Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[Gavel Rash]

If and its a big IF in IMO...Oscar fired shots first at the 'intruder' and it was 4 shots , a double tap I there meaning all ear witnesses only heard 3...and the perpetrator was screaming...they screamed for approximately 5minutes? After a fatal head shot? Mmmm.

So there was no bat break down door sounds.Oscar merely pried panel out, using bat he already had in room, as suggested in forensics,and put his hand in and found key to be missing. Did he then use bat to drag key over to small opening only one panel removed, pick them up with blood on them, open door! Blah! Run to room to get phones hence blood on hands from keys, get phones and legs and start calling.

This puts bat at scene prior to gun shots as being the intimidatory weapon. Reeva in loo scared witless is hearing load bangs...does she believe they may be gun shots hence her piercing screams that he has his gun and is firing into wall etc?

The fear is penultimate.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

In the overall now that the Prosecution has finished:

1.) Five different witnesses, none of whom has any "dog in the fight", have testified to hearing a woman screaming.

If it was one or two witnesses, perhaps I could dismiss it. But five who heard it? I believe a woman was indeed screaming.

This alone destroys Oscar's "story".

2.) The gunshot sounds.

I am STILL having trouble believing that any of the sounds were from a cricket bat hitting a door. I know, I know. I am an American, never even heard a cricket bat in action. I have attended numerous major league baseball games here and have heard the distintive sound of a baseball bat hitting a baseball. Are they wildly different?

Gunshots are SO distinctive. I have heard many, many of them. Pistols, rifles, shotguns. I've spent lots and lots of time in a very rural area where shooting is a passtime. Right out in the side yard, not at a range. The houses are far apart - some of them 1/2 mile or more. But that distinctive sound of gunshots is easily recognized.

In sitting out on the front deck, my late husband, a combat veteran, could even distinguish between the type of gun being shot off. In addition there are hunters in this area during the various hunting seasons. So you do get to hear lots of different type of gunshots.

I am certainly no ballistics expert. I know a little about audiograms and how hearing is measured - by both intensity and frequency. Intensity is the decibles, how loud the sound is. Frequency is the pitch of the sound. High pitched or low pitched? I do not know if a gunshot creates sound at a higher decible or at a higher frequency level than a cricket bat striking wood.

I do know that people who are used to hearing gunshots in the past pretty much know when they hear a gunshot.

It will be interesting to see what the Defense comes up with.

-----------------
One of the greatest cases for differences in people hearing gunshots was the JFK assasination at Dealy Plaza in Dallas, Texas in 1963. There were many, many differing accounts of the gunshots heard that day.

 

[weeeva]

Firing 4 shots into that small a space knowing there is someone in there in my view can be considered murder.

It depends whether or not a case can be made that OP's behaviour that night was due to his vulnerability as a man with a severe disability, a man at much greater disadvantage than an able bodied person.

 

[Val1]

partial quote:
No, it was the right side of her head.

Agreed, it entered on the top right and exited on lower back, all over the inside of the toilet lid...

 

[sorrell skye]

Nope...nor did we hear from any previous girlfriends who may have suggested he was prone to tantrums and jealous rages...maybe roux will call up an ex or 2.
Cecil Myers too, who claimed he warned OP and told him to "back off" from Reeva.

Samantha Taylor (ex-girlfriend) testified that OP screamed at her, as well as her sister, and several of her friends.

I don't know if he screamed at her & others due to jealousy, but to me the important part is that multiple people were subjected to his screaming rages. IMO, that's not okay, regardless of the reasons OP may or may not have justified his unacceptable behavior to himself.

 

[minor4th]

If it's true that one ear witness mistook Oscar's screaming as the screams of a woman, then it stands to reason that 5 witnesses would make the same mistake.

 

[screecher]

In the end, no matter the outcome of this trial, Reeva was murdered and her murderer will forever and a day will pay for that. No more golden boy, no more endorsements, most likely be shunned, cripes...may even go into hiding.

Look at Scott Peterson, OJ Simpson, and the baby killer in Flordia.

Oh, and learning about his paranoia, who's to say he won't off himself?

OP's life, as he's known it, will be no more.

IMO

 

[JuneBug67]

It depends whether or not a case can be made that OP's behaviour that night was due to his vulnerability as a man with a severe disability, a man at much greater disadvantage than an able bodied person.

I think there is a good case for that no matter who is telling the truth.

 

[weeeva]

Sorry to break this news, but.....I believe the law in SA is he is guilty of murder. bang.

So in SA there can be no mitigating circumstances? Is that a fact? I honestly don't know.

 

[Dr Mattus]

That said, I challenge anybody to explain how that passive access could last 5 full minutes.

My iDevices periodically back themselves up to iCloud storage when they are plugged in to charge and connected to a wifi. This could take five minutes or longer.

App or iOS updates might similarly take some time if try are set to automatically download.

 

[Val1]

Yes but he has pleaded "not guilty" to the charge put to him as premeditated murder. If the state can't prove he intentionally killed Reeva (and knew it was her in the bathroom), and the defence does manage to make a good case of he truly did think his life was in danger and he was trying to protect himself and Reeva, he could very well walk, as the documented cases of this nature I have pointed out before have proved. At most, he could get a suspended with his gun licenses being revoked.

Besides the fact, the states case was Reeva died at 3.17 from a shot to the head, we now know this is not possible.

Maybe you know this somehow, however I was not there so no I don't know this. I'm definitely leaning towards what all the witnesses testified to, that the screams stopped after the last shots which have all been testified to as in the 3:17 window.

 

[minor4th]

So in SA there can be no mitigating circumstances? Is that a fact? I honestly don't know.

I dont think that is correct, but mitigation comes in more in sentencing than the actual verdict it seems.

 

[JuneBug67]

In the end, no matter the outcome of this trial, Reeva was murdered and her murderer will forever and a day will pay for that. No more golden boy, no more endorsements, most likely be shunned, cripes...may even go into hiding.

Look at Scott Peterson, OJ Simpson, and the baby killer in Flordia.

OP's life, as he's known it, will be no more.

IMO

Endorsements are almost certainly gone, but he may yet emerge as a sympathetic character depending on the defence case, particularly given the climate of fear many in South Africa exist in as far as personal safety goes.

 

[Carol70]

Sorrell, I just remembered that June Steenkamp denied that Reeva was ever in an abusive relationship...will quote my post from last year:

06-02-2013, 03:50 PM
Carol70
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 954
Just read the You article. 2 things that stand out to me but otherwise no new info regarding the case.

1. Reevas parents emphatically DENY that Reeva was once in an abusive relationship. They said it was just rumor and I quote June steenkamp " Reeva became interested in giving talks about the abuse of women and perhaps someone misunderstood that she was talking from her own experience"

2. June and Reeva were both in therapy at some point to deal with the trauma associated with a home invasion 4 years ago. Apparently, it was a very traumatic experience and they were both lucky to escape with their lives.

No 2 is quite something. If, indeed, OP was screaming there was a intruder, I can only imagine what was going through Reeva mind.

I honestly think she was stronger than that, and judging from the messages, to me it seems she is not afraid to speak her mind. In fact, she seems to berate him for bad behavior (rightly so) and he falls over himself apologizing.

 

[Gryffindor]

Whatever happened to the rubber handle on the cricket bat? Unimportant?

 

[AlwaysShocked]

"If it's true that one ear witness mistook Oscar's screaming as the screams of a woman, then it stands to reason that 5 witnesses would make the same mistake."

It seems that only Barry Roux is saying the witness mistook Oscar's screaming as the screams of a woman. The witness certainly did not concur with that.

No, IMO, it does not "stand to reason" that if one witness was mistaken (which I do not believe) that the next four witnesses "would make the same mistake".

 

[Carol70]

So in SA there can be no mitigating circumstances? Is that a fact? I honestly don't know.

Yes there are, I've posted about a few cases in point along these threads.

 

[screecher]

Endorsements are almost certainly gone, but he may yet emerge as a sympathetic character depending on the defence case, particularly given the climate of fear many in South Africa exist in as far as personal safety goes.

BBM

IMO, the way I'm reading this, I'm pretty sure the use of an oxymoron is being used.

"...climate of fear...personal safety...."

Reeva was in fear of OP. Yet she carried no weapons.

OP claims a love of weapons and IMO, uses his stumps as an excuse for his rages and irrational behavior while going into a so-called 'defensive' mode using those weapons.

I dare say any sympathy he may garner will only be from his family and others who have the same wacked-out mindset as he. The ones who are able to identify with him.

Personally, I'm unable to bend my brain around what he's done.

 

[Carol70]

"If it's true that one ear witness mistook Oscar's screaming as the screams of a woman, then it stands to reason that 5 witnesses would make the same mistake."

It seems that only Barry Roux is saying the witness mistook Oscar's screaming as the screams of a woman. The witness certainly did not concur with that.

No, IMO, it does not "stand to reason" that if one witness was mistaken (which I do not believe) that the next four witnesses "would make the same mistake".

She said she heard a woman screaming and her husband told her it was in fact OP screaming. Roux didn't say it was OP.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It depends whether or not a case can be made that OP's behaviour that night was due to his vulnerability as a man with a severe disability, a man at much greater disadvantage than an able bodied person.

He's more able bodied than I and I'm a healthy woman.

Yeah a woman, women are targeted all the time. I'm short too. Does that give me some sort of excuse to kill willy nilly??? No!

All IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk