Theory Thread - What happened at Pistorius' house on the night of Feb. 13, 2013?

[Lux et Veritas]

Originally Posted by Judgejudi
It’s interesting that having spent the previous night at OP’s home and knowing that he still had a shoulder injury, Reeva still placed her flipflops on his side, the left-hand side, together with her overnight bag. It’s also interesting that his iPad and his prostheses were on her side of the bed. Quite apart from that, if they were sleeping on the sides he says, why then was his vest also on her side all bunched up. It obviously wasn’t placed on top of his prostheses because he said they were down near the foot of the bed. So does that mean he removed the vest and threw it over onto her side onto the floor. I don't think they changed sides at all. This was just another bit of rubbish to bolster his version as to why he didn't see her. As Mr Fossil would say, “Oh what a tangled web we weave …”

And that's assuming they both went to bed that night. It's very difficult to know what to believe.

Exactly. The positions of all the items mentioned (including the mugs on the nightstands?) could very well have been from the day/night BEFORE.

 

[AJ_DS]

I suspect you are trolling. Obviously that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that in a case where the key evidence of alleged guilt is screams, and the key issue in dispute is who was screaming and when, the fact that those witnesses also heard the alleged murderer scream for help causes reasonable doubt that the screams were in fact pre-murder and all Reeva.

Obviously just shouting for help before you kill someone doesn't introduce reasonable doubt. But as I say, I suspect you know all this but are just deliberately trolling.

Well, the State's case is not based solely on "screaming evidence"…

… if your contention is that 4 witnesses could be mistaken about the sex of the person screaming and the nature of those screams…meaning that Reeva stayed completely silent throughout the entire event... then you MUST also consider the possibility that perhaps OP never shouted HHH… perhaps it was all Reeva's doing and witnesses mistakenly thought a man shouted as well.

We have heard Reeva's voice in interviews and TV shows… she has a deep raspy voice… and the circumstance certainly favor that Reeva was the one screaming since she ended up shot dead in the toilet cubicle… at least it makes a lot more sense than Reeva staying completely silent whilst OP screamed his head off for no apparent reason whatsoever.

How many couples find themselves alone in a home and have neighbors ?… a great many I would imagine… therefore, one could kill the other inside the bedroom and the only thing available to the prosecution would be forensics, ear-witness testimony and the accused's version of events… so my argument in reply to your statement about shouting "Help! Help! Help!" and reasonable doubt is more than valid and quite on point.

As for your trolling accusations… that's uncalled for… you posted something on a public discussion forum and therefore invited comments… my reply was courteous and on topic… the fact that you do not like the obvious inferences to be made from your own statement does not warrant making unfounded accusations against fellow posters.

 

[Exchange973]

Well, the State's case is not based solely on "screaming evidence"…

… if your contention is that 4 witnesses could be mistaken about the sex of the person screaming and the nature of those screams…meaning that Reeva stayed completely silent throughout the entire event... then you MUST also consider the possibility that perhaps OP never shouted HHH… perhaps it was all Reeva's doing and witnesses mistakenly thought a man shouted as well.

We have heard Reeva's voice in interviews and TV shows… she has a deep raspy voice… and the circumstance certainly favor that Reeva was the one screaming since she ended up shot dead in the toilet cubicle… at least it makes a lot more sense than Reeva staying completely silent whilst OP screamed his head off for no apparent reason whatsoever.

How many couples find themselves alone in a home and have neighbors ?… a great many I would imagine… therefore, one could kill the other inside the bedroom and the only thing available to the prosecution would be forensics, ear-witness testimony and the accused's version of events… so my argument in reply to your statement about shouting "Help! Help! Help!" and reasonable doubt is more than valid and quite on point.

As for your trolling accusations… that's uncalled for… you posted something on a public discussion forum and therefore invited comments… my reply was courteous and on topic… the fact that you do not like the obvious inferences to be made from your own statement does not warrant making unfounded accusations against fellow posters.

So it's possible that witnesses could confuse Reeva's screams for a man but not that they could confuse OP for a womans? I'm not saying Reeva necessarily stayed silent throughout, just that the "event" took place earlier than these witnesses give evidence. I.e. they were woken by the shots, and heard OP's screams after the event. That is the defence case.

The suggestion you made in your first post that my posts are helping would be murderers cover their tracks is bizarre and offensive. I'll remind you of what you said: "As an attorney and an officer of the Court, I would hope you are not inadvertently proffering advice to would-be murderers on how to successfully escape Justice."

If you stand by that then fair enough, but I personally think crossed the line. Let's leave this here.

 

[Hoosen_Fenger]

I guess you could read OP's testimony as saying she was preparing dinner, he went for a bath/shower, then she cooked it (very quick, as you say) when he came down at about 7pm. They sat at the table for an hour eating, talking and discussing Reeva's new contract. The testimony makes a fascinating read ... SNIPPED BY ME AS I WANT TO GET TO MY POINT VERY QUICKLY!
From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMMdyuXfFUg&feature=youtu.be&t=34m50s

Bang on Mr Fossil - I remember hearing this and saying 'Hang on, was it a Bath or a Shower he had?'

You should be on here when some of the OP Supporters are spouting drivel about 'everyone mixing up details' after the event. This is just the type of thing that highlights how economical OP is being with the truth.

That Roux would chastise the Stipps & suggest that their version was convoluted, when his own client has said he had a shower & a bath on the same night???

The mind Boggles....

 

[AJ_DS]

AJ, I do this with full respect. But now we are back to disagreeing - with respect, you misunderstand the point/nature of our disagreement. Its much more fundamental than you believe I think.

You distinguish between A1) a claim to self-defence, e.g. where there was in fact an intruder and B) in fact self-defence. I fully understand what you mean here. I agree that only B1) should properly be called self-defence.

There is a corollary: A2) a claim to putative self defence, e.g. where there was in fact a perceived intruder and B) in fact putative self-defence. I fully understand what you mean here. I agree that only B2) should properly be called putative self-defence.

However you misunderstand the point. The point is this: in B2) one can still be negligent and found guilty of culpable homicide. This is the point me, the judges, the professors, some other sleuthers etc are making about putative self defence. Putative self defence is a subjective entity and does not exclude culpable homicide which is an objective entity. Private defence is not analogous in this respect - private defence is an objective entity and it excludes culpable homicide, by virtue of being a lawful killing.

Rough example relating to self-defence:

There was in fact an intruder, but in fact the intruder was not attacking or imminently attacking: A1
There was in fact an intruder, and in fact the intruder was attacking and all other requirements for self-defence were in fact satisifed: B1

Rough example relating to putative self-defence:

There was in fact a believed intruder, but in fact there was not a believed attack or believed imminent attack: A2
There was in fact a believed intruder, and in fact a believed attack and all other requirements for self-defence were believed to have been satisfied: B2

In B above one has in fact acted in putative self defence. It is not claimed putative self defence, it is 'proper' putative self defence. Where self-defence has objective requirements z, y, z, putative self defence has subjective requirements x, y z - did one believe x, y, z to be satisfied.

In B above, one can still be objectively unreasonable in his mistake. Eg if a reasonable person would not have believed there was an intruder, e.g. if a reasonable person would not have believed they were under attack. Therefore it is possible for one to have in fact acted in putative private defence and also be negligent.

I just want you to understand the point that's all. I'm no longer particularly interested in convincing you, heh

OK… now we have no choice but to get to the bottom of this… we have spent too much time on this to just leave it in the air, lol

- I fully understand the definition of PD and PPD… and the difference between both

- I fully know that one can have acted in PPD and still found guilty of CH

I read your post and I'm NOT disagreeing with anything you wrote… BUT somehow, you are disagreeing with what I wrote… this is fascinating

Perhaps you could point out which elements of your post you believe I would not agree with.

or

Let's take it to down to basics… do you agree with the following...

For an accused (who shot and killed someone) to be found to have acted in PPD and be acquitted these requirements must be met :

1. The accused is found to have genuinely and honestly held the belief that his life was being threatened

2. The mistake is deemed reasonable

3. The conduct of the accused as per no possibility of escaping, response to threat, etc… is also deemed reasonable.

… If 1, 2, 3 is met successfully the accused is acquitted

The subjective assessment ONLY applies to the mistaken perception of the threat…

When it comes to no possibility of escaping and response to threat, the assessment is ALWAYS objective.

 

[Murphys_Law]

I hadn't realised that part of the defence put up at the bail hearing included that although OP slept on the left hand side of the bed on 13 Feb, Reeva had slept on that side the previous night.

Listen here: Oscar Pistorius Gets Bail - Magistrate Desmond Nair Hands Down

A very important finding Mr. Fossil!!!
Thankyou"

 

[AJ_DS]

So it's possible that witnesses could confuse Reeva's screams for a man but not that they could confuse OP for a womans? I'm not saying Reeva necessarily stayed silent throughout, just that the "event" took place earlier than these witnesses give evidence. I.e. they were woken by the shots, and heard OP's screams after the event. That is the defence case.

The suggestion you made in your first post that my posts are helping would be murderers cover their tracks is bizarre and offensive. I'll remind you of what you said: "As an attorney and an officer of the Court, I would hope you are not inadvertently proffering advice to would-be murderers on how to successfully escape Justice."

If you stand by that then fair enough, but I personally think crossed the line. Let's leave this here.

Interesting…

A little bait and switch tactic when presented with an inherent flaw in reasoning…

You originally stated that you took my reply (BiB) as a joke : "I hope and assume that this is tongue in cheek"…

… then you went on saying in later post "I know all of that is dripping with sarcasm"…

… now you suddenly insist it was bizarre, offensive and that it crossed the line.

Which is it ??… joke, sarcasm or offensive ?

Are trying a plethora of possible Defence's in hopes that one of them will be deemed probable or plausible ?


As I have already stated : the fact that you do not like the obvious inferences to be made from your own statement does not warrant making unfounded accusations against fellow posters.

How many couples find themselves alone in a home and have neighbors ?… a great many I would imagine… therefore, one could kill the other inside the bedroom and the only thing available to the prosecution would be forensics, ear-witness testimony and the accused's version of events… so my argument in reply to your statement about shouting "Help! Help! Help!" and reasonable doubt is more than valid and quite on point.

Enough said on this matter.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

OP: I went upstairs then, I was ... I wanted to get out of the clothes I’d been in for the day and I went upstairs and got changed and showered. I got changed into my pyjamas and then I think around 7 o’clock I went downstairs and ...

OP: From the time I arrived home ... Reeva was preparing dinner, I was talking to her and on my iPad. I was surfing the net. I was looking at cars that I had wanted to get around to during the day to have a look at and, when I went upstairs, as I was drawing the bath I was on my iPad. I lay on my bed and took off my suit. I then sat in the bath for a while. I can’t remember if I was on it then and then as I got out of bed for a short time thereafter I was on it. And when we went down to dinner I stopped using it. We were sitting and chatting.

What a convoluted mish-mash!
Shower*. Bath.
I went upstairs. We went down to dinner.
Sat in the bath. Got out of bed.
WTF?
Lies have a way of morphing into a twisted mess!

* Crucial f##kup here because OP claims he never takes showers due to not being able to stand on his stumps.

(btw, he was plenty interested in looking at cars - but not buying a VD gift for Reeva.)

David SmithVerified account @SmithInAfrica
Versfeld: #Pistorius said, "I fall about once a week or every two weeks... I bath rather than shower because I can't stand long."

“I usually shower as I wake up to get my day going, after my morning gym session I usually have an ice bath or shower again. ... I just use shower gel: *advertiser censored*Men Hair and Body Shampoo. It is very gentle and scents my skin with the elegant fragrance of *advertiser censored*Men. And if I’m in the bath, throw salts in it for relaxation.”
- Oscar Pistorius 9.1.2011
http://thegroomingguide.com/icon/oscar-pistorius/

 

[foxbluff]

Another thing that just struck me while wandering back through some of the old threads, was the Sam RS was referring to in her January 26th text Divaris's girlfriend Sam Greyvenstein? If so, that certainly raises more questions imo.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?239205-Trial-Discussion-Thread-13-14-03-25-Day-15&p=10378044#post10378044

BBM... no it wasn't that "Sam." IIRC, lots of us here were confused by that name when first reading RS's text mgs.

However, it was finally decided that "Sam" in this case couldn't have been Justin Divaris's "Sam" as OP didn't know the name of the man he accused RS of flirting with.

Also, in that text to OP, RS said "I'm sorry if you truly felt I was hitting on my friend Sam's
husband and I'm sorry that u think that little of me." I don't know the current status of Justin and his Sam, but do know that they were not married at the time of the row between OP and RS.

O/T... for me, there are entirely too many Johans and Sams in this case.

 

[jay-jay]

I don't think he brought any fans anywhere that night. IMO that entire portion of his affidavit was purely what he conjured up as part of his story that he never saw Reeva get up. And that was part of his story too...that she got up to go to the loo. IMO the entire scenario has been fabricated by him. I believe that is why he has had trouble with specifics and it became convenient to blame the police when a hole in his story was examined. Its why he kept changing his story, too, IMO.

.. absolutely .. as Nel kept saying .. 'it never happened'.

 

[AJ_DS]

I hadn't realised that part of the defence put up at the bail hearing included that although OP slept on the left hand side of the bed on 13 Feb, Reeva had slept on that side the previous night.

Listen here: Oscar Pistorius Gets Bail - Magistrate Desmond Nair Hands Down

Is it your contention that OP preempted the possibility of forensics finding DNA or some other proof Reeva slept on the left-hand side of the bed which would contradict OP's version that he switched sides ?

 

[AJ_DS]

BBM... no it wasn't that "Sam." IIRC, lots of us here were confused by that name when first reading RS's text mgs.

However, it was finally decided that "Sam" in this case couldn't have been Justin Divaris's "Sam" as OP didn't know the name of the man he accused RS of flirting with.

Also, in that text to OP, RS said "I'm sorry if you truly felt I was hitting on my friend Sam's
husband and I'm sorry that u think that little of me." I don't know the current status of Justin and his Sam, but do know that they were not married at the time of the row between OP and RS.

O/T... for me, there are entirely too many Johans and Sams in this case.

LOL… Indeed !!

 

[Giles]

This is a RE-POST - I had to correct a couple of links...

Here are some links to audio recordings of discussion with legal experts:

Legal Round Table discussion of the State’s Closing Arguments – David O’Sullivan with Prof Stephen Tuson, Cliff Alexander and Riaan Louw (35mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/lrt-states-closing/s-JkbjO

Legal Round Table discussion of the Defence’s Closing Arguments – David O’Sullivan with Prof James Grant, Michael Motsoeneng Bill and Marius Du Toit (30mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/lrt-defence-closing/s-RkoDP

Prof James Grant on Channel 199 with David O’ Sullivan after conclusion of Arguments (9mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/james-grant/s-cDpRf

Attorney Tyrone Maseko on Oscar Trial Radio after conclusion of Arguments (18mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/tyrone-maseko/s-llHGA

Criminal Law Expert William Booth on Oscar Trial Radio after conclusion of Arguments (20mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/william-booth/s-opVSS

 

[soozieqtips]

O/T... for me, there are entirely too many Johans and Sams in this case.

~snipped~

And not enough Nels!!

 

[foxbluff]

What a convoluted mish-mash!
Shower*. Bath.
I went upstairs. We went down to dinner.
Sat in the bath. Got out of bed.
WTF?
Lies have a way of morphing into a twisted mess!

* Crucial f##kup here because OP claims he never takes showers due to not being able to stand on his stumps.

(btw, he was plenty interested in looking at cars - but not buying a VD gift for Reeva.)

David SmithVerified account @SmithInAfrica
Versfeld: #Pistorius said, "I fall about once a week or every two weeks... I bath rather than shower because I can't stand long."

“I usually shower as I wake up to get my day going, after my morning gym session I usually have an ice bath or shower again. ... I just use shower gel: *advertiser censored*Men Hair and Body Shampoo. It is very gentle and scents my skin with the elegant fragrance of *advertiser censored*Men. And if I’m in the bath, throw salts in it for relaxation.”
- Oscar Pistorius 9.1.2011
http://thegroomingguide.com/icon/oscar-pistorius/

"convoluted mish-mash" indeed !! Hey... you missed this one: "I lay on my bed and took off my suit." Lord help him... he's worse at expressing himself than I am!! ROFLOL

 

[AJ_DS]

This is a RE-POST - I had to correct a couple of links...

Here are some links to audio recordings of discussion with legal experts:

Legal Round Table discussion of the State’s Closing Arguments – David O’Sullivan with Prof Stephen Tuson, Cliff Alexander and Riaan Louw (35mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/lrt-states-closing/s-JkbjO

Legal Round Table discussion of the Defence’s Closing Arguments – David O’Sullivan with Prof James Grant, Michael Motsoeneng Bill and Marius Du Toit (30mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/lrt-defence-closing/s-RkoDP

Prof James Grant on Channel 199 with David O’ Sullivan after conclusion of Arguments (9mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/james-grant/s-cDpRf

Attorney Tyrone Maseko on Oscar Trial Radio after conclusion of Arguments (18mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/tyrone-maseko/s-llHGA

Criminal Law Expert William Booth on Oscar Trial Radio after conclusion of Arguments (20mins):
https://soundcloud.com/giles-9/william-booth/s-opVSS

… In some circles this would be considered treasonous conduct… Daka ??

 

[Lux et Veritas]

...Hmm first off, 3am seems to be OP's witching hour, second, nasty arguments seems not to be uncommon with him...
- Val1

Killer Oscar Pistorius nearly died when he crashed his car while *driving 400 miles through the night to settle a “blistering row” with an ex-girlfriend.

In his book Pistorius admits he has a fiery side which manifests itself in arguments and fights. He writes about the time he nodded off at the wheel after *setting off for Vicky’s house, 400 miles from his, at 3am after they’d had a row.

“I woke up as my car ploughed into the guardrail. One side of the vehicle was completely destroyed. My behaviour was unforgivably stupid and I regret it to this day,” he wrote.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/oscar-pistorius-nearly-died-car-1740073
- FromGermany

Driving 400 miles like a maniac at 3am to settle a “blistering row” - given what we know about OP today, one can only wonder what, exactly, he would have done to “settle” that argument - had he not first been prevented by his accident? Vicki Miles may be a very fortunate woman.

(Was alcohol involved in this blistering row and auto accident?)

Fascinating - this is now at least the second time 3AM has come up in his history. Certainly lends more credence that OP is indeed a hardcore insomniac and that Reeva and he never did go to bed that night.

Oh, heck, let’s throw in some more of OP’s self-admitted insomnia:

Oscar Pistorius @OscarPistorius 16 Jan 2013
Nothing like a little insomnia to get emails done! Haha seriously feeling good, maybe a midnight run is in order?

Oscar Pistorius @OscarPistorius 9 Jan 2013
Nothing worse than having insomnia.. Have to be up in 2 hours and not remotely tired.. Sheep, where art thou..

Oscar Pistorius @OscarPistorius 29 Oct 2012
Insomnia level 10! Ah you have to love jet lag.. Luckily the @Cape_Royale has a 24hr fitness centre, midnight cardio here I come.

It’s clear poor, anxious OP is totally “terrified” of and “vulnerable” to crime, as proven by his MIDNIGHT runs and workouts. :lol:

 

[AJ_DS]

Can posts sometimes mysteriously disappear without explanations from mods ?

… or is "jerkin' the gherkin" a frowned upon euphemism for describing what OP was doing with his iPad ?

 

[Lux et Veritas]

"Pistorius witnesses 'trampled and exhausted' by courtroom maulings"

There is a little bit more here about the witnesses experiences - even a little quote by Roger Dixon:

Roger Dixon, an expert witness for the defence with 18 years of experience in trials, said: "For the layman, it can be very traumatic to stand up there. You're not just getting questioned on your personal knowledge but on yourself. The system we have tries to break down your evidence and, if it can't do that, it tries to break you. After six days in the box, you could see how Oscar Pistorius himself was getting confused."

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/aug/25/oscar-pistorius-witness-court-south-africa

Aww...poor trampled, mauled, exhausted, traumatized little Oscar.

The Truth never gets confused.

 

[aa9511]

Hey all - when is Masipa expected to reach a decision?