Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[zwiebel]

Roux now saying he wants judges' indulgence to see which state witnesses would be 'willing to consult with us'.

Judge: Are you talking about witnesses not used by state?

She asks Nel and he agrees.

So that means Roux gets to thru entire list of state witnesses not called, and call them himself if he wants.

Court adjourned until March 27th?

 

[Melanie]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that if OP is going to testify, he has to be the first defense witness. Why would the defense need 2 days to prep him -- unless he's not going to testify, and they are bringing in other witnesses instead.

In short, I thought OP was going to testify.

Thanks,

Mel

 

[Forensics]

...i think the state's case ended 'not with a bang but a whimper'.

Not what I had expected.

 

[MeeBee]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that if OP is going to testify, he has to be the first defense witness. Why would the defense need 2 days to prep him -- unless he's not going to testify, and they are bringing in other witnesses instead.

In short, I thought OP was going to testify.

Thanks,

Mel

Yes, that is the SA law. The defense has not begun their case yet. I suspect we will see him when court resumes on the 27th.

 

[Rumpole]

Key word: "Reasonable." 1 witness hearing screaming, okay maybe they mis-heard, even two. But 5 witnesses hearing bloodcurdling, terrifying screams goes beyond "reasonable" doubt for me.

But then, I was already there. :smiliescale:

There is only ONE "reality"

It is not decided by a vote... even a unanimous vote

An illusion (an error in perception) can, and often is, "mis-seen" by EVERYBODY... even after knowing that they are perceiving something that is false.

IF the screams were heard by one person as a woman, despite it really being OP... it may well be a false impression perceived by everybody.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

I have a bad feeling about ending the state's case on the 'batman.' :frown:

IIRC, he was a very confusing witness. And Roux had his way with him. I do not understand this ending. It is very weak, imo.:trainwreck:

And you were right .......train wreck finish to prosecution

 

[Forensics]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that if OP is going to testify, he has to be the first defense witness. Why would the defense need 2 days to prep him -- unless he's not going to testify, and they are bringing in other witnesses instead.

In short, I thought OP was going to testify.

Thanks,

Mel

i think Roux can still decide whether Oscar will testify or not.

 

[Danta]

I think court resumes on Fri the 28th

 

[zwiebel]

Well, that was bad. As far as I can see door man first said he could not see any mark so that's why he did not try and match the bat to it, then when shown loads of photos he took by Roux, said he could not remember them and/or did not find them useful?

I am confused. Doesn't make much sense to me, and I wonder where Roux got those photos, if they had been taken out?

 

[Val1]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that if OP is going to testify, he has to be the first defense witness. Why would the defense need 2 days to prep him -- unless he's not going to testify, and they are bringing in other witnesses instead.

In short, I thought OP was going to testify.

Thanks,

Mel

I suppose because if they can come up with any other excuses or possible inconsistencies they may find(like RS didn't have lettuce and cheese in her stomach but instead kale and paneer) that they can float through the rest of the available witnesses, they can open that line of questioning with OP after prepping him to make it sound more credible? The defense will do whatever it takes to get their client off, at least as long as they're getting paid, that's their job.

 

[Val1]

Well, that was bad. As far as I can see door man first said he could not see any mark so that's why he did not try and match the bat to it, then when shown loads of photos he took by Roux, said he could not remember them and/or did not find them useful?

I am confused. Doesn't make much sense to me, and I wonder where Roux got those photos, if they had been taken out?

Umm, if they weren't part of the prosecution's case(ie. relevant to what they were stating) then I doubt they would be in their album, but the defense did have them, they had all the photos.

 

[katydid23]

This is so confusing to me. My dad was an attorney and I grew up watching trials and have continued to follow them for years now. And I have rarely seen such a haphazard and weak climax to a state's case. It is hard to explain. :frown:

 

[Val1]

There is only ONE "reality"

It is not decided by a vote... even a unanimous vote

An illusion (an error in perception) can, and often is, "mis-seen" by EVERYBODY... even after knowing that they are perceiving something that is false.

IF the screams were heard by one person as a woman, despite it really being OP... it may well be a false impression perceived by everybody.

So you're claiming OP was screaming like a banshee while shooting RS to death? Is that a new technique to scare "intruders" away?

 

[G.bng]

Not trying to be contrary here, just worried I could make a mistake, but can anyone explain what passive-aggressive posts are like ? I can only really recall the term with Ceaser (the dog whisperer) which I watched snippets of a couple of times and I didn't understand it then either... or maybe I just wasn't paying attention try to relate it with his methods as I didn't find them useful for our very obedient dog.

 

[Rumpole]

i think Roux can still decide whether Oscar will testify or not.

I think Robert Shapiro in a recent video posted in last thread explained convincingly that in effect this case involves a claim of "Self Defense" and so OP will HAVE to testify to make that claim.

I think he will testify.

 

[zwiebel]

The state's case was not completely coherent, I think.

I have just remembered something I wanted to say about the food - not sure if it's been covered as I haven't caught up yet.

Reeva was supposed to be cooking a meal that day but the only food in her stomach was veg and whitish substance - probably cheese. If she had eaten any protein like meat or fish, that would have been there too, as it takes longer to digest.

So did she cook a meal at all for the two of them? Bits of cheese and veg doesn't seem like much of a meal for non-veggies on Valentine's Day. She was so slim it is hard to think she may have eaten a full meal and then followed up with a midnight snack.

There is something a little odd there. I wonder if the meal failed to happen because of a row, or going to bed, and they both ended up just having a snack late at night?

 

[MeeBee]

This is so confusing to me. My dad was an attorney and I grew up watching trials and have continued to follow them for years now. And I have rarely seen such a haphazard and weak climax to a state's case. It is hard to explain. :frown:

I think Nel was trying the accommodating and was knocked out when Roux just wanted to question him about bat marks again.

 

[Val1]

This is so confusing to me. My dad was an attorney and I grew up watching trials and have continued to follow them for years now. And I have rarely seen such a haphazard and weak climax to a state's case. It is hard to explain. :frown:

I will agree with that if it turns out Nell is keeping all his eggs in a basket waiting to be flung at OP... I'm not convinced the defense won't find some reason to keep him off the stand.

 

[Insp.Dots]

Well.....how strange, not the bomb dropping end I was expecting!
I do now wonder if something was discovered last which has had a big impact on the States case...I was hoping for concrete evidence of a bad argument on the day of Reeva's death. Even a chat to her friend saying she was thinking of ending it or was worried about the tropical kiss.
Can Reeva's family have any impact on the state? Crazy thought that maybe Reeva's Mum has fallen for his sobs...she already stated she has forgiven him?
It just feels like the state stopped really trying last week or something has happened that we're not being told.
Probably too many hours on my part spent over thinking. All my own crazy thoughts......
As always I want Justice for Reeva

 

[Rumpole]

This is so confusing to me. My dad was an attorney and I grew up watching trials and have continued to follow them for years now. And I have rarely seen such a haphazard and weak climax to a state's case. It is hard to explain. :frown:

I don't think they had much of a case, and little to no evidence to support their contention that OP was lying about believing there was an intruder. Nel probably did his best with almost nothing.

Add to that witnesses who were less than convincing.. who seemed to have "an agenda" for whatever reason. Shonky police work and dubious police "experts"... with perhaps even more shonky police witnesses being shielded from testifying... and you get a big fat zero for the prosecution case......... IMO