Discussion Thread #60 - 14.9.12 ~ the appeal~

[Starmelody]

Thank you, Mr Fossil for sharing these videos. I am watching them for the first time and it is absolutely shocking to me to see OP re-enact his version of what happened, because he doesn't show any emotion whatsoever! He cried and puked in court, but in front of the camera he just went through the motions as if describing some event other than this horrific murder.

What I find interesting is that in the video when he puts on his prosthesis and runs back to the bathroom, the gun vanishes. Yet it was found on the floor in the bathroom. On the Stand in court he claims that he placed the gun on the bed while he put his legs on and then picked it up again before running to the bathroom. If that were the case,why wasn't it part of the reenactment? Or have I missed something.?

 

[44ALLAN]

What I find interesting is that in the video when he puts on his prosthesis and runs back to the bathroom, the gun vanishes. Yet it was found on the floor in the bathroom. On the Stand in court he claims that he placed the gun on the bed while he put his legs on and then picked it up again before running to the bathroom. If that were the case,why wasn't it part of the reenactment? Or have I missed something.?

It's best if you just think everything OP and his defence team said was not the truth and it becomes so much easier to understand IMO.
So Mr.Pistorius someone shot at you on the highway and you can remember parking your car after turning left /turning right/ the name of the strret/ the road /and the slip road leading into the mall etc etc etc .......................YES.
Who did you phone to come and pick you up................I can't remember !
Who brought you back the next day to collect your car.............I can't remember !

I don't think you've missed too much......................the ...ing judge did tho..............give me strength!

 

[Chelly]

May this worthless scum spend many, many more Christmas Eve's in prison!:jail:

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Exactly. Both Reeva and the "intruder" were 100% silent and invisible at all times.

It was strictly a one-man show.

Oscar was the ONLY actor, as well as sole screenwriter, director, set designer, casting director, prop master, stunt master, sound engineer, lighting director, weapons master, SFX and most importantly, editor.

Your opinion is always sooo wonderful aptly worded!!!

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Quite possibly, but what really made him flip was that she locked the toilet door and he coudn't get at her ....i'm just wondering whether she ran into the toilet with his phone because she saw something on it and that kicked it all off, for me it's something like that.

You and Starmelody are right, I think!
First a great dispute re the new contract or something similar, then Reeva's resistance and a flood of mutual accusations (she louder than him) and then one/several "dangerous" impeachment/s from Reeva to OP and the sudden necessity for Reeva to escape - my imagination in about.

 

[Marfa Lights]

Exactly. Both Reeva and the "intruder" were 100% silent and invisible at all times.

It was strictly a one-man show.

Oscar was the ONLY actor, as well as sole screenwriter, director, set designer, casting director, prop master, stunt master, sound engineer, lighting director, weapons master, SFX and most importantly, editor.

Gee, I wish Lux had prosecuted the case!

 

[Colin de France]

And..........................how could they get out of the toilet window ?
Think about it

The ladder (in OP's imagination) was at the other window..............." I was looking between the door and the window"..............not the toilet window though. He meant the bathroom window where he said the intruders entered by the ladders.

Another major point I think Nel failed in by not re-inforcing the point to the Judge and the assessors even though he did mention it.

He told the court the 'intruder', in his opinion, had entered the 'bathroom' by climbing up ladders at the bathroom window.
He then told the court he heard the toilet door slam shut and he believed the intruder was in the toilet.
He then told them to 'get out'................lol fx me.
He must have known even if all that was remotely true they would have had to jump from the toilet window to the ground below because the ladder would have been at the 'bathroom' window...............anyway he gave whoever was behind the door no chance of survival whatsoever.

Why did the judge and the assessors not see this is the question !!
Unbelievable.

Not much of a burglar slamming the door shut and if he had heard OP coming woudn't the quickest and safest route be to go back down the ladder (in the bathroom)? Lastly, all this in the dark ? Did the intruder have a torch ? The more you go into this area it's a real minefield......and the toilet lock, the intruder managed to find the lock in the dark, did the lock make a sound, would a lock make much difference to an intruder trapped in a toilet......we are in the realms of ridicule.

 

[Sherbert]

Merry Christmas, everyone! Looking forward to meeting you all here again in the New Year!

 

[44ALLAN]

Not much of a burglar slamming the door shut and if he had heard OP coming woudn't the quickest and safest route be to go back down the ladder (in the bathroom)? Lastly, all this in the dark ? Did the intruder have a torch ? The more you go into this area it's a real minefield......and the toilet lock, the intruder managed to find the lock in the dark, did the lock make a sound, would a lock make much difference to an intruder trapped in a toilet......we are in the realms of ridicule.

BiB....................
Unless like myself you believe that OP and Reeva argued ( as per witness statement) and for whatever reason he smashed the bath panel/the bedroom door/the toilet door and intentionally fired 4 shots through the toilet door in total rage knowing it was Reeva in the toilet.
If you believe that then all the rest is made up garbage after himself and his family/defence team have had the advantage of 18 months of witness statements to make up his 'story'.
Hence the reason the 'leaked' video is nearly the exact opposite of his evidence given by OP on the stand !.

I hope the SCA judges aren't on the Olympic SA Athletics Committee.................AIMHO

 

[AJ_DS]

I agree and i'm not sure that Nel merits as much praise as he has received, OP was not pushed as hard as he should of been, the case was not sealed by any means.

I would disagree (respectfully)… here is why :

1. OP had access to ALL of the evidence that the State possessed… and he had over 1 year to examine and study it.

2. OP had a whole team of high-priced attorneys working for him for more than 1 year, examining the State's evidence to determine every possible angle, hole, discrepancy, etc…

3. OP had a whole team of forensics experts working for his attorneys, assisting the Defence with every single minute detail of the State's case.

4. OP was extensively prepped and rehearsed by a whole team of attorneys for the express purpose of his testimony at Trial, specifically his cross-examination.

5. OP had a whole team of attorneys during the Trial to type-up, scrutinize and analyze in real-time witness testimonies… not having to wait for the official Court transcripts that can take days to be prepared and be made available to the Court.

6. OP is not an uneducated simpleton… OP is smart and educated… and to top it all off, OP is an experienced liar used to doing reprehensible things and then lying about it to shift blame onto others.

7. OP had the benefit of employing emotional outbursts to control the tempo and flow of his cross-examination.

8. Nel had basically nothing to go on except OP's statement to witnesses that he shot Reeva because he thought she was a burglar and OP's bail affidavit that did not provide much detail (details would come later at Trial when the "final" version was completed and tested)

9. Add to all that, the shoddy police work at the crime scene !

… Personally I cannot fathom a "worse case" scenario for any State's attorney in a purely circumstantial evidence Trial.

Entertaining the idea that Nel could possibly make OP "crack" under cross-examination is far-fetched to say the least, IMO.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Not much of a burglar slamming the door shut and if he had heard OP coming woudn't the quickest and safest route be to go back down the ladder (in the bathroom)? Lastly, all this in the dark ? Did the intruder have a torch ? The more you go into this area it's a real minefield......and the toilet lock, the intruder managed to find the lock in the dark, did the lock make a sound, would a lock make much difference to an intruder trapped in a toilet......we are in the realms of ridicule.

Ridicule is right.

Any intruder who’s got the balls and skills in the dead of night to:

* navigate over a 10 foot electrified wall (indeed, how does one do that without frying said balls?)
* waltz past roaming estate security
* scale OP’s property walls
* brazenly risk getting eaten by two large guard dogs (who mysteriously never let out one alarm and at least one of which previously killed two of OP’s other dogs)
* silently erect an unwieldy metal contractor’s ladder up to the bathroom window*
* SLAM open said window (seriously? How unprofessional after all that stealth!)
* clamber into said bathroom from precarious top ladder rung without crashing into noisy wooden blinds, metal bathroom scales and/or the metal trash can

... is NOT suddenly going to become shy and frightened and lock himself inside a tiny toilet, cowering silently in abject fear.

Oscar’s story is pure sci-fi.

The whole idea behind home invasion is to aggressively CONFRONT and INVADE.


* All while totally ignoring the open-all-night bedroom balcony doors. Uncanny that at the exact moment OP closes the balcony doors he not only misses Reeva but the “intruder” enters his house - the precise timing could not have been more perfect if it had been ... planned.

 

[lolastareyes]

I just re-watched the end of his cross examination and his explanation about the magazine rack is truly ridiculous.

When asked by Nel the position he found Reeva, OP says she was where the magazine rack was and that the magazine rack was not where it is in the photo, that it was to the far right of the toilet.
Then when he is explaining how he got Reeva out of the toilet, he says he must of kicked the magazine rack into the position it was found (first time we hear this evidence). Nel asks if he has a memory recollection/reconstruction of this, OP says he doesn't but that he "must of" kicked it into position.

Later on in the cross exam Nel points out that the left leg of the rack is in a pool of blood and there is no indication that it slid into the blood. So OP then says that it was picked up and placed into the blood (WTF?!) Nel also points out that Prof Botha said that the marks on her back were caused by the rack, so OP then says Reeva must of fallen against the rack that was supposedly on the right side of the toilet!

I don't understand how he could be so wrong about the position of the mag rack and the position of her body.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQBha2ZCAjU

 

[Colin de France]

I would disagree (respectfully)… here is why :

1. OP had access to ALL of the evidence that the State possessed… and he had over 1 year to examine and study it.

2. OP had a whole team of high-priced attorneys working for him for more than 1 year, examining the State's evidence to determine every possible angle, hole, discrepancy, etc…

3. OP had a whole team of forensics experts working for his attorneys, assisting the Defence with every single minute detail of the State's case.

4. OP was extensively prepped and rehearsed by a whole team of attorneys for the express purpose of his testimony at Trial, specifically his cross-examination.

5. OP had a whole team of attorneys during the Trial to type-up, scrutinize and analyze in real-time witness testimonies… not having to wait for the official Court transcripts that can take days to be prepared and be made available to the Court.

6. OP is not an uneducated simpleton… OP is smart and educated… and to top it all off, OP is an experienced liar used to doing reprehensible things and then lying about it to shift blame onto others.

7. OP had the benefit of employing emotional outbursts to control the tempo and flow of his cross-examination.

8. Nel had basically nothing to go on except OP's statement to witnesses that he shot Reeva because he thought she was a burglar and OP's bail affidavit that did not provide much detail (details would come later at Trial when the "final" version was completed and tested)

9. Add to all that, the shoddy police work at the crime scene !

… Personally I cannot fathom a "worse case" scenario for any State's attorney in a purely circumstantial evidence Trial.

Entertaining the idea that Nel could possibly make OP "crack" under cross-examination is far-fetched to say the least, IMO.

"pushed" ! .......With respect you forgot number 10 ...add to that the fact that the prosecution and the defence discussed before the trail started what evidence would be brought up in court ....No i'm afraid OP had it relatively easy IMHO........for someone so intelligent.

 

[Colin de France]

Ridicule is right.

Any intruder who’s got the balls and skills in the dead of night to:

* navigate over a 10 foot electrified wall (indeed, how does one do that without frying said balls?)
* waltz past roaming estate security
* scale OP’s property walls
* brazenly risk getting eaten by two large guard dogs (who mysteriously never let out one alarm and at least one of which previously killed two of OP’s other dogs)
* silently erect an unwieldy metal contractor’s ladder up to the bathroom window*
* SLAM open said window (seriously? How unprofessional after all that stealth!)
* clamber into said bathroom from precarious top ladder rung without crashing into noisy wooden blinds, metal bathroom scales and/or the metal trash can

... is NOT suddenly going to become shy and frightened and lock himself inside a tiny toilet, cowering silently in abject fear.

Oscar’s story is pure sci-fi.

The whole idea behind home invasion is to aggressively CONFRONT and INVADE.


* All while totally ignoring the open-all-night bedroom balcony doors. Uncanny that at the exact moment OP closes the balcony doors he not only misses Reeva but the “intruder” enters his house - the precise timing could not have been more perfect if it had been ... planned.

You're so right, we've gone from Mission Impossible to a ten year old burglar.....

 

[AJ_DS]

"pushed" ! .......With respect you forgot number 10 ...add to that the fact that the prosecution and the defence discussed before the trail started what evidence would be brought up in court ....No i'm afraid OP had it relatively easy IMHO........for someone so intelligent.

Apologies Colin but I'm somewhat confused by your reply :thinking:

A. "pushed" ??… You seem to be quoting my post… but I don't believe I used the word "pushed" anywhere… so I'm unsure as to what you are referring to.

B. My understanding is that "Number 10" is standard operating procedure in all criminal cases... Prosecution and Defence discuss what evidence will be or will not be presented in Court… if parties disagree, an application is made to the Judge for a ruling on the matter.

C. "for someone so intelligent"… I did not imply that OP was a MENSA candidate by any stretch of the imagination… only that defendants are sometimes simple minded, uneducated, impressionable persons which are not as capable of being highly knowledgeable about the evidence and being sufficiently prepped/rehearsed… consequently, those individuals are far easier to "trick" into an unescapable contradiction during cross-examination.

D. Your original POV was "i'm not sure that Nel merits as much praise as he has received"… to which I replied that Nel was basically up against a worse case scenario in terms of Prosecution… Now you take the view of BiB… I'm unsure how the 2 are connected in your minds eye, unless you are suggesting that Nel was bought off by OP and that he deliberately sabotaged the State's case or that the purpose of cross-examining the accused is to punish the accused.

… perhaps you could elaborate a bit and specify where you believe Nel failed the State.

What would you have done differently ? … and speculate on the answers OP would have provided to your cross-examination.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

O/T

Meet the world's first 'bionic' pop star

"I prefer seeing it as a health problem. The word disabled lost its meaning for me a long time ago and I find it too broad in scope and inaccurate. We are no longer living in the forests and jungles where a person with a physical body issue cannot reach their highest potential as a human being through other achievements, and physical ability or strength have nothing to do with that in my opinion. If we talk about intelligence ̶ which is something that's leading the modern world ̶ then the term disability and who it may apply to is very much turned on its head. I believe if anyone is going to label people disabled, then their overall capabilities should be considered."

 

[Colin de France]

In reply to AJ_DS......"pushed" was in regards to "crack". I personally don't think it should be left to the defence or the prosecution in a democratic cilvilised public court what evidence will be allowed, who is able to judge the importance of evidence even before the court has started (my opinion of course). Sometimes defendants are intelligent and are capable of manipulating the judicial enviroment. As for Nel i don't think he went as far as he could, for one you're right that he had very little power in the court i agree with that, but there was his reputation as a judicial bulldog confronted with the Mr Nice Guy public image which seemed to of took it's place, i had the impression many times that he seemed lost not knowing what to do and that affected his statue and intellectual aggressivity. As you can see from this discussion alone there are many factors which have not been explored, but there is still enough i believe, to of enabled a jury come to another conclusion radically different to that of Masipa.

 

[AJ_DS]

In reply to AJ_DS......"pushed" was in regards to "crack". I personally don't think it should be left to the defence or the prosecution in a democratic cilvilised public court what evidence will be allowed, who is able to judge the importance of evidence even before the court has started (my opinion of course). Sometimes defendants are intelligent and are capable of manipulating the judicial enviroment. As for Nel i don't think he went as far as he could, for one you're right that he had very little power in the court i agree with that, but there was his reputation as a judicial bulldog confronted with the Mr Nice Guy public image which seemed to of took it's place, i had the impression many times that he seemed lost not knowing what to do and that affected his statue and intellectual aggressivity. As you can see from this discussion alone there are many factors which have not been explored, but there is still enough i believe, to of enabled a jury come to another conclusion radically different to that of Masipa.

BiB… on that we are in agreement !!

On Nel appearing lost at times during cross-examination : Let us keep in mind that every single line of questioning that Nel put to OP was previously thought up by the Defence team which extensively prepped OP prior to him taking the stand… this is where the aforementioned "intelligence/education" was instrumental : OP was able to assimilate all the evidence and rehearse his testimony over and over with the assistance of a whole team of high-priced attorneys.

When one thinks about the forensics reenactment of the scene that was conducted and "leaked" by the Evidence Room… most people believe the primary purpose of that reenactment was to produce an Court exhibit to illustrate the Defence's version of events to the Judge… I disagree… I believe it was primarily made to create, test and refine OP's fabricated version of events :

1. By play acting a fabricated scene, OP could chronologically construct and tweak a plausible version of events.

2. By reenacting a fabricated scene, OP would engineer real memories of fictitious events… this would help him to recount his version on the stand with far greater accuracy and far less hesitation or mistakes.

3. By having an audio/video medium of OP's version, the Defence team attorneys would have something concrete to visualize, analyze and scrutinize so as to find all possible holes in OP's version of events.

 

[Colin de France]

BiB… on that we are in agreement !!

On Nel appearing lost at times during cross-examination : Let us keep in mind that every single line of questioning that Nel put to OP was previously thought up by the Defence team which extensively prepped OP prior to him taking the stand… this is where the aforementioned "intelligence/education" was instrumental : OP was able to assimilate all the evidence and rehearse his testimony over and over with the assistance of a whole team of high-priced attorneys.

When one thinks about the forensics reenactment of the scene that was conducted and "leaked" by the Evidence Room… most people believe the primary purpose of that reenactment was to produce an Court exhibit to illustrate the Defence's version of events to the Judge… I disagree… I believe it was primarily made to create, test and refine OP's fabricated version of events :

1. By play acting a fabricated scene, OP could chronologically construct and tweak a plausible version of events.

2. By reenacting a fabricated scene, OP would engineer real memories of fictitious events… this would help him to recount his version on the stand with far greater accuracy and far less hesitation or mistakes.

3. By having an audio/video medium of OP's version, the Defence team attorneys would have something concrete to visualize, analyze and scrutinize so as to find all possible holes in OP's version of events.

I'm glad you agree. What stands out with this case is there is no proof, no proof of nothing only elements which seem to be pushing us in one direction, what is so frustrating is that all the elements are in sequence and accordance, i firmly believe a jury would of needed little time to of come to a decision. The one big lesson here is just how essential is a jury.

 

[Cherwell]

Considering what’s at stake - Oscar Defense as dangerous new precedent - I think this qualifies as an exceptional case.

If it was only one or two rather sketchy witnesses viewed as “unreliable” for solid, rational reasons, one could comfortably support a trial judge’s findings of fact.

This is not the case.

State’s presented FIVE highly credible ear witnesses who heard a woman’s screams or an argument BEFORE the shots. Defense presented NO incontrovertible evidence to disprove or refute these testimonies. This alone should have convicted OP of murder. On what basis did Masipa find them all unreliable? Yet she relied heavily on “unreliable” Dr. Stipp as proof of OP’s “remorse”! This is clear evidence of cherry-picking bias.

Worse, she simply bought Roux’s blanket statement that OP screams like a woman as if it was common knowledge - she inexplicably allowed him to get away with not proving it.

As the verdict and sentence hang directly on factual findings and considering the SCA must read and examine the entire trial, I don’t see how they could fail to find multiple damning flaws in Masipa’s “facts”.

Plus she also seems to have disregarded the evidence of one of the defence witnesses (!) that Pistorius, shouting or wailing out loud, sounded like a MAN.