Trial Discussion Thread #15

[whiterum]

Whiterum:
If you could find my posts at the beginining of this thread where I asked if anyone watched Tuesday's court session a the beginning. Becuase I did and it had Nel stipulating about the 5th phone and there was the admission that it was taken from the crime scene (a serious crime in itself) and that DT had it and if I heard right, Nel said they did not receive it from DT till Feb 30 2013.

And I furthermore said it has been excised from the videos at it was at the very beginning of the day's court proceedings and is not on Session 1 in any videos. On all videos, session 1 starts with everyone standing and judge walks in etc. but session 1 for Tuesday starts with the witness testifying aready. They took out at least several minutes.
Please find my earlier posts, Whiterum--as you and I have dealt with this for a year now.

Sorry Shane just saw your above post from the previous thread I'm miles behind and have given up trying to catch up now. Yes, both Nel and Botha said at the BH that they only found out that another phone existed when Roux informed them of such the day before the BH. Then during the trial Karen Maughan tweeted from the court that this phone wasn't handed over to the State until two weeks after the incident, so it seems the DT didn't hand it over for about a week after the BH.

If OP is innocent as he claims then why not hand over all relevant items to the police since this could only support his innocence and help his case. Holding evidence back shows something fishy was going on there and Roux and Co should have been brought to book for this. What I can't understand is why they were not ordered to hand the phone over at the BH and why so little has been said about this withholding of vital evidence and removing it from a crime-scene.

 

[Viper]

Has it actually been confirmed the key was on the floor? I had just automatically assumed that when Reeva locked herself in the toilet cubicle (for whatever reason .. either to take a pee, or in order to try and get away from an impending threat) that the key would already be in the lock on the inside (surely that would just be there all the time?) and all she would've needed to have done is just turn the key? So, if that was the case .. then why would she have needed to take the key out, why would it be on the floor or somewhere on Reeva, and why would OP have needed to have reached right in to fetch it (in order to unlock the door from the outside) .. surely all he would've had to do is break enough of the door to put his hand around to the key in the other side of the lock, then either turn it in situ or take it out and turn the lock from the outside (which is where it did actually end up as the photographic evidence shows).

The tip of the cricket bat had blood on it, and on an angle. It seems to me that the key was on or near one of Reeva's blood soaked areas (chest, lap or hip, floor) and he used the bat to pull the keys towards him, then reached through and picked them up. JMO

 

[wishIknewmore]

And what I see is those on the firmly guilty side have many different theories about what happened, theories that don't even support the state's case. They themselves are confident in their theories but this is certainly a problem for me and has created even more doubt. If a clear picture of the state's case hasn't come through and a clear picture of what happened that night has not emerged that is a problem. At this point, it should be clearer what the state wants to say. That to me shows that state's case is not as strong as I initially thought it would be. So many unanswered questions yet so many are so convicted they have it all figured out.

I agree that they is quite a bit of speculation that doesn't support the prosecution. While some of the theories were interesting to toss around before the trial, we have more information now. The prosecution hasn't made a clear case which is surprising to me. I just can't figure out why. There are so many things that have not been addressed and I would think should have been brought out by the Nel. It certainly doesnt help that I am still confused about how SA trials proceed, how witnesses are questioned, what is allowed, and ultimately how the judge (vs jury) will evaluate the evidence to make a final decision.

At this point in the trial, I still think OP knew it was Reeva behind the door but there is a shadow of a doubt that he just freaked out about a sound and reacted recklessly. There are quite a few things in his affidavit and actions that do not make sense so I think he's lying about something.

If I just followed the trial but not WS or the media, I would be on the fence. I'm trying to remaim optimistic that Nel doing his job to convince the judge (verses us or a jury) of the facts she needs to make the decision so that justice will be served.

 

[wishIknewmore]

Hi everyone. Happy Sunday and Mothers' Day :-D

You just freaked me out! Mother's Day is May is the US isn't until May 11' 2014. Thought I was in big trouble there for a minute....:scared:

Happy Mother's Day to those who celebrate it today. Think I'll I add a little kahlua to my coffee and enjoy it with you.

 

[DebinGA]

OP's affis portray a couple both "deeply in love" who'd spent a quiet, uneventful evening together until the "unfortunate event" occurred around 3 a.m. But that evening was different, as OP was upset about something on Feb. 13, according to RS's msg to OP that afternoon:
.............................................................................................................
[NBC news] ...On Feb. 13, Steenkamp tries to console Pistorius about something that has gone wrong and tells him, “you’re a nice guy. “
“You are an amazing person with so many blessings,” she writes, “and you are more than cared for. Your health and future monetary blessings far out way this hurdle I can promise u that.”
.............................................................................................................
I can't remember where I read it, but iirc RS went on to msg OP that she'd understand if he wanted to be with his family that night [the 13th], which supports the idea that "the hurdle" was such that RS thought he might prefer the comfort of his family that night. But he msg back that she could work/do laundry at his home [as she'd asked permission to do] and stay over that night "if you wish". OP's affis paint a blissfully in love couple who'd enjoyed a quiet evening at home, but Nel may be able to prove that OP arrived home already angry/upset about something and things went from bad to worse with him as the evening went on.

 

[Gryffindor]

You just freaked me out! Mother's Day is May is the US isn't until May 11' 2014. Thought I was in big trouble there for a minute....:scared:

Happy Mother's Day to those who celebrate it today. Think I'll I add a little kahlua to my coffee and enjoy it with you.

Aww haha, SO sorry ;-) hee hee. Indeed, I am daughter-less till Tues as she's gone on a week-long school history trip to your neck of the woods, to Washington D.C. and NYC So I'll join you in copious amounts to drink LOL x

 

[Gryffindor]

Could Oscar's geologist manny be for the footprint on the door? Another poster mentioned the bangs being Reeva- using the magazine rack to bang with for help, possibly? Did the keys contain blood spatter, indicating they were inside the cubicle?

 

[wishIknewmore]

It's not uncommon for people to put hollow point bullets into a gun they intend to use for self defense. It's so they can make sure that if they need to use it, it would immediately severely incapacitate their target. Obviously, if he thought it was an intruder and he's shooting him with hollow point bullets he is intending to kill them. The state can say either way, it's still intentional murder. Well, the judge will obviously decide, if she rejects the state's theory, whether or not OP should be found guilty of intentional murder of an intruder. It won't just be, well he intended to kill him so guilty. Because of course he did. She will have factors to weigh, just as anyone deciding a self defense case does.

Now I already know what the response will be: but it wasn't an intruder behind the door it was Reeva. Yes, we know that. But it's possible at the time OP didn't.

I agree!

People need to stop focusing on the type of bullets. As MeeBee states, its not uncommon to use hollow point for security purposes. My husband had Black Talon bullets in his gun for years but he finally used them in target practice because they were so old. (Production was stopped in 1993.) He now has the most updated version of hollow points but can't remember the name.

According to http://thegunzone.com/black-talon.html:

"Winchester officials used research to show that the Black Talon was no more deadly4 than any of the other hollow point bullets on the market, but they pulled the ammunition from the shelves to quiet public concern. Black Talon was the first product Winchester had ever removed from the market for reasons other than manufacturing defects in the almost 130-year history of the company."

If there is an intruder, you not only want stopping power but you want the bullet to stop in the intruder. If we were to shoot full metal jackets (I.e. hard or non expanding ammunition) then we would be putting others at risk.

According to http://www.enca.com/south-africa/oscar-trial-hollow-point-bullets-vs-normal-rounds

"Hard ammunition is regarded as dangerous because it over-penetrates and if used to shoot a criminal, could easily penetrate the body and go on to hit a bystander, Hood explained.

This means that South African police are facing “a fair number of incidents” in which bystanders have been hit by bullets that had passed through targets and gone on to cause more damage."

Yes, OP chose bullets intended to kill and he shot enough times to kill. However, the type of bullets shouldn't be used against him. It's all media hype about "Black Talon" and such. If anything, might be considered more responsible because otherwise, the the bullets could have went through walls even after hitting Reeva putting neighbors at stake.

The question is what was true motive and did he know who was behind the door?

 

[Really?]

I agree that they is quite a bit of speculation that doesn't support the prosecution. While some of the theories were interesting to toss around before the trial, we have more information now. The prosecution hasn't made a clear case which is surprising to me. I just can't figure out why. There are so many things that have not been addressed and I would think should have been brought out by the Nel. It certainly doesnt help that I am still confused about how SA trials proceed, how witnesses are questioned, what is allowed, and ultimately how the judge (vs jury) will evaluate the evidence to make a final decision.

At this point in the trial, I still think OP knew it was Reeva behind the door but there is a shadow of a doubt that he just freaked out about a sound and reacted recklessly. There are quite a few things in his affidavit and actions that do not make sense so I think he's lying about something.

If I just followed the trial but not WS or the media, I would be on the fence. I'm trying to remaim optimistic that Nel doing his job to convince the judge (verses us or a jury) of the facts she needs to make the decision so that justice will be served.

BBM:
I think he is lying about a lot of things........he will have to explain every minute of that night/morning......and everything found as it was at the crime scene/house.

he will be on the stand a loooooooong time. moo

 

[minor4th]

It's not even that he has one imo, it's that she's actually come to court....

Has she really? I do find that distasteful and poor judgment to boot

 

[Viper]

Could Oscar's geologist manny be for the footprint on the door? Another poster mentioned the bangs being Reeva- using the magazine rack to bang with for help, possibly? Did the keys contain blood spatter, indicating they were inside the cubicle?

Yes I'm sure roux will use him to make the footprint on the door look damning or something, but I really only see issues of contaminating the crime scene as something that OP will be able to use on appeal. That's just my view. I think he will make the damage to the door out to be much greater than what it is, throw in Roux's new found third bat mark and find some damage on the door to explain how OPs legs got so badly beat up, and he will say that OP was wearing his legs when he hit the door twice with the bat.

I tend to not think that Reeva banged on the door with the rack, mainly because it was found where it should usually be. But I will add this, looking back she would have been much better off if she had just taken the risk of injury and jumped out of the window! I guess she never really believed he would actually kill her with his gun!

I have not seen a clear enough image of the key fob to say whether it had blood on it or not. The key troubles me because I would think that the WC key and the bedroom key would be the same, if so there would be two keys in the bedroom/bathroom area, one in the WC door and one on OP's keychain. So I am missing something regarding the key.

 

[curiousjo]

I want to know if the SAME key is used to unlock bathroom and bedroom?

Can bathroom door be locked from outside and inside?

Did he have extra keys?

Why did R take her phone to bathroom at 3 am? Did she accidentally drop on floor when escaping to bathroom - and that's why no texts or calls for help?

Did R throw the jeans out window- so if she ended up dead and missing then that might alert someone that something was ary? Are they even hers? Or did OP throw them out so she couldn't leave?

Since neighbors heard a woman screaming - overlapping mans lower pitched voice - between approx 3-3:17 am --- I have to think that's when OP was breaking down door so he could see her and shoot...

 

[nastasya]

my completed theory is short . he shot her four times , he killed her, he knew it was Reeva behind the door.

I'm on the same page as the Govt. of the RSA., its Constitution. and the Dept. of Jurisprudence.

Good evening, Viper.

Here's the FACT, not theory:

Killer was aware likelihood of Reeva using bathroom to pee was infinitely greater than likelihood that intruder scaled 2nd story window and immediately hid in toilet stall during the 45 seconds killer went to get the fans.

Think about that.

Killer shot and killed Reeva based on 1 in a million chance somebody climbed the ladder, entered the bathroom, went into the toilet, AND was going to hurt him even while he was holding a loaded 9 mm gun vs. the 99.9995% chance that it was Reeva using the toilet.

He played Russian Roulette with Reeva's life, with the odds stacked a million to 1 against her.

I won't be the tiniest bit upset to know that killer will soon be screaming like a woman in prison even if his idiotic story is true.

Oscar Pistorius is either a sociopathic killer or a recklessly dangerous killer with no regard for anybody's life but his own.

 

[minor4th]

Ahhh! Good find, Viper!

So he's the head of materials analysis. Now I'm thinking about OP's sock fibers on the toilet door that Roux mentioned.

He was formerly Vermuelen's supervisor in materials analysis at the SAPS. I believe he is a certified tool mark analyst, so I expect him to expand on or contradict Vermuelen's testimony.

 

[minor4th]

To my mind, there's really only one thing the State has to convince the judge is true:
Screams first
Gunshots second.

That is what it all comes down to.

 

[Danta]

So I wondered about where the bat was and assumed it was behind the bedroom door and then I read this. Interesting description of character. Sorry if this is just rehash of previous posting from anywhere. So he's just grabbed that after he's broken thru bedroom door in such a rage!? (If a locked bedroom door involved) Note no air rifle mentioned. Was the hole an inni or an outie? Ill check.

'.....This being South Africa, one baseball bat and one cricket bat lie behind Pistorius's bedroom door.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ol...nt-run-I-cheating-I-believe-purity-sport.html

I read this article, written before the murder, and in one of the photos of OP's prosthetic legs it shows them scratched, dented and missing pieces. It seems a lot of the damage already existed.

 

[BabaJ]

do 'dum dum bullets kill and mutilate??? even though they are called by some with such a fuzzy wuzzy name??


or the converse.. because they are called a supposed less threatening name, do they then cause less damage and savagery?



they could be named Sweet Lollipops, but the photos of a body riddled with them still looks horrific.

Just pure curiosity and probably stupid question :blushing: , which was probably discussed - it is said that the black talon bullets open up when hitting human flesh and break into pieces when hitting a bone. So if fired through a door or any other material don't they open up before hitting the body?

 

[jay-jay]

I don't see how it can be confirmed.

Absolutely .. I don't see how it can be, either .. I'm not convinced it was on the floor, it seems more likely it would've been in the lock in the door imo.

Toilet cubicle key, if it was indeed inside, it would've had blood on it during the firing, thus likely he indeed locked her in and had the key all along. That is plausible imo.

I've been toying with that, but it seems it would only be plausible if he had thrown her in there in the first place, then removed the key from the inside, then locked it from the outside, and then shot her. He wouldn't have been able to lock her in if Reeva had fled to the loo, because in that scenario, she would've locked herself in.

The toilet cubicle door, normally, would've had the key in the keyhole on the inside of the door .. surely? That would be the most logical way/place to keep a toilet cubicle key.

.. and would the key necessarily have had blood on it from the firing if it had been on the inside? They would've looked more closely at this, surely, if the key had all the hallmarks of having been on the outside of the toilet cubicle all along, that night. It would be a pretty crucial bit of evidence, I would imagine .. yet all I have heard is that they found it on the outside, photographed it, and that's about it, so it doesn't seem like they see anything significant about it ... but (scuse the pun) it could hold the key!

 

[Cherwell]

I want to know if the SAME key is used to unlock bathroom and bedroom?

Can bathroom door be locked from outside and inside?

I don't think there is a physical door to the bathroom, going by the plans that have been published.

I would expect the key to the toilet door to be kept in the keyhole (on the inside) at all times, otherwise there's no point in having one. Unless there's a bolt on the inside of the door, butt I've seen no mention of one.

 

[vansleuths]

In Pistorius' list of charges, he is charged with having "in his possession ammunition, to wit 38 x 38 rounds, without being the holder of a licence in respect of a firearm capable of discharging that ammunition"

What does wit 38 x 38 mean?