Trial Discussion Thread #1 - 14.03.03-06, Day 1-4

[minor4th]

Actually, Nel said nothing of the sort.. he , in objecting to Roux painting the scenario to Dr Stipp as a FACT, that the head shot was FIRST, which is not the stipulated facts, and which Roux was trying to propose to the witness in error AS a fact. ( it was dealt with in the objection and the ruling hasn't come down yet)

Nels said.. the witness states she WAS screaming both before the shots AND DURING the shots.. therefore, the head shot was the LAST shot and not the first, which was the scenario, the Accused scenario wanted tabled.. This resulted in a long and tense interchange, and in the end Roux had to submit and resile from portraying his idea that the head shot was the first.. he had to admit to and continue along with his cross examination on the proviso that this theory is NOT the state case , it is the version of the accused and must be addressed as such.

Then Roux attempted to question Dr Stipp on what Roux says is OSCARS version and what does Dr Stipp think about it?? Dr Stipp replied.. I understand you are making an observation about my testimony.. ( that is, Dr Stipp understood that Roux was offering an OPINION and a THEORY and not a stipulated fact...

it all ended in tears anyway because not long after this, Dr Stipp drops the bombshell that he saw a person. .he wont be drawn on man or woman IN the bathroom, WITH the light on, the SCREAMS and SHOTS were simultaneously occurring.. at this point , Roux calls for a very hast and sudden adjournment for the afternoon. no doubt to consult with his client.

I just listened to it and heard it from Nel's own mouth. He said he agrees that she could not have screamed after the fatal head wound.

 

[dgfred]

Right, but that revolve around the head shot being first or last... or what?

 

[minor4th]

It's not a bombshell that Shipp saw a person with the lights on after the first set of shots. It completely corroborates Oscar's version that he put on his prosthetics and turned on the lights after the shots.

 

[minor4th]

Right, but that revolve around the head shot being first or last... or what?

It doesn't matter. The witnesses are saying they heard the woman sounding screams after the shots ended. So whether the head shot was first or last, it couldn't have been Reeva screaming after the shots ended.

 

[dgfred]

woman sounding screams = OP

IMO

 

[Interested Bystander]

Listening to some of Roux' comments in court today, I have a feeling we will find out through expert testimony about the ability to hear screams from an enclosed toilet room. Apparently Roux' team has carried out audio tests.

ETA: Of course it was chalked up to rubbish among the group who has been convinced or Oscar's guilt before hearing evidence.

It was chalked up as rubbish because the tests were grossly flawed. It was nothing to do with OP being guilty or not.


Estelle van der Merwe has already testified that she heard screaming recently from OP's house. Roux had to own up to the tests he had carried out and must have been quite disappointed that Estelle van der Merwe had actually heard the screams with no prior knowledge. Roux had not divulged this information and was hoping to bring it up later (according to him) but she pre-empted this during her testimony.

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

Actually I wanted to ask you: What does it matter who was screaming?

The reasons of why and how mean much more to me... not what happened after the shots or as the shots were fired.

Even if witnesses were wrong about the screams... they don't have anything to do with how things got to that point.

Do you see what I'm asking? I know it isn't too clear.

Because if Reeva screamed or even said Aggghh OP would know who he was
shooting.. However acc to Roux, the judge is to believe that Reeva was in pure silence before and while she was being shot with 4 bullets whereas on the contrary OP was yelling from the roofs just sounding like a woman before shotting an unknown intruder/s . This explains how desperate Roux is for sticking on such a funny comment...:facepalm:

 

[Trooper]

I just listened to it and heard it from Nel's own mouth. He said he agrees that she could not have screamed after the fatal head wound.

Roux is painting the picture that the head wound was the first wound .. you know this.. and Nel is saying that indeed she would have been hard put to scream after the head wound but the head wound is NOT the first shot.. Roux wants the head wound to be the first shot, his client ditto, and no screams from Reeva consequently..

Not so, says, Nel. the head wound is the LAST shot, and the previous shots heard simultaneously with screaming are a woman screaming.. a dying Reeva, but not dying quietly...

It is Oscars contention, via Roux that the only screaming was Oscar.. he contends that ALL screams that night were Oscars screams. Reeva , apparently silent all through..

Every witness so far dismisses this opinion of Roux and his client. they dismiss it vehemently, persistently and without collaboration , unless there is some theory that Ms Burger, Mr Burger /Johnson AND DR STIPP , who don't know each other from a bar of soap all got together and decided to float the same idea..


Roux says.. it couldn't have been Reeva screaming, because of the head shot being first. but this is NOT the states case which Roux and his client have stipulated.. this is merely Roux opinion, and Nels objection to it being presented to a witness as a FACT has been knocked on the head. Roux has to present this theory as a THEORY of his client, and NOT a matter of FACT.

 

[minor4th]

Actually I wanted to ask you: What does it matter who was screaming?

The reasons of why and how mean much more to me... not what happened after the shots or as the shots were fired.

Even if witnesses were wrong about the screams... they don't have anything to do with how things got to that point.

Do you see what I'm asking? I know it isn't too clear.

It matters because if they heard screaming after the actual gunshots, it must have been Oscar and not Reeva. It demonstrates that they mistook the sound of the screaming.

Also, in Shipp's testimony, he heard bangs, then screaming, and then another set of bangs. This indicates that the first bangs he heard were gunshots - the screaming he then heard was Oscar, even though all witnesses believed it was a woman screaming, and then another set of bangs breaking the door with the cricket bat. Ship said the two sets of bangs sounded the same - which demonstrates that the cricket bat breaking down the door was as loud as the gunshots and sounded the same. The second set of bangs (cricket bat) happened at 3:17 - the exact time that Burger and Johnson said they heard "gunshots." It indicates that what Burger and Johnson thought were gunshots were really the cricket bat; they were awoken by Oscar's screams (mistaking them for sounds of a woman) after having slept through the first sounds of the actual gunshots, and what they heard at 3:17 was the cricket bat.

 

[Interested Bystander]

But we have already heard on the stand that the folks on the stand DID hear the recreation at their respective homes the night of the test they did, iirc was on Feburary 21st or 22nd. It was mentioned on the stand. Or have I misunderstood something....as hey...I was up from 2:30 am - 8:00 am and may have been half asleep :giggle:

The video being discussed was shot in August 2013. It was not the same as the tests Roux conducted in Feb which Estelle Van der Merwe testified she heard when she was on the stand.

 

[minor4th]

Roux is painting the picture that the head wound was the first wound .. you know this.. and Nel is saying that indeed she would have been hard put to scream after the head wound but the head wound is NOT the first shot.. Roux wants the head wound to be the first shot, his client ditto, and no screams from Reeva consequently..

Not so, says, Nel. the head wound is the LAST shot, and the previous shots heard simultaneously with screaming are a woman screaming.. a dying Reeva, but not dying quietly...

It is Oscars contention, via Roux that the only screaming was Oscar.. he contends that ALL screams that night were Oscars screams. Reeva , apparently silent all through..

Every witness so far dismisses this opinion of Roux and his client. they dismiss it vehemently, persistently and without collaboration , unless there is some theory that Ms Burger, Mr Burger /Johnson AND DR STIPP , who don't know each other from a bar of soap all got together and decided to float the same idea..


Roux says.. it couldn't have been Reeva screaming, because of the head shot being first. but this is NOT the states case which Roux and his client have stipulated.. this is merely Roux opinion, and Nels objection to it being presented to a witness as a FACT has been knocked on the head. Roux has to present this theory as a THEORY of his client, and NOT a matter of FACT.

Sorry, but that is not what Nel said. He said he agrees that Reeva could not have screamed after the head shot.

 

[Schuby]

Actually I wanted to ask you: What does it matter who was screaming?

The reasons of why and how mean much more to me... not what happened after the shots or as the shots were fired.

Even if witnesses were wrong about the screams... they don't have anything to do with how things got to that point.

Do you see what I'm asking? I know it isn't too clear.

I know you didn't ask me but I can offer a response. It matters because if she is screaming before the first shot, you have a woman cognizant of a pending assault. Thus she cannot be on a routine bathroom visit and unaware of lurking danger.

If she screams not before but at least in response to/during the shooting, the case to be made is that had he actually believed himself to be confronting an intruder and not Reeva, he'd have ceased firing when she began to scream after the first shot.

 

[minor4th]

It was chalked up as rubbish because the tests were grossly flawed. It was nothing to do with OP being guilty or not.


Estelle van der Merwe has already testified that she heard screaming recently from OP's house. Roux had to own up to the tests he had carried out and must have been quite disappointed that Estelle van der Merwe had actually heard the screams with no prior knowledge. Roux had not divulged this information and was hoping to bring it up later (according to him) but she pre-empted this during her testimony.

Certainly I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of tests from a TV program. But today Roux said he was going to have expert testimony I'm not questioning whether Merwe could have heard what she heard - but Roux said today that he is going to produce expert testimony that Burger and Johnson could not have heard someone shouting and screaming from within the enclosed toilet room. So it must have been Oscar's screams they heard because he was screaming through through an open window and on the balcony. And also Merwe conceded that the screaming she heard after the shots was Oscar and not Reeva.

 

[Trooper]

Roux puts it, that all and any screaming heard on the terrible morning were ALL Oscar.. nothing and no one else. at any time.

Anyone who heard screaming and thought it was a woman screaming says so because the don't know how high Oscar can scream.. and this is true. .no one knows, so he will have to replicate that scream on the stand, perhaps..

Roux contention that , having concluded hearing a woman screaming, every witness so far is mistaken.. because.. if his client is telling truth, Reeva was dead of the head wound BEFORE the next 3 shots were fired..

Therefore.. it is incumbent on Roux to suggest and declare that each witness so far either collaborated, or , made a mistake. They made a mistake because they IMAGINE the screams.. he says, what they heard was Oscar screaming .

the judge will determine just who is making a mistake here, which is what judges are for

each witness so far has been extraordinarily certain and sure about it being a womans scream.. they just won t come to the concept in any way , at any time that what they heard was Oscar screaming first.. Dr Stipp heard simultaneous screaming , a man AND a woman screaming at the same time.. he disputes and dismisses Roux suggestion that he could have heard 2 different TONES of Oscars voice screaming. Dr STipp refused to even give this theory any credibility at all. He heard both a man AND a womans voice screaming.

 

[Schuby]

Certainly I wouldn't rely on the accuracy of tests from a TV program. But today Roux said he was going to have expert testimony I'm not questioning whether Merwe could have heard what she heard - but Roux said today that he is going to produce expert testimony that Burger and Johnson could not have heard someone shouting and screaming from within the enclosed toilet room. So it must have been Oscar's screams they heard because he was screaming through through an open window and on the balcony. And also Merwe conceded that the screaming she heard after the shots was Oscar and not Reeva.

Well, in fairness, just because Roux said he's going to present testimony, doesn't mean it will be persuasive.

 

[minor4th]

woman sounding screams = OP

IMO

I believe that has been pretty well established considering all of the witness' testimony in conjunction with each other and the medical evidence.

 

[minor4th]

Well, in fairness, just because Roux said he's going to present testimony, doesn't mean it will be persuasive.

True. We'll see how it plays out

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Re: The SA judicial system. I am still having difficulty with the Defense Attorney being able to question a witness based on "facts" that he, the defense attorney, has made up or interpreted in his own unique way. I am also amazed at the use of information that has not been properly introduced as evidence. Such as when questioning the doctor he stated "I've spoken to three medical experts and they each said that based on the head injury, she would not have been able to scream after receiving that injury. Do you agree with this?" It just seems like the Defense Attorney could make up whatever he wants to. Would he be able to say "I've talked to three sound experts and they all said nobody could hear anything more than 20 meters away from the bathroom"?

If there is anyone from South Africa who could explain the rules of evidence/rules of questioning in a criminal matter, I think we Americans would appreciate it greatly.
------------

Re: The screams

I am with those who feel that if even one person heard one female scream, he is guilty. Because that means he knew she was in that toilet area. And there are now four witnesses who have testified they heard a woman's screams.

So the defense has to say that ALL the screams heard by everybody were OP sounding like a woman? Give me a break!

Also, I think perhaps the bathroom window WAS open and that's one of the reasons why the screams could be heard that night. But not the only one.
------------

Re: How sound carries

Thanks to another poster mentioning "wave superpositioning" I went and did some reading on this phenomenon. It is pretty technical for me, but what I got out of it is that temperature, humidity, wind, elevation, and topography all factor in to what happens to a sound wave once it is generated. Oh, and also the pitch or frequency of the source of the sound.

So really, the chances of any "recreation" of how far a sound will carry being accurate would be dependent on being able to recreate the exact ground temperature, air temperature, humidity, wind speed, etc. etc.

It is highly, highly variable. But it does explain the ability to hear sounds from a far distance at certain times under certain conditions. Perhaps this was just one of those nights that sound was carrying quite well. And I am glad it was.

But anyone trying to say it was impossible for these witnesses to have heard what they heard is just wrong.
-------------
The two cell phones in the bathroom:

It was Valentine's Day. She bought him a present. He did not buy her a present? They ate at home as opposed to going out for a dinner. He was on the phone with his buddies for several hours earlier in the evening. He was watching *advertiser censored*. NOT the typical behaviors of a couple who were "deeply in love" three months into their relationship, according to OP.

I do not think she was asleep prior to going into the toilet. Perhaps she took her own phone and HIS cell phone into the bathroom with her. So she could check out what was on his phone. He was up and around the bedroom moving fans, adjusting draperies and blinds. Did he notice his cell phone was missing, then go into the bathroom and confront her through the closed toilet door about his missing cellphone?

She would lock the door. He would beat on the door and scream at her, demanding she open the door. She would refuse to open the door. He would threaten to beat the door down. He would go and get the cricket bat, perhaps stopping to put on his prostheses, returning to the bathroom and striking the door with the bat. He may have already gotten the gun also or would have had to go back to the bedroom once again to get it.

In terms of escalating frustration and violence the screaming first, then the cricket bat battering door, then shooting at door makes sense.

I would like to see an in-court demo of a man with highly developed upper arm strength striking the same type of door with the same type of a cricket bat to see what level of noise it makes.

 

[Schuby]

Roux puts it, that all and any screaming heard on the terrible morning were ALL Oscar.. nothing and no one else. at any time.

Anyone who heard screaming and thought it was a woman screaming says so because the don't know how high Oscar can scream.. and this is true. .no one knows, so he will have to replicate that scream on the stand, perhaps..

Roux contention that , having concluded hearing a woman screaming, every witness so far is mistaken.. because.. if his client is telling truth, Reeva was dead of the head wound BEFORE the next 3 shots were fired..

Therefore.. it is incumbent on Roux to suggest and declare that each witness so far either collaborated, or , made a mistake. They made a mistake because they IMAGINE the screams.. he says, what they heard was Oscar screaming .

the judge will determine just who is making a mistake here, which is what judges are for

each witness so far has been extraordinarily certain and sure about it being a womans scream.. they just won t come to the concept in any way , at any time that what they heard was Oscar screaming first.. Dr Stipp heard simultaneous screaming , a man AND a woman screaming at the same time.. he disputes and dismisses Roux suggestion that he could have heard 2 different TONES of Oscars voice screaming. Dr STipp refused to even give this theory any credibility at all. He heard both a man AND a womans voice screaming.

The problem with the witnesses' certainty that they could identify screams by gender is that we also have the testimony of the nearby neighbors who each interpreted the same the scream differently.

 

[Interested Bystander]

It matters because if they heard screaming after the actual gunshots, it must have been Oscar and not Reeva. It demonstrates that they mistook the sound of the screaming.

Also, in Shipp's testimony, he heard bangs, then screaming, and then another set of bangs. This indicates that the first bangs he heard were gunshots - the screaming he then heard was Oscar, even though all witnesses believed it was a woman screaming, and then another set of bangs breaking the door with the cricket bat. Ship said the two sets of bangs sounded the same - which demonstrates that the cricket bat breaking down the door was as loud as the gunshots and sounded the same. The second set of bangs (cricket bat) happened at 3:17 - the exact time that Burger and Johnson said they heard "gunshots." It indicates that what Burger and Johnson thought were gunshots were really the cricket bat; they were awoken by Oscar's screams (mistaking them for sounds of a woman) after having slept through the first sounds of the actual gunshots, and what they heard at 3:17 was the cricket bat.

Nel stated in court today that Reeva died from the 3.17am volley of shots. What the earlier sounds were we don't know yet but it would not likely be OP bashing the door down before he had shot her or would it? Something else is obviously afoot.