Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #68 *Appeal Verdict*

[LemonMousse]

Yet another hostile post? Sadly no surprise there.

Victim friendly forum - of course it is. Why on earth would it be a victim-unfriendly forum?! So yeah- thanks - i had noticed! in your mind does that equate to a lack of interest in justice being done for all involved? What exactly does 'pro-reeva' and 'victim-friendly' mean to you?

How interesting to see your definition of pistorian.

How interesting also to see you comment that you don't think I am really interested in seeing justice for Reeva. Wrong, but again, sadly no surprise. Justice for Reeva is also justice for Pistorius. Justice is justice for all. It's not exclusive to one party or the other - or it wouldn't be justice would it?

And re the scream discussion yesterday, if you really think I said he stopped screaming for a moment to hear the noise, then you clearly haven't read my posts properly. Doesn't make for an informed discussion that.

What, exactly, do you think he has been found guilty of? Because it isn't the deliberate killing of Reeva Steenkamp.

Well, first of all he was convicted of the deliberate murder of a human being called Reeva Steenkamp.

Second, when I pointed out that he wouldn't have heard the wood move with all his screaming, you said:

"Re: the wood movement. Maybe he wasn't screaming at that moment". Direct quote.

Quite why you are denying it now, I have no idea. I do not have reading comprehension difficulties and I do not lie.

There was no hostility in my post to you. In fact, I went out of my way to make it clear I was addressing the content of your posts and not you personally.

So anyway...maybe Of Mice and Men is not your thing. Oklahoma, perhaps?

 

[Noisy Fan]

Van der Nest's report was definitive on the matter - he described arterial blood spatter on the walls near the open part of the upper staircase. Other marks were drips cast from Reeva's hair.

It isn't possible that the shots were first with the extra time delay, it's only just about possible with the later shots.

It's almost funny that Pistorius put in a pause with the bat strikes, trying to cover all eventualities of what witnesses heard. Just because he claims to have missed the door first time doesn't mean there would have been a pause in the sequence.

The crack through the bullet hole isn't an impossibility, considering that he did rip out the panels after the shooting.

Wasn't Van der Nest's report contested?

There is a pretty good dent on the door jam. I would probably take a second and move a bit to the left.

Again, all the state had to do was hit the door at night with the window open to determine if the strikes could be heard. If they could not be heard they win the point.

 

[Tortoise]

Wasn't Van der Nest's report contested?

There is a pretty good dent on the door jam. I would probably take a second and move a bit to the left.

Again, all the state had to do was hit the door at night with the window open to determine if the strikes could be heard. If they could not be heard they win the point.

No, it wasn't contested.

I don't think there were three bat marks on the door - it was two from memory.

However, the point is that Reeva could not have been shot at the earlier time.

 

[Cherwell]

I don't recall the prosecution re-creating the cricket bat strikes for the purpose of determining whether they could be heard or not. It seems like the model could be tested. Wait for a night with a similar temperature and at around 3 in the morning with the bathroom window open have someone hit the door a few good whacks and have people where the ear witnesses were. If the strikes were audible or not would clear up this point.

Some tests were done by the defense but not from the home with the bat unless I am mistaken ...

Again, all the state had to do was hit the door at night with the window open to determine if the strikes could be heard. If they could not be heard they win the point.

Not so simple. In the year between the murder and the trial, more houses had been built on the estate between the homes of Pistorius and Burger/Johnson. That would affect how sound travels. The conditions could never be replicated.

 

[aftermath]

Well, first of all he was convicted of the deliberate murder of a human being called Reeva Steenkamp.

Second, when I pointed out that he wouldn't have heard the wood move with all his screaming, you said:

"Re: the wood movement. Maybe he wasn't screaming at that moment". Direct quote.

Quite why you are denying it now, I have no idea. I do not have reading comprehension difficulties and I do not lie.

There was no hostility in my post to you. In fact, I went out of my way to make it clear I was addressing the content of your posts and not you personally.

So anyway...maybe Of Mice and Men is not your thing. Oklahoma, perhaps?

It hasn't been found that he knew it was Reeva behind the door so it hasn't been found that he deliberately killed Reeva.

So you agree that I didn't say he stopped screaming for a moment to hear the wood noise, just that when he heard it he wasn't screaming at that moment. Subtle but significant difference.

oklahoma definitely not my thing. As I have said - i am more of a Discovery of Witches or The Night Circus or Pride and Prejuduce or Wuthering Heights or Great Expectations or Oliver Twist or Beloved or Streetcar Named Desire or Northern Lights kind of person. I am an avid reader so can happily recommend a good writer if you are looking for a brilliant read?

 

[Paul Connelly]

From personal experience in adrenalized situations there is a focus that is all consuming. You do not get to choose. It is an auto pilot response that can save lives. It allows mothers to lift cars off of their injured child or a fireman to carry 3 times his weight out of a burning building. Ask the mother if she was aware of anything around her.

It doesn't happen all the time but when it does it is pretty amazing. I know this sounds strange ... until you find yourself in that situation and the you go "Wow!" "What just happened?"

You have never gone through this?

We have a sub conscience mind that looks after most bodily things without us having to actually choose our heart to beat or choose to breathe and in times of necessity that sub conscience takes over and can protect us or at least tries to.

It releases chemicals that directs blood flow to the muscles to give us superior strength. It blocks pain. It locks us on the important task at hand. Time slows (seemingly) ...

What seems really strange to me is that in this modern time when we know medically what is going on, the courts seem to have a hard time or at least are selective in incorporating this phenomenon as a normal human response.

That's because what you describe is some sub-standard cliched version from a C Grade movie. Oscar simply heard a noise. Nothing more, nothing less. Years ago I was a naval chaplain prior to the first gulf war. We knew war was imminent and the state of alert was at bikini Amber, the second highest. Despite this all armed personnel had to abide by the rules of engagement and give 3 warnings to any intruders before the could shoot to kill. This applied to both women and men. Despite being scared witless in any contact they would adhere to the rules of engagement knowing they otherwise faced a court martial for murder. These rules still apply to this day. Throughout my service all personnel managed this without struggling with the kind of ethereal experience you describe which simply doesn't happen because you hear a noise.

Oscar had similar training and knowledge of the rules of engagement and he recklessly ignored them as he had previously done in Tasha's.

 

[aftermath]

No, it wasn't contested.

I don't think there were three bat marks on the door - it was two from memory.

However, the point is that Reeva could not have been shot at the earlier time.

I think there were three. There was the additional one that Vermeulen didn't mention during his testimony but that Roux pointed out to him?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

It is hard to imagine how that went down. We were lead to believe that Hilton Botha had so compromised the State's case that Nel had to negotiate his way out of that situation and Carl was the beneficiary.

I see the Hilton Botha thing in another light than the most: I think, he was a well trained, decent officer who was the first to name the "tragic accident" :sick: an unambiguous homicide. He saw no opportunity that the shooting would have been caused by an "intruder". AND HE WAS EXACTLY RIGHT: he saw clues of worst DV and murder.

I'm sure, when he testified as a witness from "higher up" something specific had been imposed on him already. That caused his insecure statements. Then suddenly he was withdrawn from the case because of an ancient investigation. Since then everybody is picking on him, unfairly I think.
He was sacrificed in favor of "the" family Pistorius and its descendant Mr. Sports Hero. IMO

I will wait impatiently for a book of Botha, but I do not know if he is allowed to write it at all, the poor officer.

Btw: I have an uncertain feeling as if Nel had also some important instructions from "higher up", JM possibly too?


-.-.-.-
The next victim of the Pistorius case:

Former Colonel Schoombie Van Rensberg, who resigned from the South African police force last year amid claims of incompetency over the security of the toilet door .....

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/oscar-p...ncompetence-20140314-34sjt.html#ixzz3uElkRME1
-.-.-.-
The next victim of the Pistorius case:

Bennie van Staden began to suffer from depression after he had photographed the grisly crime scene and he quitted his job. (No link found, has been an interview with him, has disappeared.)
-.-.-.-

 

[LemonMousse]

Regarding bat marks....please remember:

Vermuelen's testimony was NEVER that the bat couldn't have been used on the door before the shooting.

The only thing he could say for sure was that the plank was prised out after the shooting because it neatly dissected a bullet hole as it came out. A proceedure, by the way, that would not have made any "banging noises".

He said that there was no scientific way of determining when the other marks were made.

Nel asked him whether the bat could have been used on the door before the shooting to scare Reeva. Vermuelen said "yes".

 

[aftermath]

No difference, subtle or otherwise. He testified that he was screaming in the bathroom, witnesses testified shooting commenced during screaming.

Begs the question, how did he hear wood moving? Your made up explanation, maybe he wasn't screaming at that moment - based on no evidence, and contrary to the evidence that was presented.

I'm sure you are an avid reader. I have never doubted that for one single second.

It isn't contrary to the evidence though. This has already been explained by a different poster. Noisy Fan, I think.
Pistorius never testified that he screamed non stop. There was plenty of opportunity - on his own evidence - when he wasn't screaming and shouting - when he could have heard a noise from inside the cubicle. My explanation isn't made up.

 

[Noisy Fan]

It isn't contrary to the evidence though. This has already been explained by a different poster. Noisy Fan, I think.
Pistorius never testified that he screamed non stop. There was plenty of opportunity - on his own evidence - when he wasn't screaming and shouting - when he could have heard a noise from inside the cubicle. My explanation isn't made up.

post #550

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Admin Note

There have been dozens of posts removed due to the constant back and forth attacking each other.

If it continues, it will result in the loss of posting privileges no questions asked.

I want to remind everyone that this is a DISCUSSION board. Not a board where someone posts their thoughts and then everyone has to agree. We don't have to agree and we can say why we don't agree, as long as we don't get personal about it.

BAITING, TROLLING, INCITING CONFLICT

“Trolling” or making posts with the intention of creating problems on the forums is obviously against the forum guidelines. This includes registering an alternative ID for the sole purpose of creating problems on the forums.

A member who visits WS only to incite "conflict" will be designated a "troll", and find his/her account temporarily or permanently suspended.

WS maintains zero tolerance for members who create posts intended to antagonize other members.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?65798-Etiquette-amp-Information

IGNORE LIST

If you've got a couple of posters that you feel you just cannot bear reading, the "Ignore List" is your friend. When you put someone's name on your list you will not see their posts. The poster will have no way of knowing they are on your list (and it's a TOS violation to make an obnoxious post saying you are doing so, since there's no reason for it). Click on the link below:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/pro...?do=ignorelist

Bump

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[LemonMousse]

It isn't contrary to the evidence though. This has already been explained by a different poster. Noisy Fan, I think.
Pistorius never testified that he screamed non stop. There was plenty of opportunity - on his own evidence - when he wasn't screaming and shouting - when he could have heard a noise from inside the cubicle. My explanation isn't made up.

Noisy Fan elected to ignore the point that we were making - and that is that it is utterly ridiculous that Pistorius would be screaming at all in that situation. He said he screamed, cried, prayed to god, screamed at Reeva to call the police and for the intruders to "get the feck out of my house". How long is this corridor? To have done all that he'd be shrieking far more than he was quiet. But I suppose he had to take a breath.

Pistorius then testified that he stopped screaming (he specified this) when he got to the bathroom so the intruders wouldn't be able to tell where he was (!!!!!!!), saw no one, started screaming again, heard a noise and shot.

That was his testimony. Never did he say that he stopped screaming and then heard a noise. Never.

And I repeat....the witnesses all claimed the SCREAMING WAS ENDED WITH THE SHOTS. That's why he had to lie and say he was screaming like a girl in the bathroom.

"Maybe he wasn't screaming at that moment" is a made up explanation based on no facts.

 

[LemonMousse]

Wasn't Van der Nest's report contested?

There is a pretty good dent on the door jam. I would probably take a second and move a bit to the left.

Again, all the state had to do was hit the door at night with the window open to determine if the strikes could be heard. If they could not be heard they win the point.

And you know, all the defence had to do was produce a recording of Pistorius "screaming like a woman" and play it to to the witnesses. This they didn't do.

Don't you find that curious?

 

[sleuth-d-]

Yes. You're right the defence did say this. Is it the truth though? Bearing in mind they had spoken to and seen all witness statements?

Not so hard to say that when you know exactly what the witnesses are going to say.

to fit the witness accounts:
he screams like both a woman and a man

and also fires a cricket bat like a 9mm, or a swings a 9mm like a cricket bat... depending on how far away you are standing.

 

[LemonMousse]

to fit the witness accounts:
he screams like both a woman and a man

and also fires a cricket bat like a 9mm, or a swings a 9mm like a cricket bat... depending on how far away you are standing.

"He screams like both a woman and a man.....at the same time!"

He is a marvel, huh? Puts Keith Harris and Orville to shame!

 

[Paul Connelly]

"He screams like both a woman and a man.....at the same time!"

He is a marvel, huh? Puts Keith Harris and Orville to shame!

Like Orville before him, I bet Pistorius wishes he could fly...to Mozambique

 

[sleuth-d-]

I hear you.

He crossed my line as well. I would have no problem locking him and his brother in jail for doing it. My problem is the prosecution, who most likely (I hope) know the details better than both of us chose to deal the matter away.

re: dealing the matter away... my problem, is that once the phone was wiped, there is no heinous crime, bombshell or hammer blow left for the prosecution to use. nevertheless, surely the fact that it was taken - out of the hands of the police investigation - means that there was something incriminating on it. if there was nothing to hide on it, why remove it? we are back to 'telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me god'. a defendant seeking justice should not be; 'telling the truth somewhat and deleting other stuff that doesn't suit my case'.

in spite of the deal… for the sake of the chronology of events, the phone was taken before botha had any effect on the case.

 

[sleuth-d-]

I see the Hilton Botha thing in another light than the most: I think, he was a well trained, decent officer who was the first to name the "tragic accident" :sick: an unambiguous homicide. He saw no opportunity that the shooting would have been caused by an "intruder". AND HE WAS EXACTLY RIGHT: he saw clues of worst DV and murder.

I'm sure, when he testified as a witness from "higher up" something specific had been imposed on him already. That caused his insecure statements. Then suddenly he was withdrawn from the case because of an ancient investigation. Since then everybody is picking on him, unfairly I think.
He was sacrificed in favor of "the" family Pistorius and its descendant Mr. Sports Hero. IMO

I will wait impatiently for a book of Botha, but I do not know if he is allowed to write it at all, the poor officer.

Btw: I have an uncertain feeling as if Nel had also some important instructions from "higher up", JM possibly too?


-.-.-.-
The next victim of the Pistorius case:

Former Colonel Schoombie Van Rensberg, who resigned from the South African police force last year amid claims of incompetency over the security of the toilet door .....

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/oscar-p...ncompetence-20140314-34sjt.html#ixzz3uElkRME1
-.-.-.-
The next victim of the Pistorius case:

Bennie van Staden began to suffer from depression after he had photographed the grisly crime scene and he quitted his job. (No link found, has been an interview with him, has disappeared.)
-.-.-.-

re: botha
do you think it is possible that the prosecution were very focused on producing a case with limited 'appeal' factors, and maybe he was sacrificed as part of this.

they trod very carefully around many things:
repeatedly asking op about the veracity of the photographic evidence.
absolute leeway for pistorius to take a break whenever he was put under duress [or started crying].
easy terms for the psych testing.
plenty of prep time between the prosecution case and the defence case.
…

 

[jilly]

to fit the witness accounts:
he screams like both a woman and a man

and also fires a cricket bat like a 9mm, or a swings a 9mm like a cricket bat... depending on how far away you are standing.

Yup! Just like Mrs Doubtfire!

I noticed his voice when he was moaning on the witness stand. He's quite the specimen.