Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[JuneBug67]

Instead of going after imagined intruder with hollow point ammo, who btw, was behind two doors, why do you suppose OP didn't collect Reeva and book down the stairs and outside to safety?

I don't know. My point is that we can't know. If Oscar's story is true, we are talking about moments to form a response to a perceived threat. He is without his prosthetics, the bedroom door is locked, perhaps in his mind if he does one other thing than remove the threat he will be gambling his own life and that of Reeva. The instinct to survive is an extremely powerful one.

 

[JuneBug67]

He wouldn't have been "blind", he would have been peering around the door jamb with the gun trained on the toilet door. Classic position which we have all seen in countless action dramas. Plus he would have been a little further away from the "intruder".

It's true that that would have been a wiser decision in most possible scenarios and outcomes. But I guess in actions dramas somebody always shoots first. If Oscar is telling the truth, he elected for it to be him.

 

[Suthrnqt]

Marking.

 

[sorrell skye]

She did specifically say it was not consistent arguing for an hour. It was intermittent arguing for approximately an hour.

And yes, Reeva was dead not long after that.

Any and all pieces need to at least be considered.

I agree - any and all pieces need to at least be considered, rather than tossed out as unrelated, unless there are evidence-based reasons that refute their possible significance, IMO.

A neighbor heard a loud argument that awoke her in the middle of the night. Regardless of whether or not that neighbor was able to determine from whose house the argument emanated, an hour or so later gunshots were heard by multiple neighbors and Reeva was dead.

If it turns out that there is trustworthy evidence that proves the sounds of a loud argument came from someone else's house, I will continue to believe those sounds likely came from OP's house.

 

[MeeBee]

BBM

IIRC, this crying was heard after the last set of bangs and it was crying, not screaming. I do believe that Mr. van der Wewre heard Oscar crying afterwards.

It's possible that because Mrs. van der Mewre heard a female voice during the argument earlier, she assumed it was the same person crying afterwards. That's just a guess on my part.

But it's also possible when stressed and under duress Oscar's distressed noises can sound feminine from a distance. It's like hearing a cat wailing and thinking you're hearing a baby crying.

 

[JuneBug67]

"We already know that one witness mistook Oscar's "loud crying" for a woman, so it is within reason that the other ear witnesses made the same mistake. That is not difficult to understand, I don't think."

Perhaps I have misunderstood the evidence presented. Because my impression upon hearing the evidence is that it is only Barry Roux's assertion that the witness "mistook Oscar's loud crying for a woman".

Thus, we do not "know" that to be a fact.

I believe there was testimony that a witness made a remark to her husband about a "woman crying" and her husband corrected her and told her it was Oscar crying.

 

[Gryffindor]

Plus, bat used 1st or 2nd upon door and in what manner, stumps or legs could surely be quantified by fingerprint/palm placement on rubber handle covering which was removed . . . . . ?

 

[MeeBee]

"We already know that one witness mistook Oscar's "loud crying" for a woman, so it is within reason that the other ear witnesses made the same mistake. That is not difficult to understand, I don't think."

Perhaps I have misunderstood the evidence presented. Because my impression upon hearing the evidence is that it is only Barry Roux's assertion that the witness "mistook Oscar's loud crying for a woman".

Thus, we do not "know" that to be a fact.

My understanding was her husband informed her that it was in fact Oscar crying.

 

[nastasya]

I don't know. My point is that we can't know. If Oscar's story is true, we are talking about moments to form a response to a perceived threat. He is without his prosthetics, the bedroom door is locked, perhaps in his mind if he does one other thing than remove the threat he will be gambling his own life and that of Reeva. The instinct to survive is an extremely powerful one.

We do know. According to the killer's own words, he left the bedroom he was sharing with Reeva. When he returned he heard a "noise" in the bathroom.

We do know as adult humans that waking to pee in the middle of the night is not an unusual event. We do know that the sound of somebody using the bathroom has never caused any of us to feel a "rush of terror," and we do know that the killer's home was in a nice gated suburban area, and that the bathroom was on the second floor, high above the ground.

It's a ludicrous alibi concocted by the defense five days after the killing to attempt to fit the known facts. Five witnesses who heard a woman screaming and gun shots confirm this. The person who was rightfully terrified was Reeva.

 

[minor4th]

"We already know that one witness mistook Oscar's "loud crying" for a woman, so it is within reason that the other ear witnesses made the same mistake. That is not difficult to understand, I don't think."

Perhaps I have misunderstood the evidence presented. Because my impression upon hearing the evidence is that it is only Barry Roux's assertion that the witness "mistook Oscar's loud crying for a woman".

Thus, we do not "know" that to be a fact.

No, that was the witnesses' own testimony.

 

[Gryffindor]

Hmm, damn pity none of us super sleuths are cross examining, heh? Hee

 

[sorrell skye]

There are emergency alarms fitted to the houses and Pieter Baba, the guard, did question, in court, why, if OP had an intruder, he did not use the alarm system to alert them.

TY. I missed that part of Baba's testimony. So, if OP had the option to utilize the alert system, for some reason he chose not to (if his alleged fear of a burglar is true). Add to that his response to Baba "Everything is fine".

 

[steveml]

I just tested 1 MB file. It took 13 seconds. That means for connection to last 5 minutes there would be 20 MB of data transferred approximately.

My guess is prosecution is waiting to cross-examine Pistorius and ask him things like why the phone connected to the internet. When he answers, they'll present the evidence. If it connected to the internet there's a record of where it connected.

State does not have to provide rebuttal evidence to the defense ahead of time. This might be fun to watch. It's like a chess game. If Pistorius is lying he won't know what state has on him until he tells the lie.

It's really only a possibility I'm throwing out there, as I don't know the connection speeds in that part of SA, and have no idea what sort of material OP may receive thru email. It could be anything - so I really would be speculating.

It will certainly be interesting, I'll probably be nervous watching.

I'm impressed you did the download speed test :star1:

 

[lisasalinger]

I want to run through the timeline of the final moments. For right now I'm using the Stipp's ear witness testimony since they were the closest plus phone records.


2:59am - Approximate time of first 3 bangs according to the Stipp's clock. Clock said 3:02am, but it runs about 3-4 minutes fast. Defense theory that these are the shots that killed Reeva

3:14am- 3 more bangs are heard according to the Stipps. I am basing this on Mrs. Stipp's clock saying 3:17, but it's 3 to 4 minutes fast. Prosecution theory that these are the shots that killed Reeva. Defense believes this is the bat

3:15:51am- Dr. Stipp gets thru to Baba to report shots heard, 16 second phone call. We know he tried calling 10111 first and didn't get thru, so there was a little bit of lag time between shot being heard and him getting thru at this time.

3:19am - Oscar calls Johan Stander. Under the defense theory, this is about 19 minutes after the shots. Under the prosecution theory, this is about 5 minutes after the shots

3:20am - Oscar calls Netcare

3:21am - Oscar calls, and receives a call, from Baba. Oscar's outgoing call likely a mistake, only crying/no words. Baba gets thru to Oscar, speaks to him and Oscar says "everything is fine"

3:24am The Standers and Baba are on the scene. They may have arrived a minute or two sooner?

So what do you guys think about the approximate 19 minutes, as listed above?? ? This is bugging me so I'm being a pest

 

[TorisMom003]

So what do you guys think about the approximate 19 minutes, as listed above?? ? This is bugging me so I'm being a pest

I think it is just one more thing in a long list of things that OP and the defense lawyers are going to have to try and explain away. And if they stick with the story that Reeva was shot and killed with the first set of "gun shot" sounds, then OP better be prepared to spend the next 25 years of his life in a prison cell.

MOO

 

[Val1]

We're not talking about running a race with prosthetics on, we're talking about responding to a perceived threat in the middle of the night, in the dark, with no prosthetics on.

So, yeah, I would definitely say it factors in. And besides, if it's even reasonably possibly true that Oscar felt vulnerable as he said, then it has to be accepted.

bbm - Not imo and I do have the added experience of having a partial quad/amputee for a husband. Re the bolded part, that has always puzzled me, if it was so dark, how did OP know he was even aiming at the toilet door, let alone in such a tight pattern, or are you conceding that perhaps those broken tiles in the bathroom may have come from other gunshots?

 

[JuneBug67]

We do know. According to the killer's own words, he left the bedroom he was sharing with Reeva. When he returned he heard a "noise" in the bathroom.

We do know as adult humans that waking to pee in the middle of the night is not an unusual event. We do know that the sound of somebody using the bathroom has never caused any of us to feel a "rush of terror," and we do know that the killer's home was in a nice gated suburban area, and that the bathroom was on the second floor, high above the ground.

It's a ludicrous alibi concocted by the defense five days after the killing to attempt to fit the known facts. Five witnesses who heard a woman screaming and gun shots confirm this. The person who was rightfully terrified was Reeva.

If he, in his mind, firmly believed Reeva was in bed then it is not unreasonable that he would feel a rush of terror at a noise in the ensuite bathroom of his locked second story bathroom located in a country where deadly home invasions are de rigueur. One the adrenaline is pumping and the heart is hammering we don't really use the parts of our brain we are using as we sit behind our keyboards pondering this. I don't know what happened that night, and I don't know what Oscar knew. I do know though that the scenario he claims is not ludicrous or outlandish. It does need a very narrow and very specific set of facts and circumstances and beliefs to be credible, but it is possible that it happened as he says it did.

 

[luvmygarden]

I just tested 1 MB file. It took 13 seconds. That means for connection to last 5 minutes there would be 20 MB of data transferred approximately.

My guess is prosecution is waiting to cross-examine Pistorius and ask him things like why the phone connected to the internet. When he answers, they'll present the evidence. If it connected to the internet there's a record of where it connected.

State does not have to provide rebuttal evidence to the defense ahead of time. This might be fun to watch. It's like a chess game. If Pistorius is lying he won't know what state has on him until he tells the lie.

Actually I like watching the defense case better. The evidence has been submitted so the prosecutor has access to bring in much of that evidence the defense chooses to question defense witnesses. If defense in this case has prosecution witnesses too so much the better. Looking forward to this Friday.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

"I believe there was testimony that a witness made a remark to her husband about a "woman crying" and her husband corrected her and told her it was Oscar crying."

Thank you for this JuneBug. I will be the first to admit that the manner of the presentation of testimony in this case has been somewhat confusing to me. Especially on the cross exam. It is so different for those of us who are used to watching U.S. trials.

So it was the crying sound that the witness mistook for a woman, not the screaming?

 

[JuneBug67]

bbm - Not imo and I do have the added experience of having a partial quad/amputee for a husband. Re the bolded part, that has always puzzled me, if it was so dark, how did OP know he was even aiming at the toilet door, let alone in such a tight pattern, or are you conceding that perhaps those broken tiles in the bathroom may have come from other gunshots?

I think the bathroom window was open and therefore there may have been some ambient light. During the fight or flight response the pupils widen to enable better night vision, which also may have been a factor. He was also a practiced marksman, and I doubt the pattern of shots would have been difficult to achieve.