Trial Discussion Thread #16

[Insp.Dots]

Just been thinking about the press reports and the prosecution documents mentioning the clothes being a very important factor . Unless there were areas of them being torn I can't figure out what it could be . You don't suppose she could have been wearing trainers or some other form of footwear ? That would be too easy maybe so what is it about the clothes other than she appeared to be dressed ?

I was looking at these earlier. I have a feeling that that pair of jeans outside are going to be a big part of ST's cross examination of OP. I think they want to show that Reeva wanted to leave and was prevented in doing so.

I ACTUALLY hope I am wrong as it just means more agony and suffering....
I cannot imagine how Reeva's family must feel not knowing exactly what took place must be the worst!

 

[steveml]

The conspiracy of evil is running wild here and although Oscar has committed an atrocious and probably intentional murder, IMO, he doesn't see it hat way himself. He truly believes his own story...it is for his own sanity that he does. The moment he pulled the trigger he was already committed. In may have been initially his whole intention to scare and intimidate the bejesus out of her. But he got more than he bargained for with the firebrand, headstrong, intelligent Reeva.
She wasn't going to acquiesce to his power and the ensuing rage that followed just continued to escalate with the screaming.
People who have been pscologically damaged...like Oscar whose limbless state was negated by his mother, whose dying words to him where that he was not bound by anything

It read: 'The real loser is never the person who crosses the finishing line last. The real loser is the person who sits on the side. The person who does not even try to compete'

..instilled an extreme & abnormal belief in his own hype. He was obsessive in his sport, his image, his goals, his accumulation of credibility as a real human, not some cripple. He could never come to terms with that. He spent his entire life making sure that no one could call him disabled.

This competitive obesession has him competing for our belief that he is truly innocent. That if he believes he did nothing wrong then we will too. The first shot shocked him. Hence the gap. I don't think he was actually siting her up. It's a small space and a guaranteed hit anyway. But that small hesitation speaks volumes about his mind. Because it was only a small hesistation. The idea of what he was doing left his mind completely after that shot..he had to keep going...he had to finish the race.

He's not competing for my belief, thank you. I think for myself.

 

[G.bng]

I had a theory about this myself but daren't post it but will now .
We know the first shot hit her hip . She would then have slumped down and made a noise as well as screamed . OP could have heard that and assumed she had crashed down on to the toilet hence the second shot missing her because he had aimed at the toilet but she had actually crashed on to the magazine rack .
He then fired two more shots close together when realising where she was because of the extra screening . Just a thought I had any view on that ?

Iirc, Mangena tracked the missed bullet as hitting the wall in front of the door above the magazine rack and ricocheting on from there, in which case it couldn't as of your theory that OP "had aimed at the toilet" but missed knowing either a burglar or Reeva was there.

IMO it is not this kind of "intentionally" that the prosecution is aiming for in the charging doc, rather "intentionality" as a technical issue, i.e. that it is reasonable to expect OP to have known that shooting 4 times blind at a door of a reduced area he knew there was a person behind, could possibly result in death. And I reckon that the prosecution, the judge or anyone else will be really hard pushed to show OP actually tracked the victim, whether burglar or Reeva, and didn't just shoot blind in anger at a door behind which he either thought was a burglar or knew was Reeva.

 

[Val1]

It's so difficult trying to determine the length and time of Reeva's screaming as indicated by witnesses, without knowing the gap between the shots or the length of time between first and last gunshot.

I don't think the state realise just how much time we've spent on this :wink:

I'm more concerned about this than the actual number of shots, however the witness statements are all so vague regarding time passage from first to last gunshot.

Johan Stipp: heard screaming after gunshots (sounded like female).
Annette Stipp: heard lady screaming after gunshots (continued screaming didn't stop)
Estelle Van De Merwe: heard nothing immediately after gunshots, went back to bed, shortly afterwards she heard someone crying out loud, (thought it was a woman).
Michelle Burger: awoken by woman screams and calling for help.
Charl Johnson: awoken by woman's distressed voice.

This is the order of the sounds I believe? inserted by me bbm

3? bangs

Johan Stipp: heard screaming after gunshots (sounded like female).
Annette Stipp: heard lady screaming after gunshots (continued screaming didn't stop)
Michelle Burger: awoken by woman screams and calling for help.did not hear initial bangs
Charl Johnson: awoken by woman's distressed voice.did not hear initial bangs

3-4 bangs heard by all witnesses.

Estelle Van De Merwe: heard nothing immediately after gunshots, went back to bed, shortly afterwards she heard someone crying out loud, (thought it was a woman).

Johan Stipp: heard yells after gunshots

 

[steveml]

The ballistics expert has said, in court, that it had to in fact be one shot, a break and then three more. I don't understand why an experts testimony is being ignored.

By the way, how do we know that Van Der Merwe actually heard the gunshots as bang-bang-bang-bang and not OP hitting the door twice, the metal plate on the tub once and the tiles on the side of the door once? Of course this then means that OP lied and the cricket bat came first. Also, if Reeva was in fact still alive when he was carrying her down the stairs then the gunshots had to have come at a time closer to 3:17 am, which would put the gunshots second and cricket bat first.

MOO

For the very reason that she said they were consecutive, and the reason that her husband also heard them. She turned to her husband and he told her they were gunshots.

She has no reason to lie. I was informed the same about Mrs Stipp many many times.

 

[nastasya]

There is a far higher probability that you would hit someone in the head through a door by luck rather than intentional skill. Ask a partner to lay on the toilet floor (if you've one of a similar size), stand outside and put your finger on the door where you think their head will be. Then open the door, keeping your finger where it is, and follow the line of trajectory. Remember, a bullet is narrower than the tip of your finger. When you've had 10 goes, please let me know how many times you were bang on the target (even clipping an ear doesn't count).

*if your partner complains, it wasn't my idea. :notgood: Tell them it's science-aid week or something.

I'm missing the sense in your assertion.

If somebody is aiming where they think the head is, it eliminates 90% of the possible locations they would aim if they were not trying to hit the head.

It's like playing pick a number between 1 and 100, and then saying the number is between 90 and 100.

Are you saying aiming for the head lessens the chance of hitting the head compared to a totally random shot? The fact that the shot hit her in the head is evidence he was NOT aiming for her head?

I'm failing to comprehend your point.

 

[TorisMom003]

For the very reason that she said they were consecutive, and the reason that her husband also heard them. She turned to her husband and he told her they were gunshots.

She has no reason to lie. I was informed the same about Mrs Stipp many many times.

And what of the ballistics expert? And what if she did hear 4 gunshots one after another at or around 3am? What if OP did fire 4 gunshots first, not at the toilet room door and "policed his casings"? What if OP then fired 4 more gunshots with a pause after the first and then three more one after another through the toilet room door but did not "police his casings" from those in order to claim that he was shooting at an "intruder"?

 

[wishIknewmore]

I dare say even I could target someone in that small room through the splintered part of the door... :moo:
http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/

I really no little about some of this stuff so I'll leave it up to the more qualified to figure out some of things regarding the door. I just wanted to say that its a small grouping of shots, even if he was fairly close, considering he was either terrified or raging. He appears to be a skilled marksman and was in control when he pulled the trigger.

 

[Carol70]

Haha.

I've always presumed BBM meant sent by BlackBerry Messenger.

Here's me thinking these phones were more popular than they were.

I know nuffink!

:facepalm:

I lol'ed..too funny!

 

[Gavel Rash]

The ballistics expert has said, in court, that it had to in fact be one shot, a break and then three more. I don't understand why an experts testimony is being ignored.

By the way, how do we know that Van Der Merwe actually heard the gunshots as bang-bang-bang-bang and not OP hitting the door twice, the metal plate on the tub once and the tiles on the side of the door once? Of course this then means that OP lied and the cricket bat came first. Also, if Reeva was in fact still alive when he was carrying her down the stairs then the gunshots had to have come at a time closer to 3:17 am, which would put the gunshots second and cricket bat first.

MOO

Merwe only heard the second set of bangs ...not the first. She lives to left side of Oscars. Although she heard the argument prior and I addressed this with the positioning of the accused & victim as being on the left of the house at the time, not in the bedroom or bathroom that are on the right side. She didn't hear the 3 bangs(softer?) but she definitely heard the shots (louder) Burger was further away but the gaps between houses and noise bouncing off walls of other homes allowed for her to hear first & second set of bangs but not the argument.
Van der Merwe also testified about hearing arguing and bangs on the night Reeva Steenkamp was murdered.

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/mys...ment-oscar-pistorius-house-last-month-solved/

This evidence concluded a dramatic morning in court, which saw Michelle Burger, who lives in an estate next to Pistorius, breaking down and crying on the witness stand.

This followed a withering cross-examination by Roux, who accused her of refusing to concede anything “that is good for the accused”.

“You see, even when I ask for an obvious concession, you will still not make it … because it’s good for the accused,” said Roux.

Yesterday, Burger testified that she had heard a woman’s terrified screams – which became increasingly anxious – that she had heard a man cry for help three times and that she then heard four gunshots.

But Roux accused her of coming to testify with preconceptions about Pistorius, which were based on negative media coverage.

“If a man is about to kill his girlfriend with a firearm, she runs away and he shoots her, one thing that’s inconsistent [in that] is a man in that house shouting for help to the extent that you reconcile that with them being attacked,” Roux said to her.

Roux put it to Burger that what she had really heard was not the screams of a woman, but those of Pistorius, after he had discovered that it was Reeva he had killed.

She refused to concede this, saying that it wasn’t possible because she had heard the woman screaming just before the man’s plea for help.

Roux also questioned if it was possible for Burger to have heard screams during the shots and fading away after the shots, as she had testified.

 

[Lyra500]

I thought Dr Stipp stated that in his opinion they were definitely gunshots. Roux tried but failed to get him to say it might have been bat strikes.

Agreed. Stipp was very clear that he knew what gunfire sounded like and that he had heard gunshots. He has a military background and said this was why he knew what gunfire sounded like.

 

[steveml]

I'm missing the sense in your assertion.

If somebody is aiming where they think the head is, it eliminates 90% of the possible locations they would aim if they were not trying to hit the head.

It's like playing pick a number between 1 and 100, and then saying the number is between 90 and 100.

Are you saying aiming for the head lessens the chance of hitting the head compared to a totally random shot? The fact that the shot hit her in the head is evidence he was NOT aiming for her head?

I'm failing to comprehend your point.

If you just pick a single post you will get the wrong idea.
The whole point of this explanation was because it was suggested that the head shot made was intentional to quieten Reeva.

It was also suggested that Reeva's voice was followed to determine where her head was. The explanation was given to show how difficult it would be to make a shot like this. I think most understood it, and hopefully found it helpful.

I'm not prepared to argue about something just for the sake of it.

 

[Val1]

It is the rhythm of the heart that creates the arc like arterial spray and in Reeva’s case it is not only on the stairs but over by the couch downstairs.
http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/reeva-s-blood-drenched-hair-left-trail-1.1664082#.UzsTeVcVHLQ informative article about blood stain testimony in OP trial.
In the above article: “Three of the four wounds – the one to her hip, arm and head resulted in her bleeding profusely. The wounds to the head and arm resulted in the spurting of blood, known as arterial spurt, he said.”
“Arterial spray - refers to the spurt of blood released when a major artery is severed. The blood is propelled out of the breached blood vessel by the pumping of the heart and often forms an arcing pattern consisting of large, individual stains, with a new pattern created for each time the heart pumps.” http://www.forensicsciencesimplified.org/blood/principles.html
People can be resuscitated 15 minutes after they stop breathing because their heart is still functioning. The following article: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_can_your_heart_still_beat_when_you_stop_breathing?#slide=15

I cannot find any info of arteries being compressed from being carried, time wise in Reeva’s case and time sequence that would make the most sense but cannot find any documentation of that.

bbm Each jolting step down(carrying a dead weight of how many kg?) would surely have created a pumping/compression effect similar to what the heart could have produced, n'est pas?

 

[G.bng]

I have been puzzled about the blood along the staircase wall .
I thought the police specialist said that he thought the blood on the bottom of the stair handrail was caused by Reeva's hair . For that to be the case her right side would have to be pressed against him so how come so much blood spurt on the left .
Really can't figure this.

Iirc the expert said the blood on the stairs was due to accumulated blood in Reeva's wounds dripping not to spurts.

 

[Val1]

With regard to OP telling Baba "everything is fine"......
IMO this was likely said to stop any calls to the Media until he had sought help from his advisers of how to handle what had happened. I think this was hinted at with what Stander had said.
I do think whether guilty or not OP has shown several times his first thoughts are usually of himself.
Having said all that, Baba has already made the error with regard to calls on the stand so maybe the Judge won't give this as much credence as she would had that not happened.

With regards to the arterial spurts, it shows that despite the evidence from Saayman, Van Der Nest and Magana and Stipp there is uncertainty around exact time of death and the arterial spurts. Yet all are State witnesses and experts.

bbm Have we heard from the other security guard that was with Baba when he claims he made the first call from the buggy or was he "let go" shortly after the murder too?

 

[nastasya]

But the shots went through the door?

Of course the shots went through the door.

After the first shot Reeva was on the floor. The only part of the door that was damaged was above the handle.

For killer to hit victim with subsequent shots through locked door he had to aim down.

The question is was the door broken enough at the top to see where he was aiming.

 

[G.bng]

IIRC Capt. Mangena said position of shots indicated OP was likely on his stumps shooting from his shoulder, not from his waist as he would have if wearing his legs. He said OP shot RS from no closer than 60 cm (2 ft.), but did he say how far back OP could have been? Roux probably wants OP as far away as possible, but do we know where OP has claimed he was as he shot?

Mangena said from a minimum 60cm to as far back as the wall.

 

[lisasalinger]

I believe that he was quite certain that the first shot had to have been to the hip and then there was a pause before the other three shots. It was explained in court that the reason for the certainty was because of the trajectory of the bullets and where they hit Reeva. There had to have been a pause between the first shot and the other three in order for Reeva to have crumpled down with her hands/arms covering her head.

Yes, exactly! Mangena's testimony was thorough and powerful.

And this is why Roux brought up Reeva being bent over. He needs her to be bent over so that the shots can hit the hip, arm and head all within the same approximate level... with his double tap theory, the 4 shots would have happened instantaneously.

But the problem with that is that the spatter from the back of her head would have gone all over the walls. The majority of what came out of her head was on/in the toilet and the floor, meaning she was lower and further back, very close to the toilet... not leaning right up against the door.

Of course, we haven't seen the Defense act this out yet, but just walking thru it right now, I don't see how their position on this could be possible.

 

[jay-jay]

I think he could have been firing from the hip. That he knew where Reeva was in the toilet having bashed a hole in it. If you know here your target is trapped then shooting from the hip is more likely. Therefore, of course, he had his prostheses on.

That's exactly what I have thought all along .. was that he was firing from the hip .. with his protheses on. :thumb:


Edited: .. just seen steveml's post:

"This was originally prosecutor Nel's claim - by OP putting his prosthesis on before shooting Reeva, it allowed sufficient time for the murder to be premeditated. There was something that made them change their mind, but I'm not sure what it was. "


I'm almost certain the reason was because of the position of the bullet holes in the door, they just took it that he had to be on his stumps to have shot that low down .. but surely they must've also thought about the possibility he could've shot from the hip? Oh, and also the ballistics guy was talking about lining the gun up with 'sight' .. well, I doubt very much if OP had bothered doing all of that, to be honest.

 

[G.bng]

No, she died and mostly bled out in the toilet room, her heart continued to make faint attempts at beating until it finally stopped downstairs. The prosecution has handled it and has already attributed some of the blood spatter downstairs to arterial spray so her heart still must have been beating, even if it was only a few beats as the heart died. For them to say otherwise would be contrary to their own expert. I don't know if either the DT or PT is pushing the issue very hard, or if they are, I missed it.

IMBW and I am really going to have to listen again but I don't recall the PT expert attributing any of the blood patterns down the stairs to arterial spatter, indeed I precisely recall the expert saying those down the stairs were blood dripping from the pools of blood accumulated in Reeva's wounds and tissues.