Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[MeeBee]

aha.. I see the theory is changing .

so it is agreed that Stipp heard gunfire first?? he didn't mistake it for cricket bat sounds??

and why would 2 cricket bat sounds fool Mrs Burger into hearing 4 gunshot sounds??


I presume its agreed there are 2 marks on the door of the bat hitting it, and 2 marks on the bat when it impacted the door. so is that agreed ??


if so.. how did Mrs Burger translate 2 sounds of a cricket bat into 4 sounds of gunfire?? we do know there were 4 shots, we know there were 2 cricket bat sounds. .

how did she do that? that's a mistake not only of the quality of the sound but the number of sounds..


Unlikely. highly unlikely and barely managing to be credible.


lets do the arithmetic here..

Um, the first set of sounds being the gunshot is the defense's case. That Oscar fired into the door and then used the cricket bat around 10 minutes later. If this is what Stipp heard it bolsters Oscar's claims, no?

The theory is not changing. That's what the devil's advocate posters have been saying.

 

[Harmony 2]

:modstop:


Discuss the case and not each other...

 

[Linda7NJ]

At first I was leaning toward guilt too, for sure.

But I realized I was going on emotion and trying to rationalize things that, deep down, knew were causing doubt for me. Like Stipp hearing two sets of bangs or Oscar having a history if being scared of being victimized. If I were a juror, at this point, I could not on good conscious convict him of premeditated murder. There's just too many questions and doubts. His story may seem absurd, but I just can't be certain that it isn't the truth or, at least, a version of it.

I don't think it was premeditated, more of a heat of passion type thing. I would convict him on 2 degree murder though...maybe first. Not 100% sure on the degree.
But I do not believe for one second he did not know she was behind that door.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rumpole]

aha.. I see the theory is changing .

so it is agreed that Stipp heard gunfire first?? he didn't mistake it for cricket bat sounds??

and why would 2 cricket bat sounds fool Mrs Burger into hearing 4 gunshot sounds??


I presume its agreed there are 2 marks on the door of the bat hitting it, and 2 marks on the bat when it impacted the door. so is that agreed ??


if so.. how did Mrs Burger translate 2 sounds of a cricket bat into 4 sounds of gunfire?? we do know there were 4 shots, we know there were 2 cricket bat sounds. .

how did she do that? that's a mistake not only of the quality of the sound but the number of sounds..


Unlikely. highly unlikely and barely managing to be credible.


lets do the arithmetic here..

:floorlaugh:

Your understanding may be changing, but I have never thought other than Stipp was awoken by gunshot noises.

The cricket bat mark dude was all over the place on what marks definitely were cricket bat marks, and what marks could have been. Two for sure... but several other potential bat marks. The defence have a third I believe.

As for the burgers???

Originally 2 bangs.. then 3 or 4, then 4 for Burger...4,5, or 6 for Johnson. I think the arithmetic would require a spread sheet and a stiff drink or 3

 

[Trooper]

:floorlaugh:

Your understanding may be changing, but I have never thought other than Stipp was awoken by gunshot noises.

so in the understanding proposed.. how was Mrs Burger 'fooled' into thinking she heard 4 gunshots?? and then mistook them for the 2 cricket bat sounds??


2 sounds.made by the cricket bat. Mrs Burger is 'fooled' into thinking she hears 4 gunshot sounds..


is this believable?? to a judge?? not only is she apparently believing it when the idea is she was 'fooled' by these 4 sounds, when, apparently she could only have heard 2 sounds. ( CB) . but then against all the odds, she gets up on the stand and continues not only being' fooled' but testifying in a court of law, in a murder trial that she was fooled??

it isn't a rational process of thought, really.

 

[MeeBee]

I don't think anyone should rely on ear witness testimony in any trial with regards to figuring out how many gun shots there were. It always varies, unless there's only one, from witness to witness. Even in trials where there's no doubt about how many shots were fired (i.e. there's video) witnesses usually give different numbers. That one witness says she's sure it was this many shots/sounds doesn't make it true. She was fresh out of sleep and probably not actively counting the shots.

 

[MeeBee]

so in the understanding proposed.. how was Mrs Burger 'fooled' into thinking she heard 4 gunshots?? and then mistook them for the 2 cricket bat sounds??


2 sounds.made by the cricket bat. Mrs Burger is 'fooled' into thinking she hears 4 gunshot sounds..


is this believable?? to a judge?? not only is she apparently believing it when the idea is she was 'fooled' by these 4 sounds, when, apparently she could only have heard 2 sounds. ( CB) . but then against all the odds, she gets up on the stand and continues not only being' fooled' but testifying in a court of law, in a murder trial that she was fooled??

it isn't a rational process of thought, really.

In her original statement she wasn't sure of how many she heard. And now she is sure she heard four sounds. This is a red flag. We also don't know how many times Oscar hit the door. Some of the bat marks could be obscured by the fact that the panel split.

Too much certainty here about things that are not certain.

 

[curiousjo]

The doctor testified to hearing intermixed female and male voices AFTER the first "gun shots" -so I don't think first round of noises were the fatal gun shots. Then, he heard a woman scream and second round of "gun shots" --- at the same time as other neighbors. Finally, he added that the latter shots were rapid (like a gun) and he didn't think he could sing a bat that fast!

 

[Rumpole]

We have only heard State witnesses so far and there is no CLEAR disagreement with OP's version. In fact I am more convinced of OP's version. I imagine there will be added confirmation from defense witnesses.

Key points are:
TWO events that made loud bangs.
A witness who hears TWO sets of bangs.
No dispute that gunshots were first, then cricket bat on door.

It does not require "rocket science" level arithmetic to work out the broad sequence of events with those data points

 

[Trooper]

the judge would have to argue, that Mrs Burger was a vexatious witness. that she was unreliable, with some sort of history of unreliability to back that up , and submitted to taking an oath on the stand. AND not only that, since she is the states witness, she also was not only 'fooled ' herself, but she 'fooled' Nels.

assuming , as is stated, that Mrs Burger was 'fooled' into thinking she heard 4 gunshots, instead of 2 cricket bat sounds, she has also fooled the entire Prosecutors office for a year.

someone is certainly fooled, but I cant see where, or why, Mrs Burger is 'fooled'.

Also.. as an aside. Roux and whoever reads Mrs Burger as being fooled is not taking into account that Roux, under Oscars instruction, is not fixated on WHAT sounds, but WHEN .. the witnesses state, screaming ,shots, screaming shots. it is Roux unenviable job to erase the woman screaming. which is why he is intent on the first shot being the instant killer of Reeva..

the testimony of the woman screaming is the where Oscar's story and the witnesses testimony parts ways..

Roux has to eliminate any and all reference, mention, testimony, evidence, hint and utterly cast the testimony of anyone, anywhere on that night at that time , in that place hearing a womans screams. It is essential that he does. how, I don't know.

I have been disappointed in how he has tried it on so far.. merely by attempting to suggest that all who heard a woman screaming that night are mistaken, fooled, deaf, blind and a liar and a collaborator.. its a pitiful defence , in my opinion. I thought he could do better and naturally, I think he must do better if that component of his defence of Oscar is to succeed..

Oscar, as we know, heard nothing. not a peep, not a squeak , not a word, not a scream of pain, or rage, or fright from Reeva.. nothing, nada, zip and zero.

According to Oscar. .. one statement says, not a word from Reeva after 10pm. another statement says he spoke to her a few minutes before.

don't know what to make of either of those two claims.

But Oscar. . with Roux x-examinations, has to , and must, and is imperatively obligated to clear each, all and every faintest mention of Reeva's voice issuing from her body at ANY time after 10pm, in whatever form it may take.

 

[Trooper]

we will just have to agree to disagree..

its no big deal. the Judge will sort it out.

I, myself, am confident that as in most trials, all trials weight will be given in accordance with the witness testimony and the accused testimony..

I don't see from here that this Judge will discard Mrs Burgers 4 gunshots and replace them with her bad hearing and 'fooling' propensities into 2 cricket bat sounds

just don't see it happening. but. good luck to those who think it will. Its a very very very thin thread, and will require a whole lot of backup of people who have in fact, and on that night and in that place made a similar mistake.

who knows?? there may be household's full of people on the Silverwater estate who were woken up by 2 cricket bat sounds, ( and slept thru 4 gunshots ) and rolled over, only to realize later what they heard. and Roux will produce them, certainly.

 

[nastasya]

<Snipped to address just this point>

I think Stipps was a GREAT witness for OP. THE BEST. His testimony would sit well as testimony from a defense witness.

This is what Stipp said he heard before hearing gunshots, then silence:

"She sounded fearful. Of someone who was in fear of his or her life," said Johan Stipp, continuing his testimony after the lunch adjournment.

"She sounded to be emotional, anguished, scared almost scared out of her mind, I would say."

Not exactly a great witness for OP.

The theory about the cricket bat sounding like gunshots means nothing if four witnesses all describe hearing a terrified woman screaming for her life.

 

[Trooper]

:floorlaugh:

Your understanding may be changing, but I have never thought other than Stipp was awoken by gunshot noises.

The cricket bat mark dude was all over the place on what marks definitely were cricket bat marks, and what marks could have been. Two for sure... but several other potential bat marks. The defence have a third I believe.

As for the burgers???

Originally 2 bangs.. then 3 or 4, then 4 for Burger...4,5, or 6 for Johnson. I think the arithmetic would require a spread sheet and a stiff drink or 3

sorry to belabor another point. but the defence do NOT have a third cricket bat mark. They HOPE to find a third mark. this is miles away from having one. . they also hope to have a kick mark. lets see if they do.

but hoping and having are , as we all know are divided by a chasm so deep even Oscar couldn't rest easy on the probability.

:juggle:

 

[katydid23]

I don't think there is a need to guess here. It is established that he carried her down stairs in order to put her in the car.

The defence maintains that he was intending to drive her to hospital, and I'm not sure what the prosecution suggest the motive is, perhaps to remove the body from the scene?

So then why didn't he do that? It was a life and death situation.


Why did he tell the security on the phone that things were fine? He could have told them he needed a ride to the hospital and met them outside with Reeva.

Or perhaps RUN to the car with her and hurry her to the hospital. We didn't see any of that.

 

[sorrell skye]

Like I have posted before, OP has a well documented history of irrational fear and paranoia. Sam Taylor said she had been woken a couple times by oscar because he heard a noise and thought it was an intruder. He almost shot his washing machine. It's not really surprising that something like this happened to a man with such a hair trigger and one that spooks so easily. It was a long time coming. I'm not excusing him. But I think that makes it quite possible that he believed there was an intruder.

Why didn't he wake Reeva? Well, I went through this before as well. It was different this time. There was actually a person in the bathroom the scenario he'd been fearing in his mind was happening and he went into full on panic mode. He wasn't thinking rationally at all. In his mind Reeva is still in bed. He perhaps didn't check her for those two reasons. Saying he didn't do what one thought he should or would do in this situation is not proof that his story is untruthful. It's speculation. You still can't say for certain that he didn't believe there was an intruder in the house. Saying so is just plain biased.

BBM

In his trial plea statement, OP said that he had spoken to Reeva moments before bringing in the fans, so he wouldn't have needed to awaken her (if his version is true). Since, according to him, he had just spoken with her, it weakens his claim that he believed an intruder was in his toilet room. If his version is to be believed, he would have known she was already awake, therefore a reasonable person would infer that any noise coming from the toilet was more than likely his awake bed partner with whom he had just spoken.

In the past, on 2 occasions when he heard noises in the night that he thought may be an intruder, he consulted with his bed partner (Sam Taylor). ST is still alive.

When he heard a noise that he feared may have been a burglar in his laundry room, he didn't shoot through the door at the alleged "intruder". His washer & dryer are still alive.

Reeva, on the other hand, is dead.

I don't believe he thought there was an intruder in his toilet room on the night he killed her. His actions on the early morning of February 14, 2013 aren't consistent with his actions on previous occasions when he claimed to have feared an intruder had entered his home. Yes - he investigated on those prior occasions. But the important difference is that he didn't fire his weapon on those previous occasions.

I think he's using his fear of burglars to try to cover up his intentional murder of Reeva. The past incidents where he was afraid of an alleged burglar are convenient excuses that he's now using to try to distract from his real issues, IMO.

He has a history of serious control issues, jealousy, possessiveness, and a history of extreme rage expressed via verbal abuse against multiple women, as well as a history of threatening a total stranger with his gun.

IMO, the writing is on the wall, not to mention that Reeva's blood is also on the wall.

 

[Trooper]

:floorlaugh:



Originally 2 bangs.. then 3 or 4, then 4 for Burger...4,5, or 6 for Johnson. I think the arithmetic would require a spread sheet and a stiff drink or 3

edited for brevity.


it really isn't a matter of what they heard. its a matter of what is..fitting the sounds that ARE .. not trying to slot into witnesses testimony sounds that are not in the hope of there being no screaming woman heard by any witness.

6 sounds and assorted screaming isn't complicated. Its the screaming that is the crux of the matter.

I just hope that a theory that the sounds of a woman screaming are not going to be attributed to a cricket bat as well. that is too bizarre, but its not improbable that someone will float it !!.. :facepalm:

 

[minor4th]

What you have posted does not in any way refute my previous post(s), sorry. And you know my previous post(s) was hours ago and you have been here all of that time. Hey, if what I showed you was too much to bear, then so be it - you were wrong. But why play all of these games?

Go ahead and tell me and WS that it was the shots first then the bat as you believe and everyone can make their own determination. Again, there are many very smart people here.

I posted the videos where the State's witness, in response to questioning by both the prosecution and defense, said the gunshots were before the cricket bat.

Is the State's witness right or wrong? I don't know, but the evidence is that the gunshots were before the cricket bat striking the door and it's transcribed for all to see with the accompanying videos if you don't want to take my word for it.

So yes, make your own determination.

 

[nastasya]

There is a difference.

In South Africa where home invasion, rape, torture, and murder are common (ish) it is REASONABLE to assume noises at 3:00AM are from an intruder.

Imagining noises are from the landing gear of an alien spaceship hitting the window sill... not so reasonable.

On planet earth, where women getting up to pee in the middle of the night is common, it is REASONABLE to assume the noises in the toilet stall are from the woman who's sharing your bedroom.

Imagining noises from a burglar climbing through a 2nd story window and immediately going to pee, then immediately rushing to put through bullets through the door... not so reasonable.

:denied:

 

[katydid23]

Like I have posted before, OP has a well documented history of irrational fear and paranoia. Sam Taylor said she had been woken a couple times by oscar because he heard a noise and thought it was an intruder. He almost shot his washing machine. It's not really surprising that something like this happened to a man with such a hair trigger and one that spooks so easily. It was a long time coming. I'm not excusing him. But I think that makes it quite possible that he believed there was an intruder.

Why didn't he wake Reeva? Well, I went through this before as well. It was different this time. There was actually a person in the bathroom the scenario he'd been fearing in his mind was happening and he went into full on panic mode. He wasn't thinking rationally at all. In his mind Reeva is still in bed. He perhaps didn't check her for those two reasons. Saying he didn't do what one thought he should or would do in this situation is not proof that his story is untruthful. It's speculation. You still can't say for certain that he didn't believe there was an intruder in the house. Saying so is just plain biased.

OK. So let's say it is just as OP says. He hears a noise in the bathroom, assumes it is an intruder, goes for his gun, and yells at the empty bed, asking Reeva to call the police. So Reeva is locked in the bathroom with her phone, hearing OP SCREAMING at the phantom intruders to GET OUT.

Why doesn't she call the police or Security for help?


And why does she even have her phone with her if she just innocently got up to use the bathroom at 3:00 am?


Why would he believe it was an intruder without first checking to see where his girlfriend was? It is very hard to get past that hurdle, for me anyway.

 

[Val1]

At first I was leaning toward guilt too, for sure.

But I realized I was going on emotion and trying to rationalize things that, deep down, knew were causing doubt for me. Like Stipp hearing two sets of bangs or Oscar having a history if being scared of being victimized. If I were a juror, at this point, I could not on good conscious convict him of premeditated murder. There's just too many questions and doubts. His story may seem absurd, but I just can't be certain that it isn't the truth or, at least, a version of it.

My question for you is how can you be so sure that Stipp did not hear two sets of actual gunshots instead of the defense's version of bat and gun sounds?

Just because OP managed to only score 3 out of the last 4 actual gunshots on RS that were definitely heard by what, four different witnesses?, doesn't mean there weren't more that they didn't hear(probably because they were deeper in the house and/or by then the doors and windows were closed muffling the sound, or they were still asleep, had the stereo up, etc.) and we haven't heard evidence about yet other than the photo of the other door with another gun close by, anymore than the 2 marks from the bat can be made out to be more than the evidence shows, no matter how much the defense wants there to be.

There is definitely bias on both sides I get that, but unless you or I were there, all we can do is try to make sense of what the judge has been presented with as evidence and hope it goes the way we would prefer and preface our comments with imo....