Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[screecher]

Fire? I don't live in an African hut! I keep them normally next to my side of the bed if I lock up or the husband put them next to his if he locks up. What I meant was many times when we are in a hurry to find keys, late for work, someone ringing the bell, guests arriving whatever, there is always a hunt for keys. We have ALOT of security gates/doors with keys that get locked. I was implying that maybe OP in that moment didn't think it would be a good idea to look for his keys/grab them, try unlock the door etc. I may not be explaining myself clearly but hope you get the gist of the point I'm trying to make.

Thankfully you don't live in a 4-story brick rowhouse either. :anguish:

 

[TorisMom003]

To validate his alleged shoulder injury. :facepalm:

Wouldn't fancy having a doctor stood over the bed watching me sleep, that's for sure :smile:

And what difference would that make? It still wouldn't tell us what side of the bed he slept on. Heck, why even bother changing sides? Just roll over and face the other way.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

She wouldn't know and that was the point

Good job she gave the right answer

 

[steveml]

I would love to see trials in the UK mainly because the law fascinates me but I do have reservations. I think some witnesses both for and against, even unseen, will feel profoundly uncomfortable knowing they are being listened to and may not perform well under questioning.

I have already listened to some journalists and a lawyer saying they think Roux is playing to the camera. That I would not like.

We can of course watch trials live in court and I have done so. The only problem is those that go on for weeks involve a lot of downtime and a lot of travelling.

I enjoy it as it gives you an insight into something you rarely see, but it still feels a bit wrong to me. The nature of public reaction can be quick and vitriolic at times.

If education instead of dramatisation is the rationale, I suppose television trials screened with a week or two delay might serve a better purpose.

 

[BabaJ]

Fire? I don't live in an African hut! I keep them normally next to my side of the bed if I lock up or the husband put them next to his if he locks up. What I meant was many times when we are in a hurry to find keys, late for work, someone ringing the bell, guests arriving whatever, there is always a hunt for keys. We have ALOT of security gates/doors with keys that get locked. I was implying that maybe OP in that moment didn't think it would be a good idea to look for his keys/grab them, try unlock the door etc. I may not be explaining myself clearly but hope you get the gist of the point I'm trying to make.

Carol, I am just curious (sorry , is there any particular reason why you lock the bedroom and why you remove the key? Why not just leave it in the door as it must be inconvenient to look for a key at night when for example you want to go to the kitchen etc.?

 

[G.bng]

However, I think we forget that OP was more than likely capable of moving about his house in the pitch dark and knew the layout of the bathroom intimately, just as we all are in our own homes but an intruder could not possibly know what was happening past the entrance to the bathroom and the layout of the room certainly giving OP the upper hand, if there was an intruder of course.

I really can't see how OP could have had the "upper hand" going down the passage to the bathroom, as it seems to me that to the contrary from the layout it appears it was the intruder/s who had a huge advantage over OP. They had perfect ambush positions at the corners of the two left turns OP had to take to enter the bathroom, and while OP would have no idea where the intruder/s were situated, whether in the passage, bathroom, toilet or shower, these could wait patiently guns at the ready listening to OP coming closer while trumpeting his progress with "Reeva call the police" and "get out of my house".

The diagram at http://tinyurl.com/qbbzkhl with the red line tracing OP's path shows the dangers. The first likely ambush at the end of the passage where OP has to poke his head around the corner to check if the coast is clear before moving further in, and at the next corner another likely ambush where he has to enter into the bathroom where intruder/s could be waiting ready to gun him down as he claims he genuinely believed they were about to do. And that's not including a surprise attack by an intruder coming from the shower or crawling out from under the hanging double sink and shooting him from behind while he is double tapping at the toilet door.

Nope, imo, no matter how "intimately" OP knew the layout it could serve him little as at every turn he would be exposing himself to attack, so much so. that, considering the "terror" and "fear" he claims he felt on hearing intruders in the house, is is unfathomable that he would venture on stumps to run the gauntlet to the bathroom where the intruder/s, guns at the ready, could be waiting patiently to shoot him no sooner he appeared in their sites... but no, instead the intruder/s poised to attack him and Reeva hides in the loo!

So for me, OP's story is utterly and irremediably ridiculous, and methinks Oscar had better not take the stand if he wishes to preserve even a minimum chance of getting away with culpable homicide.

 

[Really?]

Transferred intent is a concept that is pretty universally accepted in modern jurisprudence. However, it is not exactly as stated in the post.

An example of transferred intent would be a bankrobber who shoots to kill the bank teller, but misses and instead hits a bystander and causes his death. The killer's murderous intent is transferred from his intended victim to his actual victim.

If Oscar believed that he was lawfully defending himself from imminent harm, then he lacks the requisite intent for murder, so there is no murderous intent to to transfer to the mistaken victim.

Right..........OP did not lawfully defend himself. OP did not follow protocol. The law. He past the gun owners test, yet he shot through a closed door.....my god....what if it was a child....a teenager who thought that the couple arguing wouldn't notice him slip through the window and nick a watch..........it could have been someones pet cat......murderous intentions indeed.

 

[steveml]

And what difference would that make? It still wouldn't tell us what side of the bed he slept on. Heck, why even bother changing sides? Just roll over and face the other way.

He shouldn't have to justify it, that's exactly the point. He should be able to say I just decided to sleep on that side, or I changed sides because I was more comfortable.

It's likely the state will make a huge drama about it, and as such he'll be expected to validate his change of position.

 

[minor4th]

Right..........OP did not lawfully defend himself. OP did not follow protocol. The law. He past the gun owners test, yet he shot through a closed door.....my god....what if it was a child....a teenager who thought that the couple arguing wouldn't notice him slip through the window and nick a watch..........it could have been someones pet cat......murderous intentions indeed.

Murderous intent means you mean to commit murder - it doesn't mean you intend to commit self defense.

 

[steveml]

Right..........OP did not lawfully defend himself. OP did not follow protocol. The law. He past the gun owners test, yet he shot through a closed door.....my god....what if it was a child....a teenager who thought that the couple arguing wouldn't notice him slip through the window and nick a watch..........it could have been someones pet cat......murderous intentions indeed.

Were there any watches left? :wink:

 

[weeeva]

But if that was his fear, why would he run towards the door on his stumps to confront that danger? He could have gotten Reeva, his gun, and left the home. He could have hit the panic button, called security or the cops. He did NONE of those logical things one does when in mortal fear.

If there really had been armed intruders in his toilet, and he shot through the door, he would be dead too now most likely.

Yes exactly, and perhaps that was the only thing going through his mind at the time.
Would a person's logic come into play when the balance of the mind is disturbed?

 

[Gryffindor]

Why would that be bizarre...I sure he would have felt relief to have someone else drive considering the state he was in. It doesn't mean he wasn't going to travel with.

No he asked Stander ."Can you take her to the hospital?" ie. Oscar staying behind. Otherwise, why ask if you were planning on going yourself or indeed hadn't already left??

 

[minor4th]

But if that was his fear, why would he run towards the door on his stumps to confront that danger? He could have gotten Reeva, his gun, and left the home. He could have hit the panic button, called security or the cops. He did NONE of those logical things one does when in mortal fear.

If there really had been armed intruders in his toilet, and he shot through the door, he would be dead too now most likely.

Perhaps, but Reeva would be alive.

 

[steveml]

Thankfully you don't live in a 4-story brick rowhouse either. :anguish:

 

[nastasya]

i have issue's here
3:21:11 Oscar ends call with netcare who he says told him to bring her in
3:26 Dr Johan Stipp arrives at Oscar's to find Oscar rendering assistance to Reeva at the foot of the stairs.
So why didn't Oscar do as netcare told him?, he say's after the netcare call he ran downstairs and opened his front door, so why did he not put Reeva in his car and go?.
Strangely 54 seconds after the call to netcare, Oscar answers the phone call from Pieter Baba and tells him "everything is fine"?.
What exactly was he doing when he should have been taking Reeva to hospital?, answering the phone to baba shouldn't have been high on his list of priorities.

Waiting for Stander and his daughter to get there to help him figure out what to do?

You've raised a great point though!!!!

If OP was instructed to take Reeva to the hospital, why did he tell Stander to come over? Why did he run down to open the door then go back upstairs? That's the stupidest thing I ever heard. Two trips up and down stairs takes much longer than just carrying her downstairs then opening the door.

What strikes me about the killer's entire story is you can take any 5 minute portion of it and it's ludicrous. Combined all those 5 minute portions are the worst alibi in the history of crime.

 

[Cherwell]

But if that was his fear, why would he run towards the door on his stumps to confront that danger? He could have gotten Reeva, his gun, and left the home. He could have hit the panic button, called security or the cops. He did NONE of those logical things one does when in mortal fear.

If there really had been armed intruders in his toilet, and he shot through the door, he would be dead too now most likely.

Perhaps, but Reeva would be alive.

If they shot him, they'd shoot her too, don't you think? Eventually.

 

[weeeva]

I did not mean for it to sound like they were locked in by a third party - only that unlocking the door was another step to take to get away safely.

But if he really thought an intruder was about to come out of the toilet shooting at him and Reeva, it makes total sense to me that he would think the only sure way to protect himself and Reeva would be to get his gun and get in a position to shoot the burglar before the burglar could come out shooting.

Try to look at it from the perspective that he really did believe that an intruder was about to come out of the toilet room shooting. If he really believed that, then all of his actions make sense to me.

Me too.

 

[nastasya]

I would imagine it's because the door was locked! OP could possibly have thought in his mind, at that moment in time, that it wouldn't have been a safe option to flee the room with an unknown intruder in the bathroom who could possibly have exited the bathroom at any moment and come shooting down the passage to his bedroom, possibly chasing him and Reeva down the stairs while he is on his stumps. Something tells me that when you are fleeing for your life in terror on stumps, it's not quite the same as running the Olympics on your blades. Just a thought.

The door was locked so nobody could get IN to the room from the outside. Obviously OP got out.

Makes no sense that OP, thinking in his mind as you say, would think it safer to go down two dark passages, give up his position by saying "Look, I'm here intruders! Get out of my house now!"

OP's explanation is childishly ill-conceived and plausible only in a parallel universe where rushing towards danger is safer than moving away from the danger, where holding a 9 mm Parabellum loaded with black talons is cause to feel vulnerable, and where hearing somebody you know has been sleeping beside you using the toilet is cause to shoot not once, not twice, not three times, but four times through the toilet door.

You do realize that the bedroom door was locked from the inside, right? OP wasn't locked in or trapped in the bedroom. And the door to the deck was 3 feet away. Not knowing if there was an intruder, how many phantom intruders there were, or if they were armed, the killer describes taking the single most dangerous course of action - walking down 2 dark passages, stepping into the room with the phantom intruders, then announcing his presence in the dark.

Nah.... I've been watching the trial and the judge, unfortunately for the killer, does not have "stupid" written across her forehead.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

He shouldn't have to justify it, that's exactly the point. He should be able to say I just decided to sleep on that side, or I changed sides because I was more comfortable.

It's likely the state will make a huge drama about it, and as such he'll be expected to validate his change of position.

If the state make reference to it .
Lets hope the state have figured out why because I can't make head nor tail of it yet . Hopefully the penny will drop eventually

 

[Interested Bystander]

I'm sorry if I missed your previous requests - I do just scan posts sometimes when I am limited on time.

I'm saying Oscar has stated that he did not believe that he could get him and Reeva out the bedroom safely and quickly enough to avoid being shot by the bad guy he thought was in the toilet. Or at least he has laid out allegations that suggest that - it was dark, the bedroom door was locked, he was on his stumps, he was enveloped in terror...

I am completely unaware that Oscar has stated that he did not believe that he could get him and Reeva out of the bedroom safely. It would be great to have a link to this statement.