Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[AJ_DS]

If you were the court, on what basis would you have rejected Roux's timeline?

Simply on the basis that it was obviously skewed.

Let us not forget that Roux used testimonial evidence to skew the timeline because the detailed billing does not provide any useful information on it's own.

Phone logs are deemed objectively accurate but they can be just as subjective as testimonial evidence in what they can prove or disprove.

Roux meticulously cherry picked small bits of testimonial evidence which he associated with detailed billing information so as to discredit large portions of testimonial evidence.

In doing so, Roux was proffering inferences based on distorted and incomplete evidence.

 

[AJ_DS]

OP upgraded to category A prisoner
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rison-privileges-upgraded-good-behaviour.html

Thanks for the article

The upgrade to category A is normal and was to be expected, IMO

 

[GR_Turner]

Simply on the basis that it was obviously skewed.

Let us not forget that Roux used testimonial evidence to skew the timeline because the detailed billing does not provide any useful information on it's own.

Phone logs are deemed objectively accurate but they can be just as subjective as testimonial evidence in what they can prove or disprove.

Roux meticulously cherry picked small bits of testimonial evidence which he associated with detailed billing information so as to discredit large portions of testimonial evidence.

In doing so, Roux was proffering inferences based on distorted and incomplete evidence.

What are the small bits of evidence on which Roux based his timeline? - edited to add the following:

I probably wasn't clear in the post above.

Both the State and defense used all the evidence from Mr Johnson and Mrs Burger. They both agreed that the witnesses heard screams, he made a phone call at 3.16, they heard bangs just after (at 3.17) and the screaming stopped.

They both used all the evidence from Mr and Mrs Nhlengethwa. They agreed that she heard a bang, he then woke, they heard a little later male cries and he phoned security twice in 3.16 and got through the second time to report the crying. Both sides agree the bang was the shots.

They both agree that Dr and Mrs Stipp heard bangs, then screams, then bangs. But the phone calls don't match the evidence. So the Stipps were wrong or the phone evidence is wrong

They have both used almost all the evidence. So in what way did Roux pick 'small bits of ... evidence'?

 

[Sherbert]

What are the small bits of evidence on which Roux based his timeline? - edited to add the following:

I probably wasn't clear in the post above.

Both the State and defense used all the evidence from Mr Johnson and Mrs Burger. They both agreed that the witnesses heard screams, he made a phone call at 3.16, they heard bangs just after (at 3.17) and the screaming stopped.

They both used all the evidence from Mr and Mrs Nhlengethwa. They agreed that she heard a bang, he then woke, they heard a little later male cries and he phoned security twice in 3.16 and got through the second time to report the crying. Both sides agree the bang was the shots.

They both agree that Dr and Mrs Stipp heard bangs, then screams, then bangs. But the phone calls don't match the evidence. So the Stipps were wrong or the phone evidence is wrong

They have both used almost all the evidence. So in what way did Roux pick 'small bits of ... evidence'?

BBM

I don't think it was agreed that the bang heard by Mrs Nhlengethwa was a shot.

 

[GR_Turner]

BBM

I don't think it was agreed that the bang heard by Mrs Nhlengethwa was a shot.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I think it was, by both the State and the defense. For both the State and defense, she heard the last of the real shots and then Oscar's cries after.

 

[AJ_DS]

What are the small bits of evidence on which Roux based his timeline? - edited to add the following:

I probably wasn't clear in the post above.

Both the State and defense used all the evidence from Mr Johnson and Mrs Burger. They both agreed that the witnesses heard screams, he made a phone call at 3.16, they heard bangs just after (at 3.17) and the screaming stopped.

They both used all the evidence from Mr and Mrs Nhlengethwa. They agreed that she heard a bang, he then woke, they heard a little later male cries and he phoned security twice in 3.16 and got through the second time to report the crying. Both sides agree the bang was the shots.

They both agree that Dr and Mrs Stipp heard bangs, then screams, then bangs. But the phone calls don't match the evidence. So the Stipps were wrong or the phone evidence is wrong

They have both used almost all the evidence. So in what way did Roux pick 'small bits of ... evidence'?

Bit in Red… that's not entirely correct, is it ?… Johnson said that the 3:16 time came from his own personal notes AND that he wasn't sure if it referred to the call start time or end time… but from his testimony, the bangs occurred mere seconds after the call ended…

… as the chronology of events from his perspective was the following :

A. Sleeping
B. Waking up to hear screaming
C. Bangs
D. Silence

...it makes perfect sense that he would want to document the time of the crucial event of the evening (i.e. the bangs) which coincided with the phone call end time.

Bit in Green… that's also incorrect…

Nel's position is the Nhlengethwas were woken up by the last gunshot but were asleep for the cricket bat strikes which occurred BEFORE the gunshots… cricket bat strikes that were heard by Dr. Stipp and his wife before 3:15:51

Roux's position is the Nhlengethwas were woken up by the last gunshot but never heard the cricket bat strikes which occurred AFTER the gunshots… interestingly enough, the Nhlengethwa bedroom window was only 9 meters away from OP's open bathroom window… but the Nhlengethwas NEVER heard OP repeatedly striking the door "with all his might" which according to Roux sounds very much like gunshots… yet the Nhlengethwas managed to hear OP crying.

Bit in Blue… also incorrect…

You seem to suggest either that both Stipps lied about hearing the first bangs and/or lied about making the first phone call to security.

If a phone call is placed but not answered it will not show up on the detailed billing of the recipient… ergo having only the detailed billing of estate security could never provide a complete or accurate picture of what transpired in the Stipps bedroom.

BiB… I believe it is pretty obvious…

Forget about the detailed billing for the moment…

Taking only Dr. Stipp's testimony, it is more than clear that he was in his bedroom : when he heard the 2 sets of bangs, when he called security, when he saw OP's bathroom lights, when security arrived and he pointed them to OP's house.

It is also more than clear that he was no longer in his house : when he drove to the security gate, when he drove to OP's house, when he entered OP's house, when he witnessed Reeva's condition, when he talked to Stander and Netcare.

Now superimpose the detailed billing

It is clear that Dr. Stipp was in his bedroom around 3:15 and that he was at OP's house around 3:27

Roux took the bit about Dr. Stipp having called security twice in his bedroom as fact and applied it to 3:15 and 3:27… totally ignoring a vast portion of the chronology of events as stated by Dr. Stipp and other witnesses.

Roux wants the Court to believe the small bit about Dr. Stipp having called security twice but reject almost the entirety of his testimony based solely on the 3:27:14 call that lasted 0 seconds

The fact is Dr. Stipp called security 3 times : the first time was not logged because the call was unanswered or he dialed the wrong number… the second time at 3:15:51 he spoke to Baba who came to his house… the third time at 3:27:14 was either a misdial or he changed his mind because the call lasted 0 seconds.

The interesting bit is Roux would have the Court believe Dr. Stipp is correct about having called security twice but mistaken about everything else… especially the part when Stipp says he spoke to security on the second phone call… on Roux's version, Stipp spoke to security on the first phone call…

 

[GR_Turner]

Bit in Red… that's not entirely correct, is it ?… Johnson said that the 3:16 time came from his own personal notes AND that he wasn't sure if it referred to the call start time or end time… but from his testimony, the bangs occurred mere seconds after the call ended…

… as the chronology of events from his perspective was the following :

A. Sleeping
B. Waking up to hear screaming
C. Bangs
D. Silence

...it makes perfect sense that he would want to document the time of the crucial event of the evening (i.e. the bangs) which coincided with the phone call end time.

Bit in Green… that's also incorrect…

Nel's position is the Nhlengethwas were woken up by the last gunshot but were asleep for the cricket bat strikes which occurred BEFORE the gunshots… cricket bat strikes that were heard by Dr. Stipp and his wife before 3:15:51

Roux's position is the Nhlengethwas were woken up by the last gunshot but never heard the cricket bat strikes which occurred AFTER the gunshots… interestingly enough, the Nhlengethwa bedroom window was only 9 meters away from OP's open bathroom window… but the Nhlengethwas NEVER heard OP repeatedly striking the door "with all his might" which according to Roux sounds very much like gunshots… yet the Nhlengethwas managed to hear OP crying.

Bit in Blue… also incorrect…

You seem to suggest either that both Stipps lied about hearing the first bangs and/or lied about making the first phone call to security.

If a phone call is placed but not answered it will not show up on the detailed billing of the recipient… ergo having only the detailed billing of estate security could never provide a complete or accurate picture of what transpired in the Stipps bedroom.

BiB… I believe it is pretty obvious…

Forget about the detailed billing for the moment…

Taking only Dr. Stipp's testimony, it is more than clear that he was in his bedroom : when he heard the 2 sets of bangs, when he called security, when he saw OP's bathroom lights, when security arrived and he pointed them to OP's house.

It is also more than clear that he was no longer in his house : when he drove to the security gate, when he drove to OP's house, when he entered OP's house, when he witnessed Reeva's condition, when he talked to Stander and Netcare.

Now superimpose the detailed billing

It is clear that Dr. Stipp was in his bedroom around 3:15 and that he was at OP's house around 3:27

Roux took the bit about Dr. Stipp having called security twice in his bedroom as fact and applied it to 3:15 and 3:27… totally ignoring a vast portion of the chronology of events as stated by Dr. Stipp and other witnesses.

Roux wants the Court to believe the small bit about Dr. Stipp having called security twice but reject almost the entirety of his testimony based solely on the 3:27:14 call that lasted 0 seconds

The fact is Dr. Stipp called security 3 times : the first time was not logged because the call was unanswered or he dialed the wrong number… the second time at 3:15:51 he spoke to Baba who came to his house… the third time at 3:27:14 was either a misdial or he changed his mind because the call lasted 0 seconds.

The interesting bit is Roux would have the Court believe Dr. Stipp is correct about having called security twice but mistaken about everything else… especially the part when Stipp says he spoke to security on the second phone call… on Roux's version, Stipp spoke to security on the first phone call…

The bit in red: the State said that Johnson's phone data show that his call started in 3.16. This is how they place the second bangs at 3.17.

The bit in green: They both said Mrs Nhlengethwa heard the last of the shots and then male crying after. They only disagree about which were the real shots. I agree that it's odd they didn't hear the bat strikes on the defense case.

The bit in blue: If it is true that an unanswered call doesn't show up on phone records, how did Mr Nhlengethwa's unanswered call at 3:16:16 show up? I don't suggest for a second that the Stipps lied. Rather that they were mistaken in relation to the bangs and the phone calls they made. They witnessed two very similar events (the bangs) and made another failed phone call to 10111. It's not impossible that they were just mistaken in their testimony.

BIB: There is no evidence to support this. Can we or the court just make up evidence to suit one side over the other?

Roux wanted the court to compare Dr Stipp's evidence with the phone evidence before the court. As the two didn't match, he wanted the court to be cautious about taking the timings of the bangs from his testimony. This is surely the correct approach and does not equate to rejecting all of Dr Stipp's evidence.

 

[AJ_DS]

The bit in red: the State said that Johnson's phone data show that his call started in 3.16. This is how they place the second bangs at 3.17.

The bit in green: They both said Mrs Nhlengethwa heard the last of the shots and then male crying after. They only disagree about which were the real shots. I agree that it's odd they didn't hear the bat strikes on the defense case.

The bit in blue: If it is true that an unanswered call doesn't show up on phone records, how did Mr Nhlengethwa's unanswered call at 3:16:16 show up? I don't suggest for a second that the Stipps lied. Rather that they were mistaken in relation to the bangs and the phone calls they made. They witnessed two very similar events (the bangs) and made another failed phone call to 10111. It's not impossible that they were just mistaken in their testimony.

BIB: There is no evidence to support this. Can we or the court just make up evidence to suit one side over the other?

Roux wanted the court to compare Dr Stipp's evidence with the phone evidence before the court. As the two didn't match, he wanted the court to be cautious about taking the timings of the bangs from his testimony. This is surely the correct approach and does not equate to rejecting all of Dr Stipp's evidence.

Red : I believe you are mistaken… there was no "phone data" of Johnson's call, only his personal notes which he wrote in the days following the event without the benefit of his detailed billing, only the info on his phone… phone whose clock is set manually by the user and definitely not the same time as the clock on the server of the service provider of the estate security landline.

Green : Indeed… for the State the bat strikes occurred before the gunshots, hence they were not heard by he Nhlengethwas who were fast asleep… for the Defence, the bat strikes followed some time after the gunshots, hence they should have been clearly heard by the Nhlengethwas but they heard nothing but crying

This indicates the first bangs heard by the Stipps were the bat strikes and the second set were the gunshots which were heard by both the Stipps and the Nhlengethwas.

Blue : A busy signal is considered an answered call… same as a voice mail because for the system an "answer" is provided to the caller… if you can find a pay phone, put the money in and dial the number… if it rings, rings, rings and you hang up, you get your money back… if you get a busy signal, you won't be getting your money back

OK for the possibility of the mistake on Dr. Stipp's part… but Roux used that mistake to discredit the Stipps entire account of events by placing the second call to security at 3:27 which is ludicrous in the chronological context provided by both Stipps.

BiB : No evidence to support what ?

The reality is Roux made a conscious and devious effort to distort the evidence so as to show the Stipp testimony did not match the detailed billing… as everyone can clearly see the 3:27 call lasted 0 seconds and was not made from the Stipp bedroom but from OP's house.

Had the Stipp detailed billing been available it would have been crystal clear.

If I had to venture a guess, I would say that when Stander told Stipp an ambulance had not been called, Stipp took his phone and pressed redial believing the last call he made was to 10111 when in fact he had called security last… he realized his mistake, hung up the call and made the correct call.

… and it's not surprising that 1 year after the events, Stipp would forget having misdialed a number on which he spoke to no one.

It's no more a mystery than why OP dialed his voicemail after speaking with Baba… it was a mistake

… Imagine Stipp wanted to call estate security after hearing the first bangs but in reality, because he had just woken up and was panicked by the events, had misdialed the number… he would have no knowledge that he had misdialed since the call was never answered… he would to this day hold a genuine belief that he had indeed called security after the first bangs.

 

[GR_Turner]

Red : I believe you are mistaken… there was no "phone data" of Johnson's call, only his personal notes which he wrote in the days following the event without the benefit of his detailed billing, only the info on his phone… phone whose clock is set manually by the user and definitely not the same time as the clock on the server of the service provider of the estate security landline.

Green : Indeed… for the State the bat strikes occurred before the gunshots, hence they were not heard by he Nhlengethwas who were fast asleep… for the Defence, the bat strikes followed some time after the gunshots, hence they should have been clearly heard by the Nhlengethwas but they heard nothing but crying

This indicates the first bangs heard by the Stipps were the bat strikes and the second set were the gunshots which were heard by both the Stipps and the Nhlengethwas.

Blue : A busy signal is considered an answered call… same as a voice mail because for the system an "answer" is provided to the caller… if you can find a pay phone, put the money in and dial the number… if it rings, rings, rings and you hang up, you get your money back… if you get a busy signal, you won't be getting your money back

OK for the possibility of the mistake on Dr. Stipp's part… but Roux used that mistake to discredit the Stipps entire account of events by placing the second call to security at 3:27 which is ludicrous in the chronological context provided by both Stipps.

BiB : No evidence to support what ?

The reality is Roux made a conscious and devious effort to distort the evidence so as to show the Stipp testimony did not match the detailed billing… as everyone can clearly see the 3:27 call lasted 0 seconds and was not made from the Stipp bedroom but from OP's house.

Had the Stipp detailed billing been available it would have been crystal clear.

If I had to venture a guess, I would say that when Stander told Stipp an ambulance had not been called, Stipp took his phone and pressed redial believing the last call he made was to 10111 when in fact he had called security last… he realized his mistake, hung up the call and made the correct call.

… and it's not surprising that 1 year after the events, Stipp would forget having misdialed a number on which he spoke to no one.

It's no more a mystery than why OP dialed his voicemail after speaking with Baba… it was a mistake

… Imagine Stipp wanted to call estate security after hearing the first bangs but in reality, because he had just woken up and was panicked by the events, had misdialed the number… he would have no knowledge that he had misdialed since the call was never answered… he would to this day hold a genuine belief that he had indeed called security after the first bangs.

The timing of Johnson's phone call was used by the State to put the shots at 3.17. Are you arguing against both the State and defense cases? The State didn't argue that the shots were earlier using Dr Stipp's evidence.

Even my landline keeps a record of the last number received whether it was answered or not so I think it's unlikely that phone data doesn't include such calls. But it could have been a misdial it's true.

(My BIB was about 'the fact is Dr Stipp called security 3 times'. My computer is kicking me out of this website whenever I try to post and I forgot to put the BIB back in. Sorry for the confusion.)

I don't think the 3.27 phone matters much either. But that the earlier calls don't match Dr Stipp's evidence does affect his reliability as a witness. Given that he was one of their star witnesses and the State could easily (I assume) have shown his phone data, it isn't enough to just say that he was probably right and accept his phone time and dismiss all the other phone times.

 

[AJ_DS]

The timing of Johnson's phone call was used by the State to put the shots at 3.17. Are you arguing against both the State and defense cases? The State didn't argue that the shots were earlier using Dr Stipp's evidence.

I'm indeed arguing against elements of both State and Defence as I find failures in both of them.

Nel's 3:17 gunshots were a HUGE mistake IMO :

- Time is relative (and I don't mean in the Einstein way) as no single clock can claim dominion on absolute exactness

- The probabilities the server clock and the Johnson phone clock shared the same time is very unlikely at best

- Johnson's time is not precise : was it 3:16:00 or 3:16:59 AND was it the call start time or end time

- From the Stipps and the security landline detailed billing, the gunshots occurred moments BEFORE 3:15:51

- From the Nhlengethwas and the security landline detailed billing, the gunshots occurred moments BEFORE 3:16:13

- From Johnson, his phone clock and his notes, the gunshots occurred moments AFTER somewhere between 3:15:02 and 3:17:57

- The screaming/shots event lasted but mere minutes

- The whole event from Stipp talking to Baba to Stipp witnessing Reeva's condition lasted but 10 minutes

- Using the Johnson time means you accept a maximum of 3 minutes of error which represent 30% of the whole event and perhaps up to 100% of the screaming/shots event

- Using the Johnson time means you run the risk of contradicting the server time, the Stipps testimony and the Nhlengethwas testimony

- Arbitrarily choosing 3:17 as the time of the gunshots means you definitely contradict the server time, the Stipps testimony and the Nhlengethwas testimony

- Objectively, the evidence indicates the gunshots occurred AFTER 3:15:02 but BEFORE 3:15:51 (and this is considering the Johnson clock shares about the same time as the server clock)

… Why Nel insisted on 3:17 is another highly suspicious mystery IMO as it provided the means by which Roux was in turn able to provide the means by which the Court could acquit OP.

Even my landline keeps a record of the last number received whether it was answered or not so I think it's unlikely that phone data doesn't include such calls. But it could have been a misdial it's true.

Do you mean your detailed billing shows unanswered calls ?… or do you mean your telephone displays missed calls ?… because it's not at all the same system.

… and don't you have voice mail on your landline which "answers" call if no one is home ?

My BIB was about 'the fact is Dr Stipp called security 3 times'. My computer is kicking me out of this website whenever I try to post and I forgot to put the BIB back in. Sorry for the confusion.)

I don't think the 3.27 phone matters much either. But that the earlier calls don't match Dr Stipp's evidence does affect his reliability as a witness. Given that he was one of their star witnesses and the State could easily (I assume) have shown his phone data, it isn't enough to just say that he was probably right and accept his phone time and dismiss all the other phone times.

Well the 3:27 phone call matters a lot as it was instrumental to the Defence's case.

Stipp never provided a "phone time" in his statement to police investigators or his testimony at Trial… he never had access to the evidence, mainly the detailed billing of the security estate landline.

A. There is evidence Stipp called security twice when he was in his bedroom : once after the first bangs (call which no one answered) and once after the second bangs (call answered by Baba)

B. There is also evidence Stipp called security twice, once at 3:15:51 when he spoke to Baba AND once from OP's house at 3:27:14 when he spoke to no one

Evidence B does not disprove Evidence A… Evidence B does not discredit Evidence A… Evidence B is not more reliable than Evidence A… as they can both be correct : unanswered call or misdialed number.

How can an unanswered call or a misdialed number negatively affect Stipp's reliability or credibility ?… as it does not prove Stipp did not attempt to contact security after the first bangs.

 

[GR_Turner]

I'm indeed arguing against elements of both State and Defence as I find failures in both of them.

Nel's 3:17 gunshots were a HUGE mistake IMO :

- Time is relative (and I don't mean in the Einstein way) as no single clock can claim dominion on absolute exactness

- The probabilities the server clock and the Johnson phone clock shared the same time is very unlikely at best

- Johnson's time is not precise : was it 3:16:00 or 3:16:59 AND was it the call start time or end time

- From the Stipps and the security landline detailed billing, the gunshots occurred moments BEFORE 3:15:51

- From the Nhlengethwas and the security landline detailed billing, the gunshots occurred moments BEFORE 3:16:13

- From Johnson, his phone clock and his notes, the gunshots occurred moments AFTER somewhere between 3:15:02 and 3:17:57

- The screaming/shots event lasted but mere minutes

- The whole event from Stipp talking to Baba to Stipp witnessing Reeva's condition lasted but 10 minutes

- Using the Johnson time means you accept a maximum of 3 minutes of error which represent 30% of the whole event and perhaps up to 100% of the screaming/shots event

- Using the Johnson time means you run the risk of contradicting the server time, the Stipps testimony and the Nhlengethwas testimony

- Arbitrarily choosing 3:17 as the time of the gunshots means you definitely contradict the server time, the Stipps testimony and the Nhlengethwas testimony

- Objectively, the evidence indicates the gunshots occurred AFTER 3:15:02 but BEFORE 3:15:51 (and this is considering the Johnson clock shares about the same time as the server clock)

… Why Nel insisted on 3:17 is another highly suspicious mystery IMO as it provided the means by which Roux was in turn able to provide the means by which the Court could acquit OP.



Do you mean your detailed billing shows unanswered calls ?… or do you mean your telephone displays missed calls ?… because it's not at all the same system.

… and don't you have voice mail on your landline which "answers" call if no one is home ?



Well the 3:27 phone call matters a lot as it was instrumental to the Defence's case.

Stipp never provided a "phone time" in his statement to police investigators or his testimony at Trial… he never had access to the evidence, mainly the detailed billing of the security estate landline.

A. There is evidence Stipp called security twice when he was in his bedroom : once after the first bangs (call which no one answered) and once after the second bangs (call answered by Baba)

B. There is also evidence Stipp called security twice, once at 3:15:51 when he spoke to Baba AND once from OP's house at 3:27:14 when he spoke to no one

Evidence B does not disprove Evidence A… Evidence B does not discredit Evidence A… Evidence B is not more reliable than Evidence A… as they can both be correct : unanswered call or misdialed number.

How can an unanswered call or a misdialed number negatively affect Stipp's reliability or credibility ?… as it does not prove Stipp did not attempt to contact security after the first bangs.

The court can only go with the evidence it is given. Adv. Nel was running the prosecution in the case of his career so it seems unlikely that he would deliberately sabotage it. On the contrary, he seemed passionate about the case.

The phone call data must lessen Dr Stipp's reliability. Look at it logically. He said he made an unanswered call to security (no evidence), a call to 10111 which gave an odd tone (which Roux put at 3.17), he heard the second bangs and then some time later phoned security and got through (he got through at 3.15). The State could have shown the court that he was right by showing his phone records but they didn't do that. There must be an inference that Dr Stipp's phone records didn't help the State.

 

[GR_Turner]

I'm indeed arguing against elements of both State and Defence as I find failures in both of them.

Nel's 3:17 gunshots were a HUGE mistake IMO :

...snipped for space...

How can an unanswered call or a misdialed number negatively affect Stipp's reliability or credibility ?… as it does not prove Stipp did not attempt to contact security after the first bangs.

If your conclusions are that Adv. Nel must be deliberately sabotaging his own case which seems most unlikely, have you thought about whether there might be another explanation for these problems: perhaps Adv. Nel wasn't able to produce the evidence to show that Dr Stipp's and Mr Johnson's phone calls back up his case because his case is wrong?

 

[AJ_DS]

The court can only go with the evidence it is given. Adv. Nel was running the prosecution in the case of his career so it seems unlikely that he would deliberately sabotage it. On the contrary, he seemed passionate about the case.

The phone call data must lessen Dr Stipp's reliability. Look at it logically. He said he made an unanswered call to security (no evidence), a call to 10111 which gave an odd tone (which Roux put at 3.17), he heard the second bangs and then some time later phoned security and got through (he got through at 3.15). The State could have shown the court that he was right by showing his phone records but they didn't do that. There must be an inference that Dr Stipp's phone records didn't help the State.

Naturally I'm not purview to all of the State's investigations and what they revealed (none of us are)… but if it was collected it was surely disclosed to the Defence in discovery… hence if Stipp's detailed billing contradicted Stipp's testimony Roux would have use it, no ?… so the inference can also be that it was not available to either State or Defence.

Stipp testifying he attempted to call security after the first bangs IS evidence… which BTW was corroborated by his wife.

The fact the security detailed billing does not show this call does NOT lessen Stipp's reliability… as there are at least 2 obvious explanations why it does not appear there.

Testimonial evidence does NOT need to be corroborated by material evidence to be deemed reliable or credible.

Furthermore, the absence of material evidence does NOT automatically disprove or diminish testimonial evidence… only contradictory material evidence can do that.

E.g. You see 2 individuals running from a crime scene at 3AM… a traffic camera recording shows only 1 individual running from the crime scene at 3AM… can the Defence successfully argue that you are mistaken about seeing 2 individuals because only 1 was recorded by the camera ? Is it possible there are various reasons why the other individual was not recorded ? Should your testimonial evidence be deemed unreliable ?

As for Nel's passion… like I stated before, I believe he made many highly suspicious decisions in the case that played a pivotal role in OP's acquittal… the 3:17 time of the gunshots is one of them.

 

[AJ_DS]

If your conclusions are that Adv. Nel must be deliberately sabotaging his own case which seems most unlikely, have you thought about whether there might be another explanation for these problems: perhaps Adv. Nel wasn't able to produce the evidence to show that Dr Stipp's and Mr Johnson's phone calls back up his case because his case is wrong?

Setting aside deliberate sabotage for the moment…

1. Shoddy investigative work

2. Interference/objection by Defence to produce this evidence

… both could explain why it was not used at Trial.

BiB… For it to be so, Nel would have had to burry evidence and proceed with a prosecution he did not morally believe in.

Enjoying the discussion BTW !… thanks !!

 

[GR_Turner]

Naturally I'm not purview to all of the State's investigations and what they revealed (none of us are)… but if it was collected it was surely disclosed to the Defence in discovery… hence if Stipp's detailed billing contradicted Stipp's testimony Roux would have use it, no ?… so the inference can also be that it was not available to either State or Defence.

Stipp testifying he attempted to call security after the first bangs IS evidence… which BTW was corroborated by his wife.

The fact the security detailed billing does not show this call does NOT lessen Stipp's reliability… as there are at least 2 obvious explanations why it does not appear there.

Testimonial evidence does NOT need to be corroborated by material evidence to be deemed reliable or credible.

Furthermore, the absence of material evidence does NOT automatically disprove or diminish testimonial evidence… only contradictory material evidence can do that.

E.g. You see 2 individuals running from a crime scene at 3AM… a traffic camera recording shows only 1 individual running from the crime scene at 3AM… can the Defence successfully argue that you are mistaken about seeing 2 individuals because only 1 was recorded by the camera ? Is it possible there are various reasons why the other individual was not recorded ? Should your testimonial evidence be deemed unreliable ?

As for Nel's passion… like I stated before, I believe he made many highly suspicious decisions in the case that played a pivotal role in OP's acquittal… the 3:17 time of the gunshots is one of them.

It is possible that this evidence was available to both parties and that's why the State didn't quibble about the phone times. If they didn't have the evidence, then it's odd that they didn't given what was at stake.

 

[GR_Turner]

Setting aside deliberate sabotage for the moment…

1. Shoddy investigative work

2. Interference/objection by Defence to produce this evidence

… both could explain why it was not used at Trial.

BiB… For it to be so, Nel would have had to burry evidence and proceed with a prosecution he did not morally believe in.

Enjoying the discussion BTW !… thanks !!

Yes, it could very well be shoddy investigative work. It's still surprising given that this trial was televised so you would expect both sides to make sure of their evidence - though that would apply to the defense too, come to think of it and much of their evidence was also shoddy. Though they don't have to prove their case.

I don't see on what basis the defense could object to this evidence so that seems very unlikely to be true.

BiB Yes, it is very odd. I don't understand how he can put the shots at 3.17 and still believe that the screams were Reeva's. It makes no sense.

Me too! Glad you didn't mind me coming on here and questioning you!

 

[AJ_DS]

It is possible that this evidence was available to both parties and that's why the State didn't quibble about the phone times. If they didn't have the evidence, then it's odd that they didn't given what was at stake.

Quibble would not be the word I'd use as the Defence Timeline was more than instrumental to acquit OP…

3 possibilities :

1. Stipp phone data was available and corroborated Stipp… then one would expect Nel to use it

2. Stipp phone data was available and contradicted Stipp… then one would expect Roux to use it

3. Stipp phone data was not available

Since neither Nel nor Roux used it… one must conclude that it was not available.

As Nel stated, the phone data evidence was common cause BUT the Defence interpretations and timeline were not… but with no other explanation or alternate timeline ?!?

BiB… Indeed… hence the mystery

 

[AJ_DS]

Yes, it could very well be shoddy investigative work. It's still surprising given that this trial was televised so you would expect both sides to make sure of their evidence - though that would apply to the defense too, come to think of it and much of their evidence was also shoddy. Though they don't have to prove their case.

I don't see on what basis the defense could object to this evidence so that seems very unlikely to be true.

BiB Yes, it is very odd. I don't understand how he can put the shots at 3.17 and still believe that the screams were Reeva's. It makes no sense.

Me too! Glad you didn't mind me coming on here and questioning you!

What's mind boggling is :

- Nel enters into evidence the security detailed billing which shows Stipp called security at 3:15

- Nel enters into evidence Stipp's testimony which says the gunshots occurred before 3:15

- Nel stands up and declares in open Court that State's case is that OP shot Reeva at 3:17 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF !!

BiB… me neither… I just mentioned it as a possibility…. I'm pretty sure though that Defence objected to the State mentioning the dented metal bath panel and the jeans found outside under the bathroom window… and Masipa sustained the objection.

 

[GR_Turner]

Setting aside deliberate sabotage for the moment…

1. Shoddy investigative work

2. Interference/objection by Defence to produce this evidence

… both could explain why it was not used at Trial.

BiB… For it to be so, Nel would have had to burry evidence and proceed with a prosecution he did not morally believe in.

Enjoying the discussion BTW !… thanks !!

Perhaps we have exhausted the topic of phone call evidence?
You think that the court and State should have questioned the validity of the phone evidence as it comes from different sources and made no negative inference about the phone data not supporting Dr Stipp's evidence.
I think the court was put in the position of having to accept the calls evidence that puts the second bangs at 3.17 as that's what was put to them by both sides.

But there is more to the witness evidence than the phone calls, such as the bangs vs shots evidence from the witnesses:

If the defense case is right:
-The first bangs were the shots: Dr Stipp was woken by the first shot and heard the other three. The same probably applies to Mrs Stipp as it seems unlikely that she really heard the first bangs at 2.58 or 3.02.
-The second bangs were the bats: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard three, not four, bangs. Mrs Stipp described these as thuds.
-Mr Burger heard 5-6 shots. If they were the three bats, then this could well be the three bats and an echo. Mrs Burger heard less as she was indoors and her husband was outside.
-Mrs Van de Merwe probably did hear the actual shots as she heard only one set of bangs and was already awake so she heard all 4 shots. She heard 4 shots in quick succession (one after the other). This agrees with Oscar's version.

So this evidence fits well with Oscar's version.

If the State is right:
The first bangs weren't the shots: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard three loud bangs. The only candidate for these bangs is the bats. So the Stipps were woken by and heard all three bat strikes.
The second bangs were the shots: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard the shots but made a mistake about the number of shots despite being wide awake by this point. Mr Johnson also made a mistake about the number of shots. Mrs Burger was the only witness who heard those bangs to hear 4 shots (1 bang-3 bangs). She was furthest away of all the witnesses and indoors but she was right about this and all the other witnesses including Mrs Van de Merwe are mistaken.

This evidence is less than convincing imo.

 

[AJ_DS]

Perhaps we have exhausted the topic of phone call evidence?
You think that the court and State should have questioned the validity of the phone evidence as it comes from different sources and made no negative inference about the phone data not supporting Dr Stipp's evidence.
I think the court was put in the position of having to accept the calls evidence that puts the second bangs at 3.17 as that's what was put to them by both sides.

But there is more to the witness evidence than the phone calls, such as the bangs vs shots evidence from the witnesses:

If the defense case is right:
-The first bangs were the shots: Dr Stipp was woken by the first shot and heard the other three. The same probably applies to Mrs Stipp as it seems unlikely that she really heard the first bangs at 2.58 or 3.02.
-The second bangs were the bats: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard three, not four, bangs. Mrs Stipp described these as thuds.
-Mr Burger heard 5-6 shots. If they were the three bats, then this could well be the three bats and an echo. Mrs Burger heard less as she was indoors and her husband was outside.
-Mrs Van de Merwe probably did hear the actual shots as she heard only one set of bangs and was already awake so she heard all 4 shots. She heard 4 shots in quick succession (one after the other). This agrees with Oscar's version.

So this evidence fits well with Oscar's version.

If the State is right:
The first bangs weren't the shots: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard three loud bangs. The only candidate for these bangs is the bats. So the Stipps were woken by and heard all three bat strikes.
The second bangs were the shots: Dr and Mrs Stipp heard the shots but made a mistake about the number of shots despite being wide awake by this point. Mr Johnson also made a mistake about the number of shots. Mrs Burger was the only witness who heard those bangs to hear 4 shots (1 bang-3 bangs). She was furthest away of all the witnesses and indoors but she was right about this and all the other witnesses including Mrs Van de Merwe are mistaken.

This evidence is less than convincing imo.

BiB… LOL, yes I believe we covered it thoroughly !