Trial Discussion Thread #16

[Trooper]

the cricket bat stuff versus gunshot stuff is about 20% of Oscars problem. the over riding hurdle , and its a huge gigantic hurdle that Oscar has to unequivocally make Judge Masipa jump over is the Screaming Woman. .

The Screaming Woman is the one thing that Roux, under Oscars instruction must eliminate, eradicate, erase entirely and comprehensively from the entirety of the event.. She cannot exist in any form, Reeva, any other woman who happened to scream on that estate at that time that night, any possibility of recorded screams being broadcast, nothing nothing nothing of a woman screaming

Oscar will bring up a ballistic expert that will state the head shot was the first, which means Reeva couldn't be screaming.

which means, that two experts will be in conflict with their conclusions. one for the PT, one for the DT.

whereas. the 5 witnesses are in NO conflict in their testimony re a woman screaming.

the weight given by judgement will , I believe fall firmly on the evidence given with no conflict on that matter.. with the added weight that they all come under the 'innocent bystander law'...

this means, none of them are connected to Oscar in business, relationship, employee, etc.. in these particular witnesses, not even a neighbor relationship. none of them knew him on a social or nodding basis..

Dr stipp, for example, didn't know who he was until the next morning.

 

[Trooper]

and frankly.. I just don't think that claiming that witnesses heard Oscar screaming and all mistook him for that particular woman screaming is something Judge Masipa is going to come round to thinking..

She will certainly give it thought.. but.... .. she didn't get to be a judge on the High Court by being a ditz.

 

[vansleuths]

the cricket bat stuff versus gunshot stuff is about 20% of Oscars problem. the over riding hurdle , and its a huge gigantic hurdle that Oscar has to unequivocally make Judge Masipa jump over is the Screaming Woman. .

The Screaming Woman is the one thing that Roux, under Oscars instruction must eliminate, eradicate, erase entirely and comprehensively from the entirety of the event.. She cannot exist in any form, Reeva, any other woman who happened to scream on that estate at that time that night, any possibility of recorded screams being broadcast, nothing nothing nothing of a woman screaming

Oscar will bring up a ballistic expert that will state the head shot was the first, which means Reeva couldn't be screaming.

which means, that two experts will be in conflict with their conclusions. one for the PT, one for the DT.

whereas. the 5 witnesses are in NO conflict in their testimony re a woman screaming.

the weight given by judgement will , I believe fall firmly on the evidence given with no conflict on that matter.. with the added weight that they all come under the 'innocent bystander law'...

this means, none of them are connected to Oscar in business, relationship, employee, etc.. in these particular witnesses, not even a neighbor relationship. none of them knew him on a social or nodding basis..

Dr stipp, for example, didn't know who he was until the next morning.

That's so well put, wish you were the judge in this case

 

[lisasalinger]

According to the pathologist, "There was a small amount of urine found in her bladder."

Does this not support the PT theory that RS did not go to the bathroom to pee?

Also, there was blood still in the toilet bowl meaning that it probably wasn't flushed. Was the contents of the bowl examined for urine?

More importantly, her shorts were up when she was shot (proven by bullet hole in shorts.)

And she was standing up facing the door when she was shot (proven by bullet hole marked "A" in the door matching up with the hip injury).

I suggest rather strongly, she was not in that bathroom to pee.

We have heard no testimony about urine or toilet paper in the bowl. None of the photos show toilet paper. No mention about whether or not they tested for urine.

 

[vansleuths]

More importantly, her shorts were up when she was shot (proven by bullet hole in shorts.)

And she was standing up facing the door when she was shot (proven by bullet hole marked "A" in the door matching up with the hip injury).

You're right, I do recall one of the witnesses saying that she was standing and facing the door.

Doesn't it almost make it sound like the two were fighting while on opposite sides of the door and that is what the witnesses heard?

It seems so logical and yet the DT can really put a spin on things.

 

[Trooper]

throughout Oscar's narrative, and a lot of posters narratives in relation to the likelihood of Oscar actually having a foundation to believe he is being burgled, or threatened with violence, or death threats, is that this is a common occurrence.. its to be expected.. statistics prove etc.. happens to everyone, etc..

but in none of those narratives, is it alluded to that in any of these previous incidents, events, whether real or imagined, the perpetrator/burglar/violent attacker was a woman. Its just simply left to assume it was a man, or men. Oscar himself doesn't differentiate as to whether these or that intruder/s were male or female, and which one he was more frightened of.

but the Screaming Woman blows that out of the water . he knows he is firing at a woman, and on the balance of probabilities, he knows its Reeva.

So you can see why that Screaming Woman is as big a hole for Oscar as the Johannesburg De Beers gold mine pit.

( the biggest man made hole in the world) .

 

[nastasya]

None of it rings true to what you think would occur when somebody desperately wants help for their loved one.

That's because killer's entire story is total b******t.

Pre-Attack - 60 seconds
---killer goes to get fan from deck at 3:00 am
---killer decides to close door, blinds, and curtains
---killer plugs in fan in the dark room

BS rating: 9 out of 10.

Killing time - 60 seconds
---Killer finishes bringing in fans
---Reeva goes to bathroom, opens window, pees
---Killer hear noise, gets gun, goes to bathroom, shoots 4 times
---Killer hits Reeva 3 of 4 shots with no visual target, no voice target
---Killer only stops shooting after last shot hits Reeva's head

BS rating: 10 out of 10

Post-Killing time - 3 minutes
---killer goes back in bedroom
---killer opens curtain, blinds, and door
---killer screams like a woman for help
---killer puts on legs
---killer kicks door, no luck
---killer gets bat
---killer bashes door
---killer drags a still living Reeva out of toilet area

BS rating: 9 out of 10

Post-breaking door - 5 minutes
---3:19 killer calls Stander
---killer calls Netcare
---killer calls Baba, hangs up
---3:22 Baba calls killer, "Everything's fine"
---killer carries body downstairs
---Standers, Stipp, and Baba arrive
---no ambulance or police have been called yet

BS rating: 9 out of 10

Defense explanation:
---witnesses heard killer screaming like a woman
---witnesses heard cricket bat, not gun
---killer felt vulnerable carrying fully loaded 9 mm Parabellum
---all other damage to house was from previous incident(s)
---Reeva and killer were in love, Reeva couldn't have been happier

BS rating: 10 out of 10

Total BS rating 47 out of 50.

 

[lisasalinger]

You're right, I do recall one of the witnesses saying that she was standing and facing the door.

Doesn't it almost make it sound like the two were fighting while on opposite sides of the door and that is what the witnesses heard?

It seems so logical and yet the DT can really put a spin on things.

BBM

That's what they're there for, to add confusion and doubt.

Sometimes that confusion and doubt is just nonsense to create a diversion.
Sometimes that confusion and doubt is to truly exonerate an innocent person.

I propose that if a defense has a legitimate defense, you should not have to abandon your logic to believe it.

 

[Trooper]

and according to South African crime stats.. while Oscar has a around a 14% chance of being burgled, a 4% chance of being home invaded with violence, around 1.7% chance of it happening on a gated complex....

....Reeva , being shot dead in a home in which she was invited to as a domicile, has a 56% chance of it being her intimate partner in the context of it being a deliberate act. This particular crime, Domestic Homicide , and in particular, a woman being murdered by a man in the home occurs every 8 hours around the clock in SA..

Reeva was in more danger from Oscar, than Oscar was from an unknown male or female burglar, statistically.

its just not a long stretch to believe that Oscar actually did murder Reeva, fully knowing who it was he was shooting at , not that it matters re the murder charge.

The only thing that separates Oscar from other ordinary woman killers are the prosthetic legs.. I suppose one could toss in the Olympic gold medal.. its difficult to believe that prosthetic legs can magically eradicate the desire to kill. Unless one argues that it resides in all of us only in the lower portion of our legs..

If that were rational, all murderers would have their lower legs removed and be sent back into society as the safest folks to be around..no prison time served at all. .. the rest of us would be in haste to get rid of our tibulas, too. PDQ.

 

[Trooper]

That's because killer's entire story is total b******t.

Pre-Attack - 60 seconds
---killer goes to get fan from deck at 3:00 am
---killer decides to close door, blinds, and curtains
---killer plugs in fan in the dark room

BS rating: 9 out of 10.

Killing time - 60 seconds
---Killer finishes bringing in fans
---Reeva goes to bathroom, opens window, pees
---Killer hear noise, gets gun, goes to bathroom, shoots 4 times
---Killer hits Reeva 3 of 4 shots with no visual target, no voice target
---Killer only stops shooting after last shot hits Reeva's head

BS rating: 10 out of 10

Post-Killing time - 3 minutes
---killer goes back in bedroom
---killer opens curtain, blinds, and door
---killer screams like a woman for help
---killer puts on legs
---killer kicks door, no luck
---killer gets bat
---killer bashes door
---killer drags a still living Reeva out of toilet area

BS rating: 9 out of 10Post-breaking door - 5 minutes
---3:19 killer calls Stander
---killer calls Netcare
---killer calls Baba, hangs up
---3:22 Baba calls killer, "Everything's fine"
---killer carries body downstairs
---Standers, Stipp, and Baba arrive
---no ambulance or police have been called yet

BS rating: 9 out of 10

Defense explanation:
---witnesses heard killer screaming like a woman
---witnesses heard cricket bat, not gun
---killer felt vulnerable carrying fully loaded 9 mm Parabellum
---all other damage to house was from previous incident(s)
---Reeva and killer were in love, Reeva couldn't have been happier

BS rating: 10 out of 10

Total BS rating 47 out of 50.

BBM

a generous rating..
all this activity , bolded by me for clarity is done in the deepest shock of his life.. as far as anyone has said, he's shot a dog, a watermelon and plenty of tin targets.. oh and the floor of a restaurant, and thru the sunroof of a car..

none of these shattered and bled and screamed like a human does.. none of them died requiring explanations like humans do... none of them were in his bed not 30 seconds ago..


yet he remembers he did this sequence.. he even remembers he had some thoughts ( re burglers ) which seemed correct at the time and then, in sequence discarded those thoughts, replaced it with another ( maybe reeva is in the toilet) which was correct...

his first solid ground is ringing Standar, because Standar can tell him ,yes Oscar, you did ring me. but the rest of this scenario is what he remembers as a solitary stand-alone unit without reference to anything but the results..

amazing stuff.. its like the gift that keeps on giving to Nel.

 

[steveml]

I'll just remind you of the post which started this line of discussion:



.. which I found to be giving too much emphasis on him and his needs ("having to live with the fact he killed his girlfriend", etc) and not Reeva's. The fact is that, regardless of whether he thought it was an intruder or whether he intentionally killed Reeva, the situation should never even have arisen .. and it only did because he is gun crazed and paranoid. Don't even give him the time of day, let alone suggest he might have to "live with the fact he killed his girlfriend" .. he knew he had anger management issues, he should've got them sorted out .. the responsibility is all his.

BBM

Jay-jay. This is a discussion forum regarding OP's shooting of Reeva, I'm afraid it's impossible not to give him the time of day in this thread, as there would be nothing to debate.

That would be akin to discussing a plane crash, but ignoring the pilot because you don't particularly like him.

I'm not aware that an individual poster to entitled to control how much content or attention we give to one side or the other. :no:

FWIW, I know very little about OP, I've never met him, I don't follow his career and I've only seen him on TV by accident. I've no particular interest other than to explore the prosecution/defense possibilities.

 

[nastasya]

BBM
none of them were in his bed not 30 seconds ago..

This is the heart of what defies explanation.

I'm in my dining room typing this. My spouse is upstairs, presumably sleeping.

I just heard a noise upstairs in the bathroom.

Why in the ____ would I go get a gun and blast four shots through the toilet door right now?

My guess is not only will killer by found guilty of all counts, but that the judge will have no sympathy for killer insulting the intelligence of the court with his imbecilic explanation. Killer sentenced Reeva to death for getting up to pee.

That story's not going to fly...

 

[steveml]

True enough, but if you look after the first shot and see Reeva huddled in the corner by the toilet, you would know to shoot towards that corner and could approximate fairly accurately where that corner was.

After the first shot OP remained in the same position for all four shots, he didn't move forwards a step, back a step, or lean forwards/backwards.

There is no precision shooting going on here, no tracking of someone's voice or anything else from a sci-fi movie. It's simply four shots fired at the door, in an area where you would be most likely to fire.

It is what it is...nothing more.

The line of trajectory rods show the bullet angle and path...

http://www.jeromestarkey.com/post/80149150813/reevas-point-of-view-metal-rods-thread-the

 

[steveml]

Stats can be quite useful, depending on what you need them to convey...

According to analysis undertaken by the SAPS and published in its annual reports, 75% of home robberies occur at night, with the most vulnerable times being in the late evening between 21:00 and 23:59 and very early morning between 00:00 and 02:59. More than half (55%) of home robberies take place at these times, in all likelihood because people’s guards are down when they are relaxing or asleep.

Weapons were used in almost all cases (99,9%) by those committing home robberies. Interestingly, the 2012 NVCS data revealed that firearms were only used in a quarter of cases and knives were present in a further quarter. Police statistics indicate a higher level of firearm use compared to the NVCS: SAPS docket analysis shows that three in every four home robberies (77%) were committed with firearms.

The SAPS found that in 56% of cases, robbers gained access to the premises by forcing the victims to let them into the house. In just over 40% of cases the perpetrators managed to gain access to the premises and surprised the victims. In 4% of cases the robbers were let into the home by the victim, who didn’t realise that they were criminals.

http://www.issafrica.org/iss-today/...-we-know-about-home-robberies-in-south-africa

 

[whiterum]

If the PT is saying that the second set of bangs is the gunshots then they are saying that no one heard the cricket bat on the door?

Since the prosecution has now rested, does that mean we will never hear what they believe was the cause of the first set of bangs

The PT agreed that four shots were fired, four actually aimed through the door, evidence of four in the bathroom area or in house. Who knows, he could have fired two through the open bathroom window in a rage, just as he did through the car sunroof before turning and aiming four through the door. Would be easy enough to lift two casings from the bathroom floor since the house and garage etc was full of friends and family before police arrived anything could have been ferreted away from the crime-scene.

 

[nastasya]

After the first shot OP remained in the same position for all four shots, he didn't move forwards a step, back a step, or lean forwards/backwards.

There is no precision shooting going on here, no tracking of someone's voice or anything else from a sci-fi movie. It's simply four shots fired at the door, in an area where you would be most likely to fire.

It is what it is...nothing more.

The line of trajectory rods show the bullet angle and path...

http://www.jeromestarkey.com/post/80149150813/reevas-point-of-view-metal-rods-thread-the

I'm not sure how a conclusion could be any less accurate.

The shots were very precise.

The trajectory moved after the first shot hit Reeva's right hip and she fell.

The next 3 shots were all aimed at the same small area near her upper body and head.

Since she was slumped down on the toilet, it defies the evidence and all odds that the killer randomly sprayed bullets and hit her head. He did not.

He did not spray shots randomly. Look at this attached photo.

 

[james83]

Essentially, yes, to your first question. They want the court to believe that ALL noises made that evening were Oscar and Oscar alone. Although the defense doesn't like the 15 minute timeline so they have alluded to tightening that up. Because yes of course it looks ridiculous that Oscar was screaming like a woman for 15 minutes. We'll have to see how they do that (maybe somebody else will testify that they heard the first bangs later than 3am, just speculation).

Either way... Oscar didn't call anybody until 3:19, and that was Mr. Stander, the estate manager. He spoke to him for 24 seconds and Stander was one of the first on the scene, along with his lawyer daughter. They had not called an ambulance, they went straight to Oscar's house.

The second call that Oscar made was to Netcare, a private ambulance company. That call was 66 seconds. We don't know what was said between them, nobody has testified to it. Oscar claims that they told him to take Reeva to the hospital himself. I'm hoping that Netcare take the stand at some point because I'd really like to know what they discussed.

The ambulance situation is very confusing. The Standers never called an ambulance. Dr. Stipp (who arrived on the scene around 3:24am-ish) asked if anybody had called and at that time Stander told Baba, the security guard, to go call. The ambulance showed up after Stipp determined Reeva was dead. There seemed to be very lack-luster attempts at getting quick medical help that night (in my opinion).

Oh and also, before any help had arrived yet, Baba called Oscar at 3:22 and Oscar told him "everything is fine". Didn't say that he just shot his girlfriend accidently. Didn't say that he just spoke with Netcare and I need to get my girlfriend to the hospital, can you help me with that. Didn't say anything at all about what had just happened.

None of it rings true to what you think would occur when somebody desperately wants help for their loved one.

And don't forget at one point Oscar was screaming like a woman and a man at the same time

Roux asked Stipp to confirm he heard a woman scream and a man scream after the first shots were fired.

“Intermingled, yes,” replied Stipp.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Here's a diagram showing the place and direction I think OP fired from.

* I didn't have any small-man clip-art available so used a gingerbread man.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/police_add_more_confusion_to_oscar_pistorius_case/

Nice
If I had been aiming with the hope of shooting a potential intruder in that loo I would have aimed right in the middle of the door and straight forward which is where you would have expected them to be them to be stood or shot in all directions not 4 shots all to the left
The pathologist described Reeva's eyes as though she had been crying ? which suggests to me she had either screamed for quite a while as witness's described and if not had been just sat in there crying for a while before the shooting .

Will be listening to the rest of the case with interest as lots of these points will likely be covered and therefore become clearer.
The defence pathologist will probably try and dispute the testimony of the prosecution pathologist about the swollen eyes as well as the stomach contents amongst other things .

 

[Gbtaketwo]

After the first shot OP remained in the same position for all four shots, he didn't move forwards a step, back a step, or lean forwards/backwards.

There is no precision shooting going on here, no tracking of someone's voice or anything else from a sci-fi movie. It's simply four shots fired at the door, in an area where you would be most likely to fire.

It is what it is...nothing more.

The line of trajectory rods show the bullet angle and path...

http://www.jeromestarkey.com/post/80149150813/reevas-point-of-view-metal-rods-thread-the

That is a good picture that I haven't seen before and does look like could have been shooting more randomly but still slightly left direction but presumably because of where he was stood ?
Did the ballistic guy say A shot was the hip and B the missed shot ?

 

[james83]

The defence want us to believe that van der merwe and the burgers heard a cricket bat hitting a door but didn't hear gunshots.