Discussion between the verdict and sentencing

[Mr Fossil]

Wow I just want to say good job and you are very detailed. To me, the overriding factor is that the Stipps were adamant that they heard two different voices. And that one who was screaming was clearly the woman's voice. If there was no fight with Reeva, and also no intruder, why would they have heard 2 different voices? I don't believe the 2 different voices were both Oscar's.

My chart covers everything from the testimony, including the screams. Just wanted to share this particular puzzle for now.

 

[atthelake]

While I still believe there’s a good chance no one knows the truth (yes, including Roux) except Oscar, it’s entirely possible that Carl and Aimee know way more than they let on. (Could OP really take a chance telling even his family the ugly, horrific, self-damning truth? Murder is not something you ever want to admit, especially to those who love you. He’s lost everything else, he sure doesn’t want to lose his family support, too.)

I suspect if OP told anyone the truth, it would be Carl. Aside from Uncle Arnie, Carl seems to be the steady, stalwart rock in the family. Aimee, so very emotional in court...not so much. She, I think, could break under enough pressure. I think perhaps OP and Carl have told her certain small secrets, but have kept much from her. After all, the fewer people who know the whole truth, the fewer people who can spill it.

Perhaps they all took acting classes ?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mr Fossil]

Roux twisted the timeline, he got things very wrong, - he took Johnson's notes that were rough and incomplete where he said the time of 3.12- this is the time Roux took- but Johnson also said it could have been 3.14. Only the phone data was common cause, the timeline used by Roux was manipulated to suit Oscar's version, the Defence had to press the notion of the bat sounds being 'second sounds' (as Roux put it) or his Case would have fallen apart, because the Defence had to also push the notion that the screams heard by the witnesses were Oscar's before, during and after the shots were fired - because we know that none of the witnesses heard a woman screaming after the last gunshot sound, so Defence had to convince the Court it was Oscar heard screaming.

RSBM

Isn't 03:12 just a figment of Roux's imagination? Where does Johnson mention it?

Johnson's phone time of 03:16 is definitely suspect and even he thinks so. Look at the following exchange with Roux, who is at his befuddling best:

Roux: We have the time
Johnson: M’lady, can I ask the reference to the times, were they taken from my statement or were they taken from a central time server which I would assume the cell phone provider would have available?
Roux: Mr Johnson, I’m curious about it, because you explain to us, and we know your cell phone data, we know that’s the central data, we know you put it in your statement. You know you would not lie to the policeman and say it was 3:16 and the duration 58 seconds. You said to us that you checked it. That’s why I’m saying to you, and we received ... let me help you, we received from the police the time calls were made by the accused. The exact time calls.
Johnson: Thank you

 

[Cloen]

While I still believe there’s a good chance no one knows the truth (yes, including Roux) except Oscar, it’s entirely possible that Carl and Aimee know way more than they let on. (Could OP really take a chance telling even his family the ugly, horrific, self-damning truth? Murder is not something you ever want to admit, especially to those who love you. He’s lost everything else, he sure doesn’t want to lose his family support, too.)

I suspect if OP told anyone the truth, it would be Carl. Aside from Uncle Arnie, Carl seems to be the steady, stalwart rock in the family. Aimee, so very emotional in court...not so much. She, I think, could break under enough pressure. I think perhaps OP and Carl have told her certain small secrets, but have kept much from her. After all, the fewer people who know the whole truth, the fewer people who can spill it.

Oscar would have to tell someone,it's human nature, he'd tell his brother, he's also had his brush with the Law and time in Court - Oscar phoned him that night and he got in touch with his Lawyer, Oldwage, I believe, Oldwage turned up at the house and that's probably when Intruder version kicked into gear and the PR machine started - OJ Simpson's Defence Lawyer was interviewed about this Case and he said had he been Oscar's Lawyer the first thing he'd have done to tell Oscar 'SPEAK TO NOONE, ANYTHING YOU SAY FROM NOW ONWARDS WILL COME VIA ME< AND ME ONLY' , that's why I reckon when the police showed up at Silverwoods, Oscar did not answer Rensburg when he asked him what happened, because he'd already spoke to the brother and then Oldwage.

 

[Cloen]

RSBM

Isn't 03:12 just a figment of Roux's imagination? Where does Johnson mention it?

Johnson's phone time of 03:16 is definitely suspect and even he thinks so. Look at the following exchange with Roux, who is at his befuddling best:

Roux: We have the time
Johnson: M’lady, can I ask the reference to the times, were they taken from my statement or were they taken from a central time server which I would assume the cell phone provider would have available?
Roux: Mr Johnson, I’m curious about it, because you explain to us, and we know your cell phone data, we know that’s the central data, we know you put it in your statement. You know you would not lie to the policeman and say it was 3:16 and the duration 58 seconds. You said to us that you checked it. That’s why I’m saying to you, and we received ... let me help you, we received from the police the time calls were made by the accused. The exact time calls.
Johnson: Thank you

but Roux asked to see Johnson's 'notes' and he told Roux they were 'rough' notes, and he was busy so he hadn't written them out properly-yet Roux insisted he see them, they weren't part of his testimony - I got so angry when Roux stated everything he wanted to twist to back up Oscar's version as 'FACT' and 'WE KNOW',,,,,,,,,which was so wrong and deceptive to say things like that - I was glad Nel got up and objected to this as often as he did.

 

[sleuth-d-]

Roux twisted the timeline, he got things very wrong, - he took Johnson's notes that were rough and incomplete where he said the time of 3.12- this is the time Roux took- but Johnson also said it could have been 3.14. Only the phone data was common cause, the timeline used by Roux was manipulated to suit Oscar's version, the Defence had to press the notion of the bat sounds being 'second sounds' (as Roux put it) or his Case would have fallen apart, because the Defence had to also push the notion that the screams heard by the witnesses were Oscar's before, during and after the shots were fired - because we know that none of the witnesses heard a woman screaming after the last gunshot sound, so Defence had to convince the Court it was Oscar heard screaming.

There's no way the bat hitting a door was as loud as the gunshots. Nel didn't have to account for the first sounds the witnesses heard, as the photographs Van Staden presented to the Court showed other damage in the house---to the bedroom door, the bath panel, damage on the toilet door could have been other sounds heard that night - Nel concentrated on the gunshots and the witnesses hearing a woman heard screaming before, during and not after the last gunshot was heard.

I think Roux tailoring the evidence from the witnesses into a timeline was very clever, it was the only way he could raise doubt - but he never produced that recording of Oscar apparently sounding a like a woman when he screams, ........because HE DOESNT sound like a woman, but the Judge seemed to disregard this , despite Roux and Oscar saying that recording would be presented as evidence.

4 witnesses heard a woman screaming, it's totally implausible it could have been Oscar,(what was he screaming for ? frightened of a magazine rack ?) Even Prof Saayman, another very credible Prosecution Witness said that Reeva would have screamed out after that first shot to her hip........again ignored by the Judge. The Judge had to have believed that Reeva made NO noise at all from the moment she ran into that toilet and was shot at with 4 bullets, 3 penetrating her body, it's truly jaw dropping and implausible.

I think Reeva ran screaming to get away from him before she even got into that toilet, which is why witnesses heard ......a woman screaming in fear of her life, screaming like there was a home invasion going on , a woman screaming like her husband was being attacked in front of her, a woman screaming as if she was running down the road, a woman's petrified screams............which were the descriptions given by the witnesses.

bbm
and a woman was found killed. so it is not a coincidence that all the evidence corroborates that the screams stopped right at this point.

alternatively, i have to believe that a man stopped screaming after he hit the door with a cricket bat.

great post btw.

 

[lithgow1]

Oscar would have to tell someone,it's human nature, he'd tell his brother, he's also had his brush with the Law and time in Court - Oscar phoned him that night and he got in touch with his Lawyer, Oldwage, I believe, Oldwage turned up at the house and that's probably when Intruder version kicked into gear and the PR machine started - OJ Simpson's Defence Lawyer was interviewed about this Case and he said had he been Oscar's Lawyer the first thing he'd have done to tell Oscar 'SPEAK TO NOONE, ANYTHING YOU SAY FROM NOW ONWARDS WILL COME VIA ME< AND ME ONLY' , that's why I reckon when the police showed up at Silverwoods, Oscar did not answer Rensburg when he asked him what happened, because he'd already spoke to the brother and then Oldwage.

My gut feeling is that it's likely that Carl and Arnold P know the truth, or at least something closer to it than Pistorius's ridiculous intruder story. As for the other family members my feeling would be that they are choosing to believe OP's version because the alternative is something they don't want to face. If I'm wrong and Pistorius is as guilty as I believe him to be and they know this but are ignoring it because he's 'family' then they are no better than he IMO. In fact, in some ways it would make them even more amoral.

 

[LemonMousse]

The heart of reason in this case is that when you accept that the evidence supports the bat strikes after the gun shots the events CANNOT have happened as the state put forward. Everything else flows from that.

Why should that be accepted? It was never the evidence of the expert.

He said the panel was prised out of the door using the bat after the gunshots.

The other marks on the door that were shown to be caused by the bat could have happened before or after the gunshots....no way to tell scientifically.

 

[JudgeJudi]

For those that haven't seen the BBC3 documentary

It's gone. "This video has been removed by the user".

 

[LemonMousse]

RSBM

Isn't 03:12 just a figment of Roux's imagination? Where does Johnson mention it?

Johnson's phone time of 03:16 is definitely suspect and even he thinks so. Look at the following exchange with Roux, who is at his befuddling best:

Roux: We have the time
Johnson: M&#8217;lady, can I ask the reference to the times, were they taken from my statement or were they taken from a central time server which I would assume the cell phone provider would have available?
Roux: Mr Johnson, I&#8217;m curious about it, because you explain to us, and we know your cell phone data, we know that&#8217;s the central data, we know you put it in your statement. You know you would not lie to the policeman and say it was 3:16 and the duration 58 seconds. You said to us that you checked it. That&#8217;s why I&#8217;m saying to you, and we received ... let me help you, we received from the police the time calls were made by the accused. The exact time calls.
Johnson: Thank you

Roux certainly played fast and loose with the evidence of call times.

Johnson took the time of his call off his handset. Handsets can be (and frequently are) out by a minute or two. And his time could only be accepted as fact if it was independently verified by a central server, as the other calls were.

Even worse was his handling of the Stipp calls.

The call log from the security landline shows Stipp's first call to them being at 3.15 (16 seconds) and a second at 3.27 (0) seconds.

Since Stipp said that he heard the "helps" moments after making his last call to security, Roux decided this must mean they happened while he was standing on OP's forecourt after tending to Reeva.

This is ridiculous, clearly. By second call to security, Stipp meant the one where he actually spoke to them...and that was at 3.15. The 3.27 was probably a misdial that happened while he was trying to call an ambulance.

Without even putting it to him, Roux declared in his heads, that Stipp was calling security to tell them to call the police.

Common sense tells us what happened here:
His first call rang and rang...since it made no connection, it did not show up on the call logs.
His second call was made at 3.15 when he spoke to security.
Unknown to him, his phone briefly rang the security line while he was trying to call an ambulance outside OP's house. This time there was a brief connection that was logged. Maybe an ansaphone just managed to pick it up. Stipp was clearly unaware of the this third call.

A wrong timeline is a wrong timeline. Just because the State couldn't furnish a better one, or even an alternative one, does not by default make Roux's one correct. It clearly isn't.

 

[sleuth-d-]

BBM - The Judge went with Roux's timeline... Nel didn't provide one. And I believe that Roux got it right when he said at some point... paraphrasing here... Nel couldn't give a timeline that supported the state's case because Nel had made the mistake of trying to show that the Bat Strikes preceded the Gun Shots. Nel is a good lawyer and, imho, if he could have come up with a viable timeline which would be supported by cell records, he would have done so.

i believe nel did make a mistake in not supporting his case with an equally detailed timeline as the defence. i am not sure nel's 'bat first, gunshots second' was a mistake though.

it would be interesting to attempt to create a timeline to support nel's case, and including all the phone records - to see if it is possible. in fact, there may well be someone working on that right now...

 

[soozieqtips]

To me, the overriding factor is that the Stipps were adamant that they heard two different voices.

~snipped~

BIB - actually, I think it was just Dr Stipp who heard two intermingled voices, one male and one female. Even so, Masipa didn't take that into account, except to dump Dr Stipp in with all the other witnesses who were 'mistaken' about what they heard. Hearing two voices messed up OP's defence, so it had to be ignored.

 

[LemonMousse]

~snipped~

BIB - actually, I think it was just Dr Stipp who heard two intermingled voices, one male and one female. Even so, Masipa didn't take that into account, except to dump Dr Stipp in with all the other witnesses who were 'mistaken' about what they heard. Hearing two voices messed up OP's defence, so it had to be ignored.

I think she said that she could definitely hear two separate voices...although I don't think she said they were intermingled like the Dr did.

Will check though.

EDIT: Yes, she did. It was on the basis of this that she told her husband that she thought there must be a family murder.

Both couples mistook a male voice for a female one, and one voice for two! Yeah, right. What are the odds of that. But of course Masipa ignored that entirely.

 

[Hazy]

Roux certainly played fast and loose with the evidence of call times.

Johnson took the time of his call off his handset. Handsets can be (and frequently are) out by a minute or two. And his time could only be accepted as fact if it was independently verified by a central server, as the other calls were.

Even worse was his handling of the Stipp calls.

The call log from the security landline shows Stipp's first call to them being at 3.15 (16 seconds) and a second at 3.27 (0) seconds.

Since Stipp said that he heard the "helps" moments after making his last call to security, Roux decided this must mean they happened while he was standing on OP's forecourt after tending to Reeva.

This is ridiculous, clearly. By second call to security, Stipp meant the one where he actually spoke to them...and that was at 3.15. The 3.27 was probably a misdial that happened while he was trying to call an ambulance.

Without even putting it to him, Roux declared in his heads, that Stipp was calling security to tell them to call the police.

Common sense tells us what happened here:
His first call rang and rang...since it made no connection, it did not show up on the call logs.
His second call was made at 3.15 when he spoke to security.
Unknown to him, his phone briefly rang the security line while he was trying to call an ambulance outside OP's house. This time there was a brief connection that was logged. Maybe an ansaphone just managed to pick it up. Stipp was clearly unaware of the this third call.

A wrong timeline is a wrong timeline. Just because the State couldn't furnish a better one, or even an alternative one, does not by default make Roux's one correct. It clearly isn't.

It's pretty obvious that the Judge took Roux's timeline as the truth and didn't check it with all the phone data in evidence. That is very careless.

In fact most of Roux's assertions of the phone evidence is from cell phone records. Nel specifically told Masipa that ALL the phone data was common cause. By this he obviously meant landlines as well as cell phones and most likely all the internet connections too.

 

[pandax81]

It's gone. "This video has been removed by the user".

You, and anybody else, are welcome to PM me about the BBC3 documentary.

 

[soozieqtips]

I think she said that she could definitely hear two separate voices...although I don't think she said they were intermingled like the Dr did.

Will check though.

EDIT: Yes, she did. It was on the basis of this that she told her husband that she thought there must be a family murder.

Both couples mistook a male voice for a female one, and one voice for two! Yeah, right. What are the odds of that. But of course Masipa ignored that entirely.

BIB - Ah, thanks. I forgot about that. I knew Dr Stipp definitely mentioned two intermingled voices, because I wondered how on earth Roux was going to convince him that not only could OP could sound like a woman, but could also simultaneously sound like two different people. In that case, Masipa discarded the most damning evidence of all, in my opinion.

 

[LemonMousse]

I may be totally wrong, but I am starting to think that the State never held much hope that they'd get him on premed and it was actually eventualis that they were really pressing for.

Because when you think about it - how much time did Nel spend questioning OP about the screams and times of when things happened? Barely any. And he didn't spend half as much time on the timeline in his heads as Roux did.

Nel is far, far too experienced a prosecutor to simply neglect essential evidence like this. I suspect that he didn't produce a timeline because he simply couldn't without going down a lot of speculative paths. I have yet to see anyone anywhere manage to put together a timeline that actually accounts for all the known facts. Roux hasn't managed it either.

I think that the State knew from the get go that the evidence was a bit too circumstantial to guarantee a guilty verdict on premed. But Eventualis was pretty much in the bag, so that was their main aim.

His questions to OP were all about tripping him up to show his dishonesty (which he did brilliantly) and getting him to admit his intention to shoot the intruder behind the door....eventualis.

I read somewhere that, because the court is able to convict on a lesser charge (but never a greater one) then aiming high in the hope that it might just about work loses you nothing.

Chances were, Masipa was never going to go for premed because the evidence just wasn't there - and Nel knew that. But there was bags of evidence for eventualis and this SHOULD have succeeded - probably would have done with a more sensible judge.

So why didn't Nel nail the timeline? Because he couldn't, anymore than we can listening to the evidence, and premed was always a long shot anyway.

Not saying this is correct, but it does sort of make sense to me.

 

[wb180]

"One of the first things to be sacrificed on the altar of irrational passion is truth. A deluge of nonsense spewed from foreign media: the UK Guardian fabricates the notion that Pistorius invoked a "mythical black intruder". What, it asks, "must a man do to be found guilty of murdering a woman?" How about be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have done so? Just as they "knew" Pistorius was guilty before the trial, they "know" before sentence that "punishment will not be enough".

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2014/09/17/ignorance-fuels-feeding-frenzy-over-pistorius

Yes they can spin it all they want but there is a reason why the majority of lawyers and smart people who followed this trial thinks Masipa got it wrong. Think about it.

 

[JudgeJudi]

"One of the first things to be sacrificed on the altar of irrational passion is truth. A deluge of nonsense spewed from foreign media: the UK Guardian fabricates the notion that Pistorius invoked a "mythical black intruder". What, it asks, "must a man do to be found guilty of murdering a woman?" How about be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have done so? Just as they "knew" Pistorius was guilty before the trial, they "know" before sentence that "punishment will not be enough".

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2014/09/17/ignorance-fuels-feeding-frenzy-over-pistorius

Posted on 20 February after the bail hearing:

“As you can just imagine – I cannot even imagine myself – being the tool that, that, that, that took my loved one away”

Unfortunately for you Arnold we think (read know) you and your family are all tools.

“Oscar will survive. He will have a tough time going forward but he’s a survivor”.

No Arnold, he did survive. He had a tough time until a few weeks later when he went to Mozambique and was photographed out partying with friends and picked up a new girlfriend 52 days later. Yeah, he’s a survivor. Reeva is not.

“I haven’t seen him for a couple of days now because we were busy trying to collect evidence …”

Since when is it a family member’s position to collect evidence. This is so wrong.

Speaking about Sheila, OP’s mother, he says “She was a genuine Christian”.

Arnold and his family are the antithesis of genuine Christians IMO.

“You know, I would say the case is going and, and you can judge for yourself. Like light controls darkness, truth will prevail and as you, as we go along – because I know the truth – I know exactly what happened”

How does Arnold know the truth. He wasn’t there. All he knows is OP's version.
If Arnold knows the truth, why does he believe Oscar.
If Arnold knows the truth, why does he let a murderer stay in his home.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut6-X8X7lEA

Just like everybody else, you’re entitled to your views. I guess the most respected legal experts in SA and around the world are all wrong, including the vast majority of people who’ve been following this trial.

 

[Jake18]

I can't move past this being a corrupt decision. This is because :
1) The cherry picking of the DT's argument to dismiss dolus directus - fair enough lots of legal pundits didn't think there was enough for this but it wasn't a reasoned judgement.
2) The dismissal of dolus eventualis because OP, an experienced firearms owner, did not foresee that shooting 4 times into a tiny space would kill the occupant.
3) A guilty verdict on the one charge Roux had given permission for.
4) Acquittal on the ammunition charge for completely inexplicable reasons; this also sets up a dangerous legal precedent where no one can ever be convicted of possessing anything.
5) verdict announcement immediately followed by announcement from Team OP about *recommencement of training, Olympic plans etc. And a possible book deal.

*If there's a suspended sentence, of course although *if* and *when* seem interchangeable.

I don't want to believe this and would love for someone to convince me otherwise.