Post sentencing discussion and the upcoming appeal

[soozieqtips]

Of course, in reality they weren't on because they weren't found on but we see OP reinforcing the idea that they were on repeatedly in his story: he wakes and "noticed that the fans were still running" (why say that when they supposed to be? He also notices the doors are still open - through the closed curtain, in the dark). He moves the fans and tells us again "the fans were still running, they were still running at the time".

~snipped~

BIB - Because they weren't supposed to be? I also don't believe the fans were on at the time, but I don't find it odd that in OP's "version" he mentions they were still running when he woke up. Didn't he say he told Reeva to turn them off and close up before she went to sleep? So it would make sense to point out they were still on when he woke up as he was expecting Reeva to have turned them off by then.

 

[Mr Fossil]

~snipped~

BIB - Because they weren't supposed to be? I also don't believe the fans were on at the time, but I don't find it odd that in OP's "version" he mentions they were still running when he woke up. Didn't he say he told Reeva to turn them off and close up before she went to sleep? So it would make sense to point out they were still on when he woke up as he was expecting Reeva to have turned them off by then.

No, he didn't. I think he's merely reinforcing the point that he wants us to believe they're on. It's a very strange thing to say when they should be on. Why switch them off on such a warm night and his own version tells us he wanted them left on because he says he left them on.

Here's what the official transcript says he says to Reeva:

"And I was getting increasingly tired. I said to her, do you want me to close the doors or would you close them when you come.. when you fall asleep. Will you bring in the fans and close the curtains, and lock the door when you fall asleep and she said… you know, she said to me that she would. Then I fell asleep."

The transcript is, as ever, slightly inaccurate. He actually uses the term "when you come..." twice, and corrects himself, which is also strange. When you come ... to bed?

From my transcription:

"And, umm, I was getting increasingly tired and I said to her, umm, do you want me to close the doors or will you close them when you come, when you fall asleep. Will you bring in the fans and close the curtains and lock the door when you come, when you fall asleep. And she said, umm, she said, you know and she said to me that she would. And then I fell asleep."

 

[soozieqtips]

Thanks Mr Fossil. So he only asked her to bring them in, not turn them off. As for his "when you come to..." - it indicates Reeva wasn't even in bed at the time. I guess it's quite normal, when lying, to slip up by inadvertently including the truth sometimes.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Thanks Mr Fossil. So he only asked her to bring them in, not turn them off. As for his "when you come to..." - it indicates Reeva wasn't even in bed at the time. I guess it's quite normal, when lying, to slip up by inadvertently including the truth sometimes.

Yes, like when he says "I ran back to my bedroom, where my phone was. Next to the left hand side of the bed and … both my phones were there."

Firstly we see he mentions only one phone (probably the truth since the 4949 phone was usually kept on charge in the kitchen overnight according to Sam Taylor), which he subsequently corrects, and then he reinforces the side of the bed, quite unnecessarily.

There are slip ups where the truth might rise to the surface inadvertently and also facts thrown in at inappropriate times where he is overly keen to reinforce something, both signs that he is lying IMO.

In all probability he had the 0020 phone with him at all times until he swapped it with the 4949 phone. Again, Sam Taylor tells us he took it everywhere with him, even to the bathroom.

 

[soozieqtips]

I think one of his most telling slips (of which there were many) was when he had to stop himself from saying he retrieved the gun from next to the bed, which is where it was normally kept. He started to say "next" and then quickly changed it to "under", no doubt to add credibility to his story that he managed to miss seeing Reeva in the bed.

 

[Mr Fossil]

I think one of his most telling slips (of which there were many) was when he had to stop himself from saying he retrieved the gun from next to the bed, which is where it was normally kept. He started to say "next" and then quickly changed it to "under", no doubt to add credibility to his story that he managed to miss seeing Reeva in the bed.

Yes, there were many slip ups.

That one's not so clear to me because in the transcript he says "when I got upstairs I had taken my firearm and I placed it next to the… under the bed next to the pedestal". He uses 'next to the' immediately again, so the 'under the bed' bit appears to be elaboration, if I've found the instance you're referring to.

If I check my transcription I have "when I got upstairs I’d taken my firearm and I’d placed it next to the pe..., under the bed, next to the pedestal ..." I'd have to listen to it again to be sure, but I think he starts to say 'pedestal' then elaborates. Not bed. He goes on to explain "... the kind of, umm ... The bed’s got ... the bed base is a, is a, is a furniture base and it’s got 4 legs and the bedside table touches the floor along its entirety on its base, so I put it around the corner, under the bed."

 

[44ALLAN]

RSBM

I've been running through OP's 'final' version from the moment he woke until the moment he shot Reeva, but also seen from Reeva's point of view if she's following his script, trying to imagine why each part of the story exists or was added or changed. Of course, none of this is what actually happened IMO.

It starts with Reeva talking to him, establishing that she is in bed. Ok.

I can accept that Reeva got out of bed and went to the bathroom unseen and without saying anything whilst OP fetched the fans in, keeping his back at all times to the bed. Assuming she was sleeping on the right hand side (looking at the bed), she would have needed to get out at the bottom or on his side with all the clutter he has on that side of the bed, not forgetting his prostheses which aren't shown in the photos in situ. Let's also accept she took her phone with her for some reason (which we'll assume she picked up off the bedside table on the right).

I believe OP added the extra fan because moving one fan simply doesn't allow enough time for Reeva to get to the bathroom unnoticed if he isn't to go on to the balcony. I think he ditched going on to the balcony (he tells us this in two different ways in his bail affidavit so it was his story at the time) simply because he realised it would entail him opening the curtains, blinds and doors wider to get around the fan, filling the room with light, and turning to face the bed when he walked back in - why else would he have gone on to the balcony other than to get to the other side of the fan (perhaps the more logical side to carry it from)?

I think the fans are on in his version so that he doesn't hear Reeva get out of bed. Interestingly we never learn when the fans are plugged in or switched on. Of course, in reality they weren't on because they weren't found on but we see OP reinforcing the idea that they were on repeatedly in his story: he wakes and "noticed that the fans were still running" (why say that when they're supposed to be? He also notices the doors are still open - through the closed curtain, in the dark). He moves the fans and tells us again "the fans were still running, they were still running at the time". He needs them to be on.

Ignoring the balcony light that must have been partially illuminating the room at times during this process (he keeps telling us he closes the curtains) ...

He now has a problem. When Reeva opens the bathroom window he wouldn't hear this with the second larger fan blowing in his face. He can't have got back to bed or he'd have checked the bed and known she wasn't in it. So he pauses to put the jeans over the blue LED and at this stage hears the window sliding open and hitting the frame (more reinforcement). I think this is why the blue LED features. No other reason. Not because of the light disturbing him: it was probably in this state on many nights and something he would be familiar with. I included this in a previous post as part of him buying time, which was incorrect. It doesn't because she has to have cleared the bedroom passageway by the time he is facing the stereo (the passageway is now to his right). It's simply so that he can hear the window open. Why the jeans are on the floor is another story.

But why does Reeva open the bathroom window? If it's stuffy / humid and she's going to the toilet why not open the toilet window? We'll have to accept that she does open it and must also assume that she intends to close it after she's been to the toilet so as not to freak security conscious OP out.

Now I need to come up with an approximate elapsed time for him to fetch his gun, whisper, scream, shout etc. as he makes his way down the passageway to the bathroom and hears the toilet door shut. And then explain what Reeva is doing in this elapsed time and, if she flushes the toilet, why OP doesn't hear it. She knows there's no one in the passageway and bathroom because she's just walked through them. Assuming she's figured there's an intruder (when exactly does OP shout to get out of his house?), she must think he/they are downstairs or he's seen them from the balcony window ... so why doesn't she call the police when he shouts for her to? Why doesn't she talk to OP?

OP wants us to believe that she's scared (she has had a similar experience in the past), and she doesn't know where the intruder is, hence stays quiet.

It gets trickier so I'll work on this whilst taking on board any views.

BiB..........totally agree with that statement.
OP's whole version is made up and tailored to suit the evidence and the testimonies.

My question to all Websleuthers is this...............
Do we really believe OP has the nous and intelligence to fabricate all those versions all by himself?
I don't and I'm 100% certain of that.
So if my thoughts are correct..........who helped him with his 'versions' ?

Whoever it was knows he's a murderer otherwise he wouldn't need to change any of his story from the night in question.

Was it the family?
All sitting around the table over the last few months playing out a real life Cleudo game?
Or was it the defence team?
Someone helped him concoct his *advertiser censored* and bull story that's for sure IMO.

 

[Mr Fossil]

BiB..........totally agree with that statement.
OP's whole version is made up and tailored to suit the evidence and the testimonies.

My question to all Websleuthers is this...............
Do we really believe OP has the nous and intelligence to fabricate all those versions all by himself?
I don't and I'm 100% certain of that.
So if my thoughts are correct..........who helped him with his 'versions' ?

Whoever it was knows he's a murderer otherwise he wouldn't need to change any of his story from the night in question.

Was it the family?
All sitting around the table over the last few months playing out a real life Cleudo game?
Or was it the defence team?
Someone helped him concoct his *advertiser censored* and bull story that's for sure IMO.

We know that he filmed a re-enactment at his Uncle's house which was never used but may have helped him develop and picture his version. Various people would have been involved with this. His sister definitely was. I'd imagine some of the defence team as well as the film makers. We can see some of them in the film.

We know that he worked through the times of the witness statements and his version.

"I have marked out the distance that I have walked on my stumps but I remember.. as far as I can remember how fast I walked, how fast I could walk, it was about five minutes before I hit the door with the cricket bat that I .. I fired.. that I fired my weapon." (p133)

We know that he worked on his version.

"I have given them my version many, many, many months ago. We have reworked on it... spoken about it and they have worked with it... with me." (p188)

Oh, and for a laugh, I'll add:

"My version has never changed." (p161)

 

[44ALLAN]

We know that he filmed a re-enactment which was never used but may have helped him develop and picture his version. Various people would have been involved with this. His sister definitely was. I'd imagine some of the defence team as well as the film makers.

We know that he worked through the times of the witness statements and his version.

"I have marked out the distance that I have walked on my stumps but I remember.. as far as I can remember how fast I walked, how fast I could walk, it was about five minutes before I hit the door with the cricket bat that I .. I fired.. that I fired my weapon." (p133)

We know that he worked on his version.

"I have given them my version many, many, many months ago. We have reworked on it... spoken about it and they have worked with it... with me." (p188)

Oh, and for a laugh, I'll add:

"My version has never changed." (p161)

Yup my thoughts exactly.
All his family know he's a murderer it's as simple as that IMO.

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

Yes, like when he says "I ran back to my bedroom, where my phone was. Next to the left hand side of the bed and … both my phones were there."

Firstly we see he mentions only one phone (probably the truth since the 4949 phone was usually kept on charge in the kitchen overnight according to Sam Taylor), which he subsequently corrects, and then he reinforces the side of the bed, quite unnecessarily.

There are slip ups where the truth might rise to the surface inadvertently and also facts thrown in at inappropriate times where he is overly keen to reinforce something, both signs that he is lying IMO.In all probability he had the 0020 phone with him at all times until he swapped it with the 4949 phone. Again, Sam Taylor tells us he took it everywhere with him, even to the bathroom.

BBM

There is a saying in Turkish : ' The truth has sort of a bad habbit of rising to the surface one day ''

:boohoo:

 

[jay-jay]

BiB..........totally agree with that statement.
OP's whole version is made up and tailored to suit the evidence and the testimonies.

My question to all Websleuthers is this...............
Do we really believe OP has the nous and intelligence to fabricate all those versions all by himself?
I don't and I'm 100% certain of that.
So if my thoughts are correct..........who helped him with his 'versions' ?

Whoever it was knows he's a murderer otherwise he wouldn't need to change any of his story from the night in question.

Was it the family?
All sitting around the table over the last few months playing out a real life Cleudo game?
Or was it the defence team?
Someone helped him concoct his *advertiser censored* and bull story that's for sure IMO.

It seems to me to have something to do with this video he had made .. I swear that the main reason this was done, was to see if his version actually worked, and to add or subtract various inventions in order for it to fit a timescale that would work with his intruder verision. Then, I reckon, he had to act out what we saw in that video many times over, for it all to sink in and for him to be able to recite it as if it really happened. I do personally think he is capable of having actually thought of the whole storyline himself though, he seems like many others like him (one of which I have personal experience of) who are able to think up a whole load of BS in the blink of an eye that most of the rest of us wouldn't know where to start and just wouldn't even want to in the first place.

 

[jay-jay]

We know that he filmed a re-enactment at his Uncle's house which was never used but may have helped him develop and picture his version. Various people would have been involved with this. His sister definitely was. I'd imagine some of the defence team as well as the film makers. We can see some of them in the film.

We know that he worked through the times of the witness statements and his version.

"I have marked out the distance that I have walked on my stumps but I remember.. as far as I can remember how fast I walked, how fast I could walk, it was about five minutes before I hit the door with the cricket bat that I .. I fired.. that I fired my weapon." (p133)

We know that he worked on his version.

"I have given them my version many, many, many months ago. We have reworked on it... spoken about it and they have worked with it... with me." (p188)

~rsbm~

Snap!

:thumb:

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

Well I never had a fan in my home or work and to tell the truth I always thought that it was a bit dangerous to grab or even touch a fan while working.. as it has a propeller in the middle ..don't know .. I have always avoided touching it here and there where I see .. Must be way harder in the dark and on prosthesis .. but it's a big fat lie anyway.. :thinking:

 

[Cherwell]

Because they weren't supposed to be? I also don't believe the fans were on at the time, but I don't find it odd that in OP's "version" he mentions they were still running when he woke up. Didn't he say he told Reeva to turn them off and close up before she went to sleep? So it would make sense to point out they were still on when he woke up as he was expecting Reeva to have turned them off by then.

Even if he had asked her to turn the fans off before she went to sleep, according to him she was still awake, reading or whatever, so no reason why she would have turned them off. Or bring them in, same difference.

 

[Cherwell]

No, he didn't. I think he's merely reinforcing the point that he wants us to believe they're on. It's a very strange thing to say when they should be on. Why switch them off on such a warm night and his own version tells us he wanted them left on because he says he left them on.

Here's what the official transcript says he says to Reeva:

"And I was getting increasingly tired. I said to her, do you want me to close the doors or would you close them when you come.. when you fall asleep. Will you bring in the fans and close the curtains, and lock the door when you fall asleep and she said… you know, she said to me that she would. Then I fell asleep."

The transcript is, as ever, slightly inaccurate. He actually uses the term "when you come..." twice, and corrects himself, which is also strange. When you come ... to bed?

From my transcription:

"And, umm, I was getting increasingly tired and I said to her, umm, do you want me to close the doors or will you close them when you come, when you fall asleep. Will you bring in the fans and close the curtains and lock the door when you come, when you fall asleep. And she said, umm, she said, you know and she said to me that she would. And then I fell asleep."

It's nonsense anyway - how can somebody do anything when they fall asleep?

It's blindingly obvious that he meant "when you come to bed". I don't believe she went to bed at all that night. He may have, then got up again to see where she was. Or that whole bit may have been borrowed from the night before.

 

[Mr Fossil]

It's nonsense anyway - how can somebody do anything when they fall asleep?

It's blindingly obvious that he meant "when you come to bed". I don't believe she went to bed at all that night. He may have, then got up again to see where she was. Or that whole bit may have been borrowed from the night before.

Semantically you are of course correct. I think he wanted to say "before you go to sleep". The question is whether the "when you come..." is just him unable to find the right words or it's another slip, as she wasn't in bed at that time. Of course, the reality is that neither statement is true since the whole fan fiasco is a fabrication. A prior night is a plausible origin for this yarn and perhaps other elements of his version.

 

[44ALLAN]

It seems to me to have something to do with this video he had made .. I swear that the main reason this was done, was to see if his version actually worked, and to add or subtract various inventions in order for it to fit a timescale that would work with his intruder verision. Then, I reckon, he had to act out what we saw in that video many times over, for it all to sink in and for him to be able to recite it as if it really happened. I do personally think he is capable of having actually thought of the whole storyline himself though, he seems like many others like him (one of which I have personal experience of) who are able to think up a whole load of BS in the blink of an eye that most of the rest of us wouldn't know where to start and just wouldn't even want to in the first place.

I totally agree j-j and the BiB is my whole point.
He maybe did think the whole storyline up by himself but it took him months to do it.
Everyone around him will have known that what he was telling them wasn't what happened on the night because he changed it that many times.
As has been said on here many times....if he was telling the truth his first version would have been his only version.

His family know alright and so does his defence team.........he murdered her and all the ear witnesses heard her screaming for her life, of that I have no doubt whatsoever.
Makes me sick to just look at them all now it really does.

 

[Mr Fossil]

On the subject of semantics, OP says in his bail statement:

"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains."

Roux, in his final argument says:

546. The Accused testified that, “I opened the sliding doors onto the balcony” (Record, page 1461, line 21). The above description of how the doors were opened by the Accused, is incorrect in the sense that the door is in fact a sliding door and that it simply slides along the wall of the bedroom as opposed to such door opening outwards onto the balcony.

547. This aspect of the Accused’s evidence is significant in that he erroneously described having opened the door “onto the balcony”, whereas, his evidence should have been that he merely opened the door of the balcony.

548. The significance of this is to be found in the fact that the Accused stated that, “I did not go onto the balcony. I picked the fan up which was on the balcony and I brought the fan in” (Record, page 1529, lines 7-8). Clearly, the Accused perceived the one fan to have been on the balcony, as the one leg of the fan was on the balcony. This was misconstrued by Mr Nel who suggested that the Accused had lied with reference to him having gone “onto” the balcony as stated in the bail application. The mistake made by the Accused is merely as a consequence of his “manner of speaking”.

But Roux conveniently ignores the fact that OP also says later in his bail statement:

"With the benefit of hindsight I believe that Reeva went to the toilet when I went out on the balcony to bring the fan in."

As no doubt does Masipa. "Went out on the balcony" can only mean one thing. It is not a manner of speaking. Nel did not misconstrue anything. OP lied and Roux misrepresented what OP meant by only focusing on one part of what he said.

ETA: Not unexpectedly, OP blames his defence team for the wording of his statement. To Nel (p175), "I am sure that what they wrote there, they interpreted as my explanation to them. Maybe I did not pick it up at the time, that they said I went on to the balcony." In blaming the defence for the wording, OP effectively agrees that the statement says he went outside on to the balcony; but in arguing the meaning of OP's words, one thing Roux's statement does achieve is to confirm that it is OP's wording and not his.

Pages 175-177 develop this theme and are well worth a re-read.

 

[jay-jay]

[/I]As no doubt does Masipa. "Went out on the balcony" can only mean one thing. It is not a manner of speaking. Nel did not misconstrue anything. OP lied and Roux misrepresented what OP meant by only focusing on one part of what he said.

~rsbm~

BBM - Absolutely ... and this is what really bugged me when some of those who believed his story would just keep saying that it was either his manner of speaking, or that he misremembered something and therefore it didn't come out quite right or appeared to contradict what he had said previously but that it didn't really matter 'because his core story remained the same'. No, some .. many .. of these instances really do matter, because they are not just minor discrepancies .. they are major flaws, inaccuracies and inconsistencies which prove beyond doubt that he is lying. These should've been Masipa's starting point, and from which she would then have realised that the ear witnesses were telling the truth when they said they heard an argument, a woman screaming for her life, etc, etc .. instead of which, she just swept them under the carpet because they were so damaging to his version that she needed them to be hidden away and forgotten about.

 

[jay-jay]

Let's not forget the bit where he tells us how he checked for Reeva on suddenly realising it might be her in the toilet cubicle .. he said he ran to the bedroom, onto the bed, felt around for her on the floor (on the RH side of the bed next to the patio doors) then felt the curtains to see if she was hiding behind those. Then when questioned later about it, he said he just got straight off the bed and walked down that side of the bed and that he would've known if Reeva was hiding down on the floor because he would've walked into her (or was it 'kicked her' I can't remember now, but same difference .. and both of which I found extremely disrespectful to her memory, too, what a horrible way of putting it).