Oscar Pistorius Defense

[Cherwell]

BBM

It seems as if one of the Stander's primary concerns was to prevent publicity and backlash from the media. They were very protective.

Re making sure the area was clear of cars. I think that was simply to make sure that there was room for the ambulance to come in, that's all.

 

[BritsKate]

Your link re the uncle only proves that he is not a reputable source.

The family, in great shock appointed him.

But your link is titled "'Nobody saw it coming,' Reeva Steenkamp's uncle says"



http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news...ody-saw-it-coming-reeva-steenkamps-uncle-says



Sometime later June started giving interviews and said that Reeva told her there were problems with him from the getgo.



Indeed maybe the uncle is the source of rumors. But there seems to be nothing to be found from Reeva's own mouth. If she was forthcoming about a "psycho" date, maybe she would have told all, if there was a long-time abusive relationship?



Everyone has said that Reeva would not have tolerated such a thing.

Do you happen to know if the draft of her speech has been discredited? Because she specifically referenced such a relationship in the excerpts published in UK media. Here's a quote and a link:

"I was in an abusive relationship at the same time (his mother used to abuse him)," read the notes. She was in the relationship towards the end of her time at university in Port Elizabeth, when she also broke her back, forcing her to "learn mobility again". Her traumatic relationship caused her to leave Port Elizabeth and "move to Jozi [Johannesburg]".

"I lost a lot of self-worth during my last year in PE [Port Elizabeth] before I moved to Jozi and it took some serious soul searching to remind myself of my value in this world," reads the draft of her speech. "Being loved by others, although an amazing feeling to have the appreciation of others, does not define your place in the world," the draft continues.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/d...d-was-previously-in-abusive-relationship.html




Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[swissmonster]

Hi everyone, I'm new to this forum, my first to be honest. I've spent the last week or so reading as much as I physically can and want to say how impressed to read such intelligent discussions. Thank you.
As many, I am totally consumed with this trial, it's taken a major seat in my life and I've many questions that I hope will find answers/theories here.
If I may, I'd like to start with one point that haunts me. I apologise in advance if this is a little out of line (mods?). It's the sex issue. Why is this not something that comes up? I would have thought that the fact that OP was looking at *advertiser censored* between 6 and 7pm, whilst up in his room supposedly putting his pyjamas on would be of interest to the pros. to form a motive. OK, so I'll stop beating around the bush and say it: did OP try to, or suceed in raping RS and then needed to eliminate her, the threat to his bucks, ego and career? I think this because of: the *advertiser censored* watching (who does so early in a relationship whilst new gf is cooking dinner and you're supposed to be getting ready for the evening/dinner??), the jeans inside out at the bottom of the bed, his grey t-shirt that looks like it's been thrown on the R side of the bed, the duvet on the ground. If you look at the side of the bed RS was in that night, the pillow has a major head dent. It sounds like she did not sleep that night in the bed (again, OP's version) and was sitting up texting or whatever ("I laid my head on her stomache"). The pros. version is that she did not even go to bed that night, so why the head dent in the pillow?? It bugs me. If a housekeeper cleans the house, and no doubt makes the bed, pillows are often "fluffed out", yet this pillow says that a head was on it, either for a long time, or being pressed into it. I cannot stop thinking that he, wound up by all night arguing, agressed her sexually, either managed to or she managed to get away, ran to the bathroom as there was no other exit (bedroom door locked, balcony blocked by fan and OP no doubt). Once she had bolted, IMO, he then decided her fate. In a split second, he decided to turn her last breaths into pure terror ("how dare you defy me") and eliminate her, dispose of the body (and panels) and then use her "disappearance" for his.......marketing! Oh poor OP cannot find his gf.
Finally, does anyone know more about the autopsy report?? Has it been made public?

 

[swissmonster]

Excuse me, this is a little bit off topic from the current discussion. I am confused and maybe someone familiar with cricket bats can assist. Are these photos of the opposite sides of the cricket bat? If so, how did the blood get on the other side?

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www...cache/gallery_780x583/2014/04/01/img_0826.jpg


http://assets.nydailynews.com/polop...rivatives/article_1200/pistorius1n-13-web.jpg

link

I have been wondering why so much blood is on the cricket bat at all! If he supposedly used it to bash in the door, then what's the blood doing there? I keep wondering if he hit her, hard, in the head at some point, broke skin (wanting to make her ugly) then when she locked herself in the toilet, he broke the door with the handy bat, saw that she was bleeding through the crack, and realised there was only one option left: eliminate her.

 

[swissmonster]

Something's very strange about this whole ambulance debacle.

OP's testimony about when the Standers arrived.

08:51:

"When I got down to the bottom of the stairs they told me to put Reeva down and told me the ambulance was on the way. I said: 'We need to get to the hospital. We need to get to the hospital.' They said to just put her down as the ambulance was on its way," Mr Pistorius tells the court.

TWICE he says the Standers told him an ambulance was on its way - but how could it be, when OP hadn't called one, and neither had the Standers? Dr Stipp wasn't even at the house at that point, and it was he who told Stander to call an ambulance. So why did OP claim the Standers told him to put Reeva down because an ambulance was on its way? An ambulance hadn't even been called at that stage

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-26951686

He no doubt was already planning to pin the blame on the Standers: THEY told me an ambulance was on the way, it never came, so it's their fault that she died.

 

[swissmonster]

~BBM

totally agree and was just about to post similar. That great minds thing again

I've always thought, how strange to have the mindset to plug in your phone for charging on such a night. I would imagine that charging your phone is the least of your worries, especially now that the police etc are there, all with phones and he had another two phones available. Why on earth make sure THAT phone is charged?

 

[swissmonster]

I think the pics dated Feb 28 with the measuring tape were taken in the lab after the cricket bat was collected from the scene as evidence. There are other pics (that were shown in court) of the cricket bat in the bathroom that are dated Feb 14, 2013.

Lisa's blog (juror13) contains many of the evidence photos, including the dates that the crime scene photographer took them.

http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-11/




I agree. Those pics show the same side of the cricket bat. One is obviously an image of the bat in the bathroom. I think the image of the bat with the measuring tape was taken 2 weeks later in the forensics lab.

Here is an image of the reverse side of the bat with the signatures:

http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-11/

OMG I had not seen that side of the bat before. It just hit home to me, per my previous post, he used the bat to hit her in the head. I'm no forensics expert but come on, what on earth is that blood on the corner of the bat?? And so well placed? Surely you'd hit with the top corner to create as much damage as possible. I'm sure he left a mark on her head and (in his sick mind) had no other option that to kill her. The fact that a bullet went into her head, (and I DO believe he could see her through the cracks in the door), he AIMED at her head to cover up the beating. How could they tell during the autopsy whether she was hit or not in the head? He had blown it away.
This makes me sick

 

[swissmonster]

Good point, Greater Than.

If the Standers believed that Reeva was dead, why was Stander's daughter scurrying here and there fetching towels, plastic bags, rope, and tape in an effort to allegedly staunch the bleeding?

Perhaps they are starstruck and yes, were ready to help him dispose of the body. Mr. Stander is the estate, what owner, manager? So money is involved... the mere fact that OP called HIM speaks volumes about their "friendship". Does OP have info on them (blackmail) and used it to gain their cooperation? I can just imagine the daughter telling OP, no body no crime, you need to get rid of it.
I think they are just as sick as OP.

 

[katydid23]

Re making sure the area was clear of cars. I think that was simply to make sure that there was room for the ambulance to come in, that's all.

Maybe. It depends upon how it was worded. Saying that the 'area ' should be 'clear of cars' sounds bigger or different than just leaving room for the ambulance. jmo

 

[kittychi]

Two different people with different life experiences reacting differently to a very stressful situation. Obviously Carise had some hope that Reeva was alive and she set out to gather things to render aid. Hopefully the defense will call one or both of them so that they can tell us what was said to them and why they did what they did.

I don't believe that OP instructed Carise to run upstairs to do something to the crime scene for him, and to bring back some towels as an excuse. She was trying IMO to be of help to Reeva.

I respond to questions from my wife about things everyday and she often times looks at me with astonishment and does what her first thought was before she talked to me about it. I'm used to it now. People have an instinct or a gut feeling about what they should do in many situations and just because others would do differently that does not preclude them from doing what feels right to them.

:floorlaugh:

 

[Cherwell]

Maybe. It depends upon how it was worded. Saying that the 'area ' should be 'clear of cars' sounds bigger or different than just leaving room for the ambulance. jmo

But that was only my paraphrase! :floorlaugh:

I was responding to a post of yours in which you said* "Stander also told Baba to make sure that there were no cars parked at Oscar's house".

Whatever the words that were actually used, I don't think we should read any more into it. Facilitating access for the emergency services is a normal and practical thing to do in such circumstances.

* looking back, I see that you were quoting another poster anyway.

 

[swissmonster]

Another thought..
Why, what on earth would make RS run and hide in the toilet, of all places?? I am sure only a very very bad event. Think about it, she was 30 (mature), a Leo (strong traits), was known to stand up for herself... She probably faught back with all her might, right up to the last 15 minutes where she had no other option than to run and take cover in a tiny, cornered in toilet (room within a room no least). Something happened between 2 and 3am, something terrible, that left marks on RS and on the wall above the bed. I think she somehow managed to get away (he is missing parts of his legs which must given her an advantage at some point) ran in bathroom as there was no other option (fight or flight, she was in the flight stage) and once that door slammed shut, she knew she was trapped, and going to die.
Her jeans out the window...that was perhaps a desperate attempt that she hoped would help the no doubt future investigation into her death.
The blood curdling screaming: I'm about to die. Hear me

 

[turaj]

As I recall they are starting May 5th but then election on May 7th...so are we going to have a very short week here. With the hours and breaks this could be a mid summer (in US) finish.

 

[Viper]

Just so we have it all in one place:

Oscar
Phone records show that he called Netcare at 3:20:05 (66 seconds).
He testified that he was told by the dispatcher to drive Reeva to the hospital himself.

He also testified that when he reached the bottom of the stairs, Stander told him to put Reeva down and that an ambulance was on the way (twice).

Stipp
According to Dr. Stipp, after he examined Reeva and determined she was dead, he stepped outside with Stander. He asked Stander if an ambulance was on the way, and Stander said he had not called them yet.

Stipp called his hospital ER but they told him he needed to contact emergency services/911 directly. Stander got them on the phone, and Stipp described Reeva's injuries to them. The ambulance arrived somewhere in the time range of 3:45am. SIDE NOTE: Stipp testified that Mrs. Stander made a comment about hoping that the incident did not get out to the media.




Baba
Baba testified that when Oscar came down the stairs, the Standers were in the doorway and he was behind them (Baba and guards never made it inside the house that night).

He stated that Mr. Stander instructed him to go call police and an ambulance, which he says he did. SIDE NOTE: Stander also told Baba to make sure that there were no cars parked at Oscar's house.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He testified that he was told by the dispatcher to drive Reeva to the hospital himself.

He also testified that when he reached the bottom of the stairs, Stander told him to put Reeva down and that an ambulance was on the way (twice).

That could mean that OP told Mr. Stander that he (OP) would call for an ambulance after they hung up the phone. Mr. Stander believed that OP had called for an ambulance and it was on its way. OP did call Netcare after they hung up, but he says they told him to drive Reeva to the hospital himself. Mr. Stander apparently did not know that, and he saw that Reeva was dead, so he told OP to put her down.

...He (Stipp) asked Stander if an ambulance was on the way, and Stander said he had not called them yet....

That does not say that Mr. Stander did not believe that OP had called for an ambulance. It says that he (Stander) had not called. Perhaps by that time Mr. Stander was beginning to question whether OP had really called Netcare.

He (Baba) stated that Mr. Stander instructed him to go call police and an ambulance, which he says he did. SIDE NOTE: Stander also told Baba to make sure that there were no cars parked at Oscar's house.

So upon arrival at the house Mr. Stander requested that Baba call for an ambulance and the police! Mr. Stander also requested that Baba keep the driveway clear for the arrival of the ambulance and the police. All of that sounds reasonable and appropriate.

 

[jimmy73]

That does not say that Mr. Stander did not believe that OP had called for an ambulance. It says that he (Stander) had not called. Perhaps by that time Mr. Stander was beginning to question whether OP had really called Netcare.

Apologies if I have missed it on the threads or during court proceedings but has anything been released in terms on OP's call to Netcare beyond the call time and duration? Is the content of the call likely to be discussed further?

 

[shane13]

Do you happen to know if the draft of her speech has been discredited? Because she specifically referenced such a relationship in the excerpts published in UK media. Here's a quote and a link:

"I was in an abusive relationship at the same time (his mother used to abuse him)," read the notes. She was in the relationship towards the end of her time at university in Port Elizabeth, when she also broke her back, forcing her to "learn mobility again". Her traumatic relationship caused her to leave Port Elizabeth and "move to Jozi [Johannesburg]".

"I lost a lot of self-worth during my last year in PE [Port Elizabeth] before I moved to Jozi and it took some serious soul searching to remind myself of my value in this world," reads the draft of her speech. "Being loved by others, although an amazing feeling to have the appreciation of others, does not define your place in the world," the draft continues.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/d...d-was-previously-in-abusive-relationship.html

The link you posted goes to a page which has no source and no author (that I could see).

No one has been able to find who this alleged abuser is.

It wasn't Lahoud (4.5 yr relationship),and I saw a recent video on the life of RS. Revealed the supposed first boyfriend (over 7 years long relationship),who said he still loved her, and their relationship was fine, and it wasn't him. Much that was in the MSM within the first couple of days did not pan out [like your article with the uncle saying there was no indication,when there was.]. I believe June has said there was no such abusive relationship that she knew about [other than Oscar.]
So we don't know for sure...if that is true and who that bf was, if true.

 

[Viper]

Apologies if I have missed it on the threads or during court proceedings but has anything been released in terms on OP's call to Netcare beyond the call time and duration? Is the content of the call likely to be discussed further?

No details about what was said in the conversation have been released, no recording or any statement from Netcare. I don't recall whether or not Roux suggested that anything was coming that is related to the Netcare call when he was questioning any of the witnesses. We have only heard from OP that he was told to take Reeva to the hospital, and his phone records document that he did call Netcare. That's it really, for now anyway.

 

[Interested Bystander]

As I recall they are starting May 5th but then election on May 7th...so are we going to have a very short week here. With the hours and breaks this could be a mid summer (in US) finish.

The judge said they would have to work through Election Day of 7th May.

 

[JuneBug67]

To be honest, I was really referring to those who make an excuse for every lie he's been caught out in. I had an open mind myself until the cross-examination got underway and actually found it hard to believe that anyone could be so untruthful. There's always two sides to every story and I like to hear both sides first, but once the lies kept coming and coming, well the tables turned for me.

As trials unfold we get more and more information to consider. We are all making ongoing decisions about what information is important or definitive and what information must then be explained in some other way. That's reasoning. For example I find these things to be very important:

- there is far more precedent for Oscar overreacting, gun in hand, to perceived threats in his home than there is to him meting out physical violence on a girlfriend

- the relationship was new and mostly good and the were in general very affectionate towards each other; murderous rage is a significant step from even the ugliest of their handful of disagreements

- the evidence very strongly suggests to me that the gunshots and cricket bat strikes came in two discreet groups and that the shots were first; if so this is fatal to the prosecution theory

And to a lesser extent:

- the evidence is consistent with Oscar's version of standing at the entrance to the bathroom and firing into the door as he claims; this is a more credible distance and angle for reacting to an 'intruder' than it is for a direct confrontation with a known target you are in a rage against

- if they hadn't gone to bed that night I would have expected some activity on at least one of their electronic devices that indicated definitive human action, even briefly and even once.

So the pieces of evidence that to my mind are important have me leaning to Oscar's version being fundamentally true. That means I have to find alternate explanations for things which seem to implicate him. Those on the other side of the fence must do it too for potentially exculpatory information. This is not making excuses, it's building a narrative that is internally consistent. So in my case that means things like:

- rejecting the crime scene photographs as completely reliable based on the fact that things are known to have been disturbed and the fact that one of the first cops on the scene was banished and branded and not even here to testify

- accepting that Oscar may indeed have been yelling and screaming in a high pitch at times and that witnesses would have a bias to hearing a high pitch as a female voice; I have to go further and perceive intermingled voices as a construction of memory rather that an actual event. This is where it might be perceived that I am "making excuses", which In a sense I am. But it comes from my belief that the objective evidence indicates that the bat came second which means Reeva could not have been screaming, so there must be an alternate explanation for what the witnesses heard.

- believing that Oscar's inconsistencies are issues with memory, character and personality, fear of conviction and the nature and goals of cross examination rather than an indication that he is lying about targeting Reeva rather than an 'intruder'

And so on. I realize that many of you see this as making excuses or close mindedness or having ones head in sand etc. but it is just the individual nature of thought and experience and reasoning. If challenge and stretching ones mind and capacity for empathy is valued then thought in opposition to our own is far more precious than agreement. The minority opinion is almost always undervalued on discussion boards and its holders often demoralized to the point of withdrawing. I think there is some evidence of that happening in these discussions and I think it has perhaps begun to affect the conversation.

 

[Karmady]

I've always thought, how strange to have the mindset to plug in your phone for charging on such a night. I would imagine that charging your phone is the least of your worries, especially now that the police etc are there, all with phones and he had another two phones available. Why on earth make sure THAT phone is charged?

I don't think you meant to quote me here.