with not even an attempt at explanation as to how she reaches that conclusion is ridiculous.

 

[44ALLAN]

Nel's case was that the cricket bat strikes came first... that there had been an argument and Reeva ran and locked herself in the toilet to protect herself from OP.

I think a weakness of the State's case was that Nel didn't create a mosaic around his theory.

I agree..................but

He didn't need too surely!

He stated early on that it didn't matter who was behind the toilet door.
OP fired 4 shot's at a 'human being' and it resulted in that human being dying from said shots.................that's Murder whether it was Reeva or an Intruder.
OP knew the rules because he took the tests and signed the forms.
Masipa and the assessors are toast after this ridiculous travesty of justice and I really do feel sorry for them.
But they have no one to blame but themselves................surely they were taking advice?
Are they allowed to consult with 'superior' minds during the trial?
I doubt it but.................?

The verdict will be over ruled without doubt IMO

 

[homegirl]

i have seen no mention of where the tank top was found. in her bag, or otherwise.
i have said before that it was quite possible she was still wearing it. [see photo and compare with the mini security entrance video]

no mention either of whether 'fully clothed' meant just OP's basketball shorts and HER tank top. no mention of knickers... were they also neatly packed in amongst her fresh laundry???

if she was wearing his basketball shorts, they would have had similar hole/damage in the upper thigh/hip area... has anyone seen this to verify it?

Here are a couple of excerpts about the shorts from Juror 13.This was written before the photo of the top was released, obviously. I have not seen any photos of the shorts. I don't think any have been released.

Below is a compilation of the injuries to Reeva, per the Medical Examiner, as reported by various news outlets. They cannot quote the ME directly but they can summarize his evidence. (Warning: GRAPHIC)

Reeva’s body was nude when it was given to the Medical Examiner. The clothing that she was wearing that night and was given to the ME were a pair of Nike shorts and a black tank top (or vest, as described by the ME, which I understand is a common way to describe a tank in South Africa).

A small 5mm hole was found on the shorts, along with blood spatter. Tissue and bone fragments were found on the tank. Also some tears and small bullet fragments on the tank were reported as well. We have not seen images of the clothing, so we can only go by what is reported by the media

RIGHT HIP/GROIN

• A bullet wound to her right hip, 92cm from the ground. Small 5mm hole found on shorts.
• Right hip bone was shattered and this was likely to cause immediate instability.

http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-6/

 

[Angela Carr]

~rsbm~

.. can't say I blame them, there's not really much point being there for a sentencing hearing for a verdict with which they (and many others of us) believe to be completely incorrect.

Going back to what they were saying on the TV interview about now wanting/being ready to speak privately with OP (I personally think they would be wasting their energy, but obv. realised why they feel the need to do it), I wouldn't mind betting that once this whole trial is over and he is free to do whatever he wants, he will not be in the least bit interested in meeting with them and that he was only saying he wanted to earlier in the trial because it was all part of his manipulation of it. He has no need to meet with them once it's all over and seeing as, for him, everything he does is about him, he won't be interested .. in fact, he will absolutely not want to meet them because he won't be able to hide it from them what really happened that night, they will see it in his eyes .. he's too much of a coward for them to see that.

We've come to know OP so well.

 

[delilah]

How can people STILL be talking about Reeva screaming when direct physical evidence proves it can't have been her? When does this stop being about Oscar and start being about the minds of others?

It seems you've fallen down the same rabbit hole as Masipa. She also didn't seem to understand that the state's case was that RS screamed BEFORE the shots and possibly briefly after the first shot, in the latter case just as the state's experts testified she probably would have. I don't see how anyone who has paid a modicum of attention to the trial can fail to understand that this was the state's case. Well, apart from Masipa and her assessors, of course.