awaiting sentencing phase

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
 
Hi folks

I’m a total novice at this – so please forgive the mistakes I may make.

I am a great fan of the forum and know many of you have all the testimony at your finger tips – so can anyone pinpoint when OP claims to have called out “REEVA, REEVA, REEVA” ? Where was he? At what point in the bang-scream-bang-silence sequence?

I’ve tested it and “REEVA, REEVA, REEVA” never sounds like screaming for your life. It never sounds like “HELP HELP HELP.” It is a clear CALL and it travels a long way. So why did none of the ear-witnesses mention hearing some sound that was clearly like a female name?
 
Mr Fossil said:
So far I have the following (from you, google and 2 obvious guesses). Not sure what's making them appear in google.

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...r/downloads/documents/BallisticsWolmarans.pdf
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...oor/downloads/documents/BallisticsMangena.pdf
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...oor/downloads/documents/SpatterVanderNest.pdf
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...downloads/transcripts/closing_arg_defence.pdf
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/...r/downloads/transcripts/closing_arg_state.pdf
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pmb-portals/behind-the-door/downloads/transcripts/judgment.pdf
Click to expand...

The complete transcript of OP's testimony is also there as well as a not very useful graphic timeline presumably made for Bateman's book. The defence and State's HOAs are NOT the transcripts as described in the title, merely the written versions as already published online.
 
G.bng said:
The complete transcript of OP's testimony is also there as well as a not very useful graphic timeline presumably made for Bateman's book. The defence and State's HOAs are NOT the transcripts as described in the title, merely the written versions as already published online.
Click to expand...

Do you have links for OP's testimony and graphic timeline?
 
Cpt Mangena's report - dated 21st May 2013.
Wolmaran's report - dated 23rd April 2014.

Let's not forget possibly the biggest story in the trial. The prosecution forensic experts laid a stellar case piecing together what happened behind the door, with great performances on the stand. It became so obvious that the 1st shot was to the hip, standing close to the door, that I believe it totally destroyed the defence plan with it's 'dream team' of experts. The defence case was originally going to be Reeva on the floor, moving the magazine rack out of the way to take cover behind the toilet, with the 1st shot to the head killing her. But after the state case, they had to re-group and re-plan...

OP didn't know what to do and hoped they would stick to their original plan, hence the magazine rack post-shooting placed in the seemingly ludicrous position of the corner of the toilet. But even the defence experts had to sell OP out on this one. This should have been curtains for OP - it left the defence explanation for the mistake/cause of the shooting seemingly impossible, and it left OP liable for murder in respect of shots 2, 3 and 4.

In my view, this should have been, and still should be on appeal, sufficient to convict on the murder charge. Even on the court's own findings of fact, if the principles of law are applied correctly, then OP is at least guilty of murder by virtue of knowing he was unlawfully firing shots 2, 3 and 4 accepting he may kill.
 
WilliamMunter said:
Cassidy Taylor-Memmory document. Needs some translation

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pmb-portals/behind-the-door/downloads/documents/CassidyLawyerNotice.pdf
Click to expand...

Notice of Withdrawal of Counterclaim

Please note that the Verweederes HEREBY withdraws the appropriate counterclaim.

ETA: This doesn't make sense because "Verweederes" appears after her name yet he's the one who withdrew the counterclaim. (Sometimes there are extra words that it's hard to put in context so for clarity I've added the following):


"Oscar Pistorius has reached an out-of-court settlement over an alleged assault case in which he was accused of causing an injury to a guest at a party at his house.

Pistorius has also dropped the 2.2million Rand (£122,093) counter claim, in which he accused blogger Taylor-Memmory of making up the assault"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...accused-assault-slammed-broke-door-party.html
 
Judgejudi said:
Notice of Withdrawal of Counterclaim

Please note that the Verweederes HEREBY withdraws the appropriate counterclaim.

ETA: This doesn't make sense because "Verweederes" appears after her name yet he's the one who withdrew the counterclaim. (Sometimes there are extra words that it's hard to put in context so for clarity I've added the following):


"Oscar Pistorius has reached an out-of-court settlement over an alleged assault case in which he was accused of causing an injury to a guest at a party at his house.

Pistorius has also dropped the 2.2million Rand (£122,093) counter claim, in which he accused blogger Taylor-Memmory of making up the assault"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...accused-assault-slammed-broke-door-party.html
Click to expand...

Yes, from the document, (and from some of the news reports), it would seem that OP was the Claimant, whereas Taylor-Memmory was counterclaiming.

Probably, his lawyers seized the initiative by issuing proceedings before she did. It seems he was claiming damages for injury to his reputation and consequential loss of income caused by her allegation that he had assaulted her.
 
Lady Detective said:
Hi folks

I’m a total novice at this – so please forgive the mistakes I may make.

I am a great fan of the forum and know many of you have all the testimony at your finger tips – so can anyone pinpoint when OP claims to have called out “REEVA, REEVA, REEVA” ? Where was he? At what point in the bang-scream-bang-silence sequence?

I’ve tested it and “REEVA, REEVA, REEVA” never sounds like screaming for your life. It never sounds like “HELP HELP HELP.” It is a clear CALL and it travels a long way. So why did none of the ear-witnesses mention hearing some sound that was clearly like a female name?
Click to expand...

It's a rhetorical question really. Most observers of the trial recognise there is no way that 4 independent witnesses would have mistaken terrified female screams for either a) a man shouting "get the *** out of my house" or b) calling/shouting someone's name. It's completely absurd.
 
 
RosieC said:
Brilliant, thanks, have you saved these pdfs, in case they are removed online? Really appreciate your work.
Click to expand...

I've learned to save everything, including web pages, just in case (I've already had at least one web page disappear on me).
 
FromGermany said:
http://grubstreet.co.za/2014/03/13/...elationship-between-media-and-justice-system/

...

http://grubstreet.co.za/2014/03/14/oh-how-we-laughed-top-oscar-retweets-2014-03-14/

Oh, how we laughed: top Oscar retweets, 2014-03-14

sickipediabot @sickipediabot

...
Click to expand...

This morning I was surfing YouTube for sounds of camels screaming (don't ask). Along the way, I ran across a video of baby goats. Scrolling down the page past a few more related videos the following imaginary conversation came to mind...


DERMAN: "Mr. Nel, there's only one startle response that Mr. Pistorius didn't display: fainting."

(Fainting goats are born with a condition called myotonia congenita, which causes their leg muscles to tense up as part of the fight-or-flight response." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT-UGTQd6zQ)

NEL: "Mr. D... D...Darwin. ahk... Professor Derman, please address the court."

"Are you saying that the accused might have fainted?"

DERMAN: "Mr. Nel, I mean M'Lady, it could have been possible, yes."

NEL: "Why did the accused not faint?"

DERMAN: "He just didn't."

NEL: "Professor, how can you say that?"

DERMAN: "Because I know that there are only two more startles coming."
 
Mr Fossil said:
Ok.

I should also have added: what made her think to take her jeans with her when she fled to the toilet? I could add where did she get them from but I'm happy that she may have had a laundered pair available for the following day.
Click to expand...

Those jeans on the ground are truly puzzling because of the way the lie there.

I've always wondered whether she might not have dried those jeans hanging from the window - or partially dried them, folded over the long way, doing one side first then the other.

When I dry jeans in a dryer they often dry out except for the thicker parts -- the waist band, the belt loops, the seams, the cuffs, the button or zipper fly, never get dry. I hang them up and let the rest of them dry on their own.

Why would she have folded them over and later turned them to dry on the other side(s) (back left, back right, front left, front right.) Maybe the window wasn't wide enough to spread them out all the way.

But, if they fell out, how could they have landed so perfectly folded over the way they did? First of all, perhaps because they were already folded like that hanging from the window plus the fact that air dried jeans are often as stiff as boards.
 
FromGermany said:
I don't know for sure. But Frankie could have heard Reeva's screaming out of a window... IMO that's normal if there is loud screaming in the middle of the night and if I (Frankie) know the source (Reeva). There was a fight with voices/noises over about 1 hour before, we must not forget.
...
Click to expand...

For many reason, if I'm Frank, I doubt I'd become involved. Given OP's history, one of the reasons would be that screaming, shouting, fighting and loud noises would have been normal at Oscar's house. No big deal; Frank had heard it all before.

A bloodcurdling scream and 4 gunshots - that would have been new. Maybe I'd run up there but probably not. I'd absolutely know just how out-of-control Oscar could get. I would have thought he'd shoot me next.
 
ColonelMustard said:
Those jeans on the ground are truly puzzling because of the way the lie there.

I've always wondered whether she might not have dried those jeans hanging from the window - or partially dried them, folded over the long way, doing one side first then the other.

When I dry jeans in a dryer they often dry out except for the thicker parts -- the waist band, the belt loops, the seams, the cuffs, the button or zipper fly, never get dry. I hang them up and let the rest of them dry on their own.

Why would she have folded them over and later turned them to dry on the other side(s) (back left, back right, front left, front right.) Maybe the window wasn't wide enough to spread them out all the way.

But, if they fell out, how could they have landed so perfectly folded over the way they did? First of all, perhaps because they were already folded like that hanging from the window plus the fact that air dried jeans are often as stiff as boards.
Click to expand...

I think that is a perfectly reasonable explanation. I have often thought that her jeans were put over the sill of the bathroom window - NOT the balcony window with the dogs bringing them around to the other side. This would also prove that the bathroom window was already open IMO.

Something else I have often thought is how could an intruder get through that bathroom window! He would have to be very small.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 1,361 (members: 144, guests: 1,217)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
1,217
Total visitors
1,361
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
598,649
Messages
18,084,570
Members
230,693
Latest member
MrCharmichael
Back
Top