Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[AJ_DS]

I didn't think you meant 'ha ha' funny. I'm sorry if in my reply it seemed that way. It's too easy to misunderstand when communicating this way!

Maybe our problem with the Stipps evidence is a differing approach to evidence. This is a court case and I'm trying to see the evidence from the perspective of the court which involves using the rules of the court. These rules were familiar to Adv Nel so when the State didn't contend that Dr Stipp's 10111 call wasn't at 3.17 or that Johnson's call didn't start at 3.16, he would have been aware that for the court, the Stipps' version of events doesn't agree with the calls evidence. We've already covered the rest - surely Dr Stipp's and Mr Johnson's phone records were available and yet not produced. If they weren't available from the phone company then why not.

The times of Dr Stipp's calls in relation to the bangs no longer matter that much as the evidence conflicts. But yes, I'd say he and his wife heard both sets of bangs and he made the 3.15 call between them.

I find most of Dr Stipp's evidence pretty reliable but like all witnesses, he could have made mistakes. He heard and saw many things and each should probably be judged on their own merits. I don't believe the bit about seeing the light on immediately after the first bangs.

BiB… Tell me about it !!

I agree "the State didn't contend Dr Stipp's 10111 call wasn't at 3.17"… Roux contented Stipp made the 10111 call at 3:17… but there is no evidence of that at all… if you want to follow the rules of the Court, you must concede that unfounded attorney contentions are meaningless.

I agree "the State didn't contend Johnson's call didn't start at 3.16"… Roux chose 3:16 as the start time because it helped his timeline… but the evidence before the Court is that it could have started or ended at 3:16.

Also, it is important not to misuse the term "conflicting evidence"… the Stipp's testimony evidence does not conflict with the phone data evidence… the Stipp's testimony evidence is simply not corroborated by the phone data evidence… there is a BIG difference between "conflicting" and "not corroborated" if you adhere to the rules of the Court.

As for Dr. Stipp, you find him pretty reliable except he was confused and made the following mistakes :

- His belief he attempted to call security twice from his bedroom, once after the 1st set of bangs and once after the 2nd set of bangs... is wrong because he only called once

- His belief he talked to Baba after the 2nd set of bangs… is wrong because he talked to Baba between the 1st and 2nd set of bangs

- His belief everything went quiet after he talked to Baba… is wrong because there was more screaming and another set of bangs

- His belief he saw the lights turned ON in OP's bathroom after the 1st set of bangs… is wrong because... ??? (...it contradicts OP and would jeopardize his version of events ?)

- … and Stipp's wife made the exact same mistakes.

If this is true then what about the Nhlengethwas :

- Stipp's call to security at 3:15:51 after 1st set of bangs heard by Stipp and his wife

- Nhlengethwa's call to security at 3:16:13 after 1st set of bangs heard by Nhlengethwa and his wife

- After the 1st set of bangs, Stipp and his wife both heard loud screaming and the 2nd set of bangs from a distance of 72 meters

- After the 1st set of bangs, Nhlengethwa and his wife both heard nothing but silence and eventually some crying from a distance of 9 meters

… How do you explain it ?

Did both Nhlengethwa and his wife make the exact same mistake and completely forget about the screaming and the 2nd set of bangs ?

How is it even possible for 2 people, 9 meters away who can hear faint crying, be unable to hear loud screaming and the repeated strikes of a cricket bat on a door… taking into consideration your earlier statements :

- "bats can sound very similar to shots"

- "putting all his might into swinging at the door"

- "he's an Olympic athlete so probably much stronger than most"

… and let us not forget that Johnson and his wife both heard from 177 meters away the screaming and the bat strikes at 3:17 which were loud enough that they mistook them for gunshots !!!!

 

[GR_Turner]

BiB… Tell me about it !!

I agree "the State didn't contend Dr Stipp's 10111 call wasn't at 3.17"… Roux contented Stipp made the 10111 call at 3:17… but there is no evidence of that at all… if you want to follow the rules of the Court, you must concede that unfounded attorney contentions are meaningless.

I agree "the State didn't contend Johnson's call didn't start at 3.16"… Roux chose 3:16 as the start time because it helped his timeline… but the evidence before the Court is that it could have started or ended at 3:16.

Also, it is important not to misuse the term "conflicting evidence"… the Stipp's testimony evidence does not conflict with the phone data evidence… the Stipp's testimony evidence is simply not corroborated by the phone data evidence… there is a BIG difference between "conflicting" and "not corroborated" if you adhere to the rules of the Court.

... snipped for space...

… and let us not forget that Johnson and his wife both heard from 177 meters away the screaming and the bat strikes at 3:17 which were loud enough that they mistook them for gunshots !!!!

BiB Not according to the State. Are they wrong?

 

[GR_Turner]

BiB… Tell me about it !!

I agree "the State didn't contend Dr Stipp's 10111 call wasn't at 3.17"… Roux contented Stipp made the 10111 call at 3:17… but there is no evidence of that at all… if you want to follow the rules of the Court, you must concede that unfounded attorney contentions are meaningless.

I agree "the State didn't contend Johnson's call didn't start at 3.16"… Roux chose 3:16 as the start time because it helped his timeline… but the evidence before the Court is that it could have started or ended at 3:16.

Also, it is important not to misuse the term "conflicting evidence"… the Stipp's testimony evidence does not conflict with the phone data evidence… the Stipp's testimony evidence is simply not corroborated by the phone data evidence… there is a BIG difference between "conflicting" and "not corroborated" if you adhere to the rules of the Court.

...snipped for space...

… and let us not forget that Johnson and his wife both heard from 177 meters away the screaming and the bat strikes at 3:17 which were loud enough that they mistook them for gunshots !!!!

It's hard to know what to make of Dr Stipp's 10111 call time. Adv Nel didn't object when Adv Roux said it so what can we make of that when both advocates were quick to object to inaccuracies in each others' statements? We don't know the source but that doesn't mean that the lawyers and court didn't know it.

Where there are two sources of evidence if they agree, then they corroborate each other. If they don't (ie there is conflicting evidence) they do not corroborate each other. In this case the evidence does conflict and so there is no corroboration unless you disregard some of the evidence.

 

[AJ_DS]

It's hard to know what to make of Dr Stipp's 10111 call time. Adv Nel didn't object when Adv Roux said it so what can we make of that when both advocates were quick to object to inaccuracies in each others' statements? We don't know the source but that doesn't mean that the lawyers and court didn't know it.

Whether they knew or didn't… it does not matter as their is no evidence before the Court… it's never about what attorneys know but what they can prove or disprove with evidence presented to the Judge.

Many statements by both parties were made and not challenged by opposing counsel… we cannot start trying to infer facts from them as it would be unwise and futile in the end.

Where there are two sources of evidence if they agree, then they corroborate each other. If they don't (ie there is conflicting evidence) they do not corroborate each other. In this case the evidence does conflict and so there is no corroboration unless you disregard some of the evidence.

I disagree…

Non corroborated evidence is definitely not the same as conflicting (contradictory) evidence.

E.g. had Stipp testified he never called security and the phone data showed he did call security that would be conflicting evidence

I provided another example in a previous post about a video recording that showed only one suspect fleeing when a witness testified he saw 2 suspects fleeing the crime scene… the fact the 2nd suspect was not in the field of vision of the camera or the time lapse recording failed to record the image of the 2nd suspect does not result in conflicting evidence… simply non corroborated evidence as it still possible they were 2 suspects

 

[GR_Turner]

BiB… Tell me about it !!

... snipped for space...

As for Dr. Stipp, you find him pretty reliable except he was confused and made the following mistakes :

- His belief he attempted to call security twice from his bedroom, once after the 1st set of bangs and once after the 2nd set of bangs... is wrong because he only called once

- His belief he talked to Baba after the 2nd set of bangs… is wrong because he talked to Baba between the 1st and 2nd set of bangs

- His belief everything went quiet after he talked to Baba… is wrong because there was more screaming and another set of bangs

- His belief he saw the lights turned ON in OP's bathroom after the 1st set of bangs… is wrong because... ??? (...it contradicts OP and would jeopardize his version of events ?)

- … and Stipp's wife made the exact same mistakes.

If this is true then what about the Nhlengethwas :

- Stipp's call to security at 3:15:51 after 1st set of bangs heard by Stipp and his wife

- Nhlengethwa's call to security at 3:16:13 after 1st set of bangs heard by Nhlengethwa and his wife

- After the 1st set of bangs, Stipp and his wife both heard loud screaming and the 2nd set of bangs from a distance of 72 meters

- After the 1st set of bangs, Nhlengethwa and his wife both heard nothing but silence and eventually some crying from a distance of 9 meters

… How do you explain it ?

Did both Nhlengethwa and his wife make the exact same mistake and completely forget about the screaming and the 2nd set of bangs ?

How is it even possible for 2 people, 9 meters away who can hear faint crying, be unable to hear loud screaming and the repeated strikes of a cricket bat on a door… taking into consideration your earlier statements :

- "bats can sound very similar to shots"

- "putting all his might into swinging at the door"

- "he's an Olympic athlete so probably much stronger than most"

… and let us not forget that Johnson and his wife both heard from 177 meters away the screaming and the bat strikes at 3:17 which were loud enough that they mistook them for gunshots !!!!

I have doubts about the Stipps' timings because their phone calls and evidence are different. Dr Stipp's memory of the timing of the 3 helps is also different from that of Mrs Burger and Mr Johnson.

I don't believe the Stipps about the lights being on for a number of reasons. They saw different lights, their descriptions of the lights is unlikely to be that of the lights immediately after the first bangs on either version, and they said the lights didn't change, impossible on both versions.

I am not concerned that Mrs Stipp's evidence agreed with Mr Stipp's. They probably discussed it and agreed what happened together - this would be the natural thing to do. We know that Mrs Stipp originally said she saw a man in the bathroom and then had it removed from her statement as she realised this was her husband's memory.

You are right about the Nhlengethwa's and other close neighbours not hearing the second bangs - it is odd. And the same must surely apply to the Stipps and the male crying on the State's version. Why didn't the Stipps hear Oscar's crying after the second bangs? It was very loud and lasted some time, and they should have been able to hear this but didn't.

Distance was clearly not everything - Mrs Van de Merwe was much closer than Mrs Burger and Mr Johnson and heard less. So it seems that the direction of the windows matters too.

 

[AJ_DS]

BiB Not according to the State. Are they wrong?

The State is not a witness… they present evidence and make their case according to said evidence.

Johnson testified the call started or ended at 3:16 … that's the evidence before the Court.

The State chose (for some unexplained and inexplicable reason) the call started at 3:16 (ending at 3:17) and the gunshots occurred seconds after which were heard by everybody.

The Defence chose the call started at 3:16 (ending at 3:17) and the bat strikes occurred seconds after which were heard by Dr. Stipp and Mrs Stipp (from 72 meters away), by Johnson and Burger (from 177 meters away) BUT were NEVER heard from Mr. Nhlengethwa and Mrs. Nhlengethwa (from 9 meters away)

Yes... I believe the State made a HUGE mistake by building their case on Johnson's testimony and notes as the times in the detailed billing provided a more exact and more precise timeline which did not contradict Johnson's uncertain 3:16 time.

 

[AJ_DS]

I have doubts about the Stipps' timings because their phone calls and evidence are different. Dr Stipp's memory of the timing of the 3 helps is also different from that of Mrs Burger and Mr Johnson.

I don't believe the Stipps about the lights being on for a number of reasons. They saw different lights, their descriptions of the lights is unlikely to be that of the lights immediately after the first bangs on either version, and they said the lights didn't change, impossible on both versions.

I am not concerned that Mrs Stipp's evidence agreed with Mr Stipp's. They probably discussed it and agreed what happened together - this would be the natural thing to do. We know that Mrs Stipp originally said she saw a man in the bathroom and then had it removed from her statement as she realised this was her husband's memory.

You are right about the Nhlengethwa's and other close neighbours not hearing the second bangs - it is odd. And the same must surely apply to the Stipps and the male crying on the State's version. Why didn't the Stipps hear Oscar's crying after the second bangs? It was very loud and lasted some time, and they should have been able to hear this but didn't.

Distance was clearly not everything - Mrs Van de Merwe was much closer than Mrs Burger and Mr Johnson and heard less. So it seems that the direction of the windows matters too.

I'm confused about your answer about the Stipps… basically it seems to me you are saying they are unreliable in regards to what they saw, what they heard and what they did… yet you describe them as "pretty reliable" witnesses ?!?

Saying it is "impossible" the light didn't change is incorrect IMO… it is only impossible if one subscribes to OP's version of events.

BiB… you qualify as simply "odd" the fact the Nhlengethwas did not hear the screaming and the mighty bat strikes which sound like gunshots !!!… that's not odd, that's a GAPPING hole !

… and you explain it by pointing out the Stipps at a distance 8 times greater than the Nhlengethwas could not hear OP crying and sobbing… really ??

1. Who said the crying was "very loud"… the people who where 9 meters away.

2. If the crying and sobbing was very loud for the Nhlengethwas, the screaming and bat strikes would have been deafening and unforgettable for them.

3. One should take into consideration where the events took place in OP's house… the shooting and the bat strikes unmistakably occurred in the bathroom… the crying started in the bathroom (back of the house) but moved downstairs near the front door (front of the house).

 

[AJ_DS]

GR_Turner

If the Stipps who were merely bystander witnesses to an unknown event could get so confused and make so many mistakes about what they saw, heard and did, surely OP who was the main character directly implicated in the event - scared, panicked, terrorized and in fear for his life - would also be confused and make mistakes, no ?

Which parts of OP's testimony about the events do you believe to be unreliable ?

 

[AJ_DS]

Try pretending to hit something three times and fast with a bat or something of similar size. It isn't a static thing with careful placement of the bat over your shoulder on the backswing. To hit a ball you'd move the bat back sharply before bringing it forward again. To do multiple hits quickly you must move the bat back very fast to start the next swing. That's why you'd always check what's around you before you swing a bat. So the backswings would be very powerful.

How is the YT guy's swing inconsistent with the testimony?

Sorry I missed this reply…

I'm not questioning the fact that a back swing has some force…

The tub panel is far to low (near to the ground) and far to back and to the left (near the window) to ever be struck on any kind of back swing.

Look closely at the photos… particularly at the size of the full square tiles and the small narrow tiles around the tub







The YT guy at 1:20 swings the cricket bat basically parallel to the ground with a slight upwards motion… the tip of the bat starts slightly below the waist and strikes door slightly above the waist

OP's testimony and forensic evidence shows the swings were in a downwards motion like someone using an axe to split wood logs… the tip of the bat started slightly above the head and strikes the door approximately at eye level.

Considering the evidence and/or the location of the tub panel… there is no way someone bashing at the toilet door could ever accidentally or otherwise strike the tub panel… never mind with the force necessary to bash the tub panel in that manner.

The tub panel was bashed with intent that is undeniable IMO

 

[GR_Turner]

I'm confused about your answer about the Stipps… basically it seems to me you are saying they are unreliable in regards to what they saw, what they heard and what they did… yet you describe them as "pretty reliable" witnesses ?!?

Saying it is "impossible" the light didn't change is incorrect IMO… it is only impossible if one subscribes to OP's version of events.

BiB… you qualify as simply "odd" the fact the Nhlengethwas did not hear the screaming and the mighty bat strikes which sound like gunshots !!!… that's not odd, that's a GAPPING hole !

… and you explain it by pointing out the Stipps at a distance 8 times greater than the Nhlengethwas could not hear OP crying and sobbing… really ??

1. Who said the crying was "very loud"… the people who where 9 meters away.

2. If the crying and sobbing was very loud for the Nhlengethwas, the screaming and bat strikes would have been deafening and unforgettable for them.

3. One should take into consideration where the events took place in OP's house… the shooting and the bat strikes unmistakably occurred in the bathroom… the crying started in the bathroom (back of the house) but moved downstairs near the front door (front of the house).

If the crying started in the bathroom then it should still have been heard by the Stipps. They were out on their balcony talking to the security people in the minutes following the phone call. So both they and the security people should have heard something imo. The close neighbours were indeed close but their windows weren't facing Oscar's bathroom or bedroom like the Stipp's bedroom was. Their descriptions were of very loud (so loud they thought it was in their house in the case of the Motshuanes) keening or wailing that was very high pitched as though someone was in pain. Yet this didn't reach the Stipps' house. This doesn't seem likely to me. Even the Van de Merwes heard Oscar crying at a similar distance - it makes no difference if they heard him in the bedroom or later downstairs, it's still a similar distance.

 

[AJ_DS]

If the crying started in the bathroom then it should still have been heard by the Stipps. They were out on their balcony talking to the security people in the minutes following the phone call. So both they and the security people should have heard something imo. The close neighbours were indeed close but their windows weren't facing Oscar's bathroom or bedroom like the Stipp's bedroom was. Their descriptions were of very loud (so loud they thought it was in their house in the case of the Motshuanes) keening or wailing that was very high pitched as though someone was in pain. Yet this didn't reach the Stipps' house. This doesn't seem likely to me. Even the Van de Merwes heard Oscar crying at a similar distance - it makes no difference if they heard him in the bedroom or later downstairs, it's still a similar distance.

And the point being what ???

… that OP never cried ?…

… or that the Stipps are more unreliable because they could not hear OP crying… in which case the Nhlengethwas are completely unreliable for not hearing the screaming and the cricket bat strikes.

Or are you suggesting it's possible the Nhlengethwas could hear the crying but not the screaming and the bat strikes who sound like gunshots because of the angle of the window ????

Seriously ?

BiB… distance to the source of a sound is not the only factor although I'm starting to suspect you will argue anything as long as it makes OP story stick

- Van de Merwes bedroom balcony faces the front of OP's house

- OP's front door was open

- OP was with Reeva's body at the bottom of the staircase which is about 2 meters from the front door

- When Van de Merwes and her husband heard OP wailing, they were also witnessing a commotion in front of OP's house (cars, people, etc.)… since the first individuals to arrive and enter OP's home found him coming down the stairs, the wailing Van de Merwes and her husband heard was of OP near the front of the house, next to the front door which was open.

- When OP was in the bathroom he was at the opposite end of the house… so it's not at all the same distance or the same circumstances.

- Not hearing someone cry from 72 meters away is perfectly normal (that's 2 thirds of a football field !!!)… describing those cries as being loud from 9 meters away is also normal.

 

[GR_Turner]

Sorry I missed this reply…

I'm not questioning the fact that a back swing has some force…

The tub panel is far to low (near to the ground) and far to back and to the left (near the window) to ever be struck on any kind of back swing.

Look closely at the photos… particularly at the size of the full square tiles and the small narrow tiles around the tub

View attachment 69691

View attachment 69692

View attachment 69693

The YT guy at 1:20 swings the cricket bat basically parallel to the ground with a slight upwards motion… the tip of the bat starts slightly below the waist and strikes door slightly above the waist

OP's testimony and forensic evidence shows the swings were in a downwards motion like someone using an axe to split wood logs… the tip of the bat started slightly above the head and strikes the door approximately at eye level.

Considering the evidence and/or the location of the tub panel… there is no way someone bashing at the toilet door could ever accidentally or otherwise strike the tub panel… never mind with the force necessary to bash the tub panel in that manner.

The tub panel was bashed with intent that is undeniable IMO

On Vermeulen's evidence, the bat was just pulled back and hit the door. The strikes were too low for him to be standing like that. If he hit downward with the bat, then the bat would be low down and so there's a chance of a hasty backswing being low too. I don't think it's impossible it was the back swing. I think we would probably need to actually try this one out to test whether it's possible .

No one did call the cleaner so we just don't know. The case won't be decided on this unless there's a retrial at any event.

 

[AJ_DS]

On Vermeulen's evidence, the bat was just pulled back and hit the door. The strikes were too low for him to be standing like that. If he hit downward with the bat, then the bat would be low down and so there's a chance of a hasty backswing being low too. I don't think it's impossible it was the back swing. I think we would probably need to actually try this one out to test whether it's possible .

No one did call the cleaner so we just don't know. The case won't be decided on this unless there's a retrial at any event.

BiB…

- You are more than willing to allege some things are possible when they are clearly not… and other things as impossible when they clearly are possible.

- When confronted with some shockingly inexplicable incongruity you are satisfied to call it a mere unimportant and inconsequential oddity… but on some minor inconsistencies or uncorroborated fact you will declare total lack of reliability on anything that does not suit you.

- Some evidence you will automatically and arbitrarily dismiss without justification or explanation.

Personally, I was hoping for an open-minded and frank discussion about the evidence but I now realize you are not the person to provide it.

Cheers.

 

[GR_Turner]

And the point being what ???

… that OP never cried ?…

… or that the Stipps are more unreliable because they could not hear OP crying… in which case the Nhlengethwas are completely unreliable for not hearing the screaming and the cricket bat strikes.

Or are you suggesting it's possible the Nhlengethwas could hear the crying but not the screaming and the bat strikes who sound like gunshots because of the angle of the window ????

Seriously ?

BiB… distance to the source of a sound is not the only factor although I'm starting to suspect you will argue anything as long as it makes OP story stick

- Van de Merwes bedroom balcony faces the front of OP's house

- OP's front door was open

- OP was with Reeva's body at the bottom of the staircase which is about 2 meters from the front door

- When Van de Merwes and her husband heard OP wailing, they were also witnessing a commotion in front of OP's house (cars, people, etc.)… since the first individuals to arrive and enter OP's home found him coming down the stairs, the wailing Van de Merwes and her husband heard was of OP near the front of the house, next to the front door which was open.

- When OP was in the bathroom he was at the opposite end of the house… so it's not at all the same distance or the same circumstances.

- Not hearing someone cry from 72 meters away is perfectly normal (that's 2 thirds of a football field !!!)… describing those cries as being loud from 9 meters away is also normal.

The point being that there are problems with the State's version too. I have said it's odd that the Nhlengethwas didn't hear the bat strikes and that this is a weakness in the defense version. But then it's odd that there were 2 sets of sounds that night that sounded like gunshots, when one wasn't. And the State didn't explain the first set of shots. So that's a weakness in the State's version.

I don't think either of us is unbiased. Who is? You want Dr Stipp's phone call to security to time the second shots because that makes Oscar guilty surely. This means a misdial, a 10111 call at 3.17 has been made up somehow by the defense, yet not contradicted by the State, and Mr Johnson's 3.16 call must have started or ended at 3.16. Would he not have gone home and checked his records at the very least and let Adv Nel know the true time if it was wrong? Or they could have checked the other security phone number. It's just so obvious to me that the phones evidence is a problem for the State and that just dismissing it as above doesn't solve those problems.

The Nhlengethwas wouldn't have heard female screaming on either version. On the State's they slept through it and on the defense they heard it but knew it was a man's voice, not a woman's.

 

[GR_Turner]

BiB…

- You are more than willing to allege some things are possible when they are clearly not… and other things as impossible when they clearly are possible.

- When confronted with some shockingly inexplicable incongruity you are satisfied to call it a mere unimportant and inconsequential oddity… but on some minor inconsistencies or uncorroborated fact you will declare total lack of reliability on anything that does not suit you.

- Some evidence you will automatically and arbitrarily dismiss without justification or explanation.

Personally, I was hoping for an open-minded and frank discussion about the evidence but I now realize you are not the person to provide it.

Cheers.

The phones evidence really only leads one way imo. It's not wrong then to wonder how the rest of the evidence may be right or wrong and not just dismiss things as impossible when you can't be that sure.

To be clear, regarding the phones evidence, Adv Nel not only didn't challenge the evidence but actually agreed with it, so one of the following must be true:

A. The State know the phones evidence is wrong but are deliberately trying the throw the case (no)
B. The State didn't get the phones evidence - so they are incompetent in the most high profile case of their careers (v. unlikely imo - they had plenty of time to realise that the phone evidence was key)
C. The phones evidence is not available. (imo it's highly unlikely that none of Mr Johnson, Dr Stipp, the other security or the 10111 call data were obtainable from the phones company)
D. The phone data are right and support the defense case. (what other option is there?)

Have I missed something? If not then logically we are left with:

Either Oscar's version is basically true, or
The screams evidence is wrong but that the State's contention that there was a fight and he meant to shoot Reeva is basically true.

Do you see where I'm coming from? If you want someone who will just agree with you then I'm not the right person. I don't mind if you prefer not to discuss further but it's been interesting so thanks for the discussion.

 

[Sherbert]

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.

If that is the case, doesn't it prove that the bats came first? If they came second, how could the Nhlengethwas have missed them?

 

[GR_Turner]

If that is the case, doesn't it prove that the bats came first? If they came second, how could the Nhlengethwas have missed them?

Do we then have two impossible versions? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how the States's version about the screams can be true - see my post above. That and the lack of a proper narrative from the State which makes me think they don't understand how their evidence fits together either. The problem of the near neighbours not hearing the bats is small fry compared with the State's rather bigger problems imo.

 

[Estelle]

EXCLUSIVE - Oscar Pistorius's luxury prison upgrade:
Killer given privileges to hug visitors and wear jewellery because 'he doesn't pose a threat'

Prison chiefs have upgraded his status from category B to category A
New privileges also include making more phone calls and having a hobby
Allowance to buy chocolate, drinks and toiletries has risen from £6 to £9
Source told MailOnline: 'This has boosted him a lot. He has been very low'
Pistorius has served four months of 5-year 'culpable homicide' sentence


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...es-upgraded-good-behaviour.html#ixzz3SHcaW7CB

 

[Estelle]

Oscar Pistorius Case: Principles in practice or Principles avoided.

http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/Osca...es-in-practice-or-Principles-avoided-20150218

What do you think about this article?

 

[Sherbert]

Do we then have two impossible versions? Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how the States's version about the screams can be true - see my post above. That and the lack of a proper narrative from the State which makes me think they don't understand how their evidence fits together either. The problem of the near neighbours not hearing the bats is small fry compared with the State's rather bigger problems imo.

I don't understand how the evidence fits together either. How can the Defence simultaneously claim that the first sounds heard by the Stipps at approx 3:02 were the shots and the bang heard by the Nhlengethwas approx ten minutes later was also the shots?

Also, how could the Nhlengethwas be phoning at 3:16, ie at least a couple of minutes after hearing the last shot, if Johnson heard bangs during his 3:15 call?