Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[MeeBee]

If you consider Twitter confirmation, then yes :floorlaugh:

WAT says so too, so, either way, I'll be here!

I'm going to have A LOT of sleep to catch up on after this trial. Oh, Lordy.

 

[Interested Bystander]

I can only guess that as evidence was handed over to the defence, the time arose when many cups of tea were expended in thinking over what changes had to be made to his original statement..


only a guess.. I don't think it was done on a whim or a fancy..

I am thinking keys. He said he knocked down the door to retrieve the key to the toilet cubicle. If I remember rightly in the photos there seemed to be a bunch of keys in the door. I wouldn't have expected to see a bunch of keys to lock/unlock a loo door. To me it suggests that there was not normally a key in the loo door. Perhaps it will come to me in my sleep - lol. 01.12 in the UK and time for me to hit the sack.

 

[soozieqtips]

OP should definitely be giving evidence today.

Will be interesting to see how he conducts himself if Nel treats him the same way Roux treated the state witnesses. I hope Roux has warned OP that he can't cover his ears when Nel is asking awkward questions!

And for both sides, the most important witness will be Pistorius himself,
who is expected to testify in the morning.

http://www.itv.com/news/2014-03-27/oscar-pistorius-expected-to-testify-tomorrow-in-murder-trial/

 

[minor4th]

But for murder, culpable homicide, and "intent" it appears it takes more from Dutch law. From my understanding there is no transferred intent as such but it is covered under murder (always intentional), in that even if the killing of a person were not "intended" and would normally be charged under culpable homicide, it can convert to "intentional murder" if the possible consequence of the act was foreseeable. just my understanding

You've almost got it. If the actions that led to the death are so outrageous and inherently dangerous that no reasonable person could possibly fail to know that death is a likely result - then the "intent" is imputed and a murder conviction can result. There was a recent SA where some young men were drinking and drag racing around children and like 4 kids were killed. The drivers were found guilty of murder because one cannot accept as possibly true that the drivers did not foresee that their actions would kill those kids.

But that scenario does not apply in this case because Oscar is not claiming that he didn't intend to kill someone.

 

[minor4th]

WAT says so too, so, either way, I'll be here!

I'm going to have A LOT of sleep to catch up on after this trial. Oh, Lordy.

I might have to go take a nap so I can wake up at 2:30 in the morning to watch - I have a trial starting on Monday and can't afford to lose a whole night's sleep.

 

[Trooper]

at some stage of this trial, it would be helpful if it was agreed to that Oscar is a citizen of South Africa, Reeva is a citizen of South Africa, the crime itself took place in Pretoria, South Africa, in the district of Gauteng, and as such all and every matter pertaining comes under South African law.

South African law isn't a complicated and baffling procedure.. its very straightforward, it's lineal and comprehensible , and justice in South Africa proceeds along its merry way within the parameters set by the Govt of the Republic of South Africa..

there are a whole lot of other places on earth I would chose not to be facing trial in , than South Africa.. a very great many.

 

[Val1]

Such a strange thing to grab to stem blood flow...plastic bags? Why would they have not grabbed tea towels or paper towels? Or him carry her with towels around her from upstairs bathroom? Plastic absorbs nothing....but it does stop that pesky blood staining the travertine! Imagine the cost of replacement all those stained tiles! was this the thinking?

Who knows, all I know re bin liners is that I use them to dispose of stuff I no longer want, need, or are broken and past mending.

 

[Trooper]

OP should definitely be giving evidence today.

Will be interesting to see how he conducts himself if Nel treats him the same way Roux treated the state witnesses. I hope Roux has warned OP that he can't cover his ears when Nel is asking awkward questions!



http://www.itv.com/news/2014-03-27/oscar-pistorius-expected-to-testify-tomorrow-in-murder-trial/

bucket time, sooz..

this time, I wont be allowing my small dog to watch or listen to it. She and I have barely recovered from that terrible day in Pretoria High court..

 

[Viper]

The state is done presenting its evidence though. They can't call any more witnesses or introduce new evidence. But you're certainly right that they can use what is already admitted and the stipulations to cross examine. And I sure hope their case becomes clear somehow in the process.

BIB. I know that. In the rest of your post I believe you understand what I was saying. I understand that some do not see what Nel is doing and that is fine, the case will become clear as soon as Nel has OP. :smile:

 

[Gbtaketwo]

I am not following. What holes are you referring to?

The security guy baba? Call sequence
The photo with Mrs stipp's hand on it .
I think Roux is going to discuss more things to discredit the ex girlfriend testimony more
The bat man was not a great witness because he just didn't seem fully prepared.
I thought he seemed out of his depth somehow ,almost unprofessional .
Forensics didn't seem too good as there were many unanswered questions
other areas of damage
I could go on but am tired now so can't think of everything off the top of my head.
I am not legally trained and have not followed many trials so maybe I am just not qualified to have any opinions at all really other than this case is such a tragedy

 

[soozieqtips]

Irrespective of who was in the toilet, why did Pistorius shoot without warning?

This is the central question of intent.

Pistorius may struggle to persuade the judge that he had good reason to believe his life was in danger when he shot four times through a locked door in the early hours of Valentine's day last year.

Worth a read.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/27/oscar-pistorius-key-questions-witness-box

 

[K.T]

I’m not so sure unlike others that Pistorius will crumble under Nel. He’s a slick media operator and he’s done more interviews than anyone could imagine. He might come under pressure by the prosecution only by attrition. Definitely, he would have been practicing with is legal team for one year on techniques to how he presents his version on the stand.


I remember watching his interviews with Piers Morgan, where he justified his angry outburst about the other competitor’s blades. He knew exactly how to make him appear both humble, contrite and also the victim.

A common occurrence in the trial where he always puts his own gestures, like crying, retching, childlike covering fingers in ears, bible reading, that tend to bring the spotlight on him rather than where it should have been at the testimony presented. Savvy.

 

[Val1]

Just asked the same question this evening
Still don't know the answer though . Will need to try and look through pics again.
My hunch is the defence will say the bedroom keys were on a bunch somewhere in the room and he couldn't see them in the dark .

In the past, there was a pic of a whole bunch of them right in the same drawer where he kept his gun in the cabinet(night stand) on the left(as you face it from the foot) of the bed.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/oscar-legs-stand-article-1.1268919



Sorry, I don't know how to make this just a thumbprint.. mods help? :/

 

[Viper]

The security guy baba? Call sequence
The photo with Mrs stipp's hand on it .
I think Roux is going to discuss more things to discredit the ex girlfriend testimony more
The bat man was not a great witness because he just didn't seem fully prepared.
I thought he seemed out of his depth somehow ,almost unprofessional .
Forensics didn't seem too good as there were many unanswered questions
other areas of damage
I could go on but am tired now so can't think of everything off the top of my head.
I am not legally trained and have not followed many trials so maybe I am just not qualified to have any opinions at all really other than this case is such a tragedy

Baba, Mrs. Stipp's hand, girlfriend, batman. Ok. I'm not seeing real holes, respectfully. If they had no body, no murder weapon, no admission from the killer, and no ear witnesses to the murder I would see big problems! But those others not so much.

 

[MeeBee]

Good thing the margins got blown at the tail end of the page! Lol...

 

[minor4th]

I’m not so sure unlike others that Pistorius will crumble under Nel. He’s a slick media operator and he’s done more interviews than anyone could imagine. He might come under pressure by the prosecution only by attrition. Definitely, he would have been practicing with is legal team for one year on techniques to how he presents his version on the stand.


I remember watching his interviews with Piers Morgan, where he justified his angry outburst about the other competitor’s blades. He knew exactly how to make him appear both humble, contrite and also the victim.

A common occurrence in the trial where he always puts his own gestures, like crying, retching, childlike covering fingers in ears, bible reading, that tend to bring the spotlight on him rather than where it should have been at the testimony presented. Savvy.

He could also be telling the truth, in which case there won't be a lot of drama

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Baba, Mrs. Stipp's hand, girlfriend, batman. Ok. I'm not seeing real holes, respectfully. If they had no body, no murder weapon, no admission from the killer, and no ear witnesses to the murder I would see big problems! But those others not so much.

Good to hear let's hope the judge sees it that way too and I am worrying unnecessarily .
Night

 

[Viper]

I’m not so sure unlike others that Pistorius will crumble under Nel. He’s a slick media operator and he’s done more interviews than anyone could imagine. He might come under pressure by the prosecution only by attrition. Definitely, he would have been practicing with is legal team for one year on techniques to how he presents his version on the stand.


I remember watching his interviews with Piers Morgan, where he justified his angry outburst about the other competitor’s blades. He knew exactly how to make him appear both humble, contrite and also the victim.

A common occurrence in the trial where he always puts his own gestures, like crying, retching, childlike covering fingers in ears, bible reading, that tend to bring the spotlight on him rather than where it should have been at the testimony presented. Savvy.

You are probably right. But I saw him in an interview where he exploded, said bad things to the host, and stormed off the set! I also saw him when TMZ caught him in Los Angeles, nice at first but when they asked about the advantage his cheeta legs gave him he snarled and quickly turned and got away. He is going to need 25mg Zanax and a beer for breakfast the day that Nel gets ahold of him! :floorlaugh:

 

[MeeBee]

Does anyone know yet if he will appear on camera?

 

[Viper]

You know I believed that the DT had been working with OP for many weeks before the trial to prepare him, but his smirking at the one witness testifying about the shooting the gun out if the sunroof leaves me to question that. That was arrogant and dumb and if they had been working with him why did he make that stupid mistake. I could go on about him adding the eyeglasses, but it just is a question in my mind about whether or not they really expected to put him on the stand. I am thinking not, up until recently.

Oh well...