Trial Discussion Thread #16

[jay-jay]

LOL. I moved on a week ago!

I only joined last week, so I've only just moved on this morning

 

[Trooper]

I only joined last week, so I've only just moved on this morning

:laugh:

 

[wishIknewmore]

I'd like to. :smile: but...

Being able to see through the panel would make it more difficult. I know you're going to think it strange but it's not. I'll explain...

To see Reeva you've got to be quite close to the panel. As soon as you get close to the panel you cannot hold the gun in front of you, there's no room. You can't be right up to the door as the gun wasn't fired from against the door. This means that your eyes are looking through the panel, and your arm cannot naturally follow your line of sight. You literally have to shoot one-handed with your arm bent more or less from your hip, and pulled backwards (your arm needs to be as far back from the door as the minimum distance specified by the expert witness).

The easiest example I can give you is shooting pool. To get the ball in the pocket you look down the cue and line everything up (even then you may still miss). Now, try to pot that same ball with the pool cue stuck out at the side of you rather than directly in front of you. Your eyes can look straight at the pocket (OP looking at Reeva's head), the cue is out to the side (OP's gun) and your hoping to hit the ball in the pocket (bullet to target). The shot becomes much more difficult. Remember, this is a bullet, not a pool ball.

The far more accurate way to fire a gun is to stand further back from the door, put both hands in front of you, look along the sight at where you want to fire, and shoot. This is exactly how you learn to shoot on a shooting range. You hardly ever see anyone shoot one-handed, and certainly nobody does it for accuracy.

This is why I'm convinced that OP was a few feet back from the door when he fired. He put his arms out front and fired four quick shots through the door. No specific target, just at the most likely area someone would be.

I agree! Nice explaination. It would be very hard to shoot that way. His shots were so close together that his eyes were on a specific part of the door when he fired all 4 shots. If he could see in, then she could have seen him too so one would think she would have either moved or crouched in a ball in a corner. There's the chance it was all to fast but I don't think so.

I do find it strange that he was so accurate in choosing where to aim. It could have been a good guess or perhaps she gave away her position by yelling at him, hitting the the door in anger with her fists, or backed into the magazine stand which scraped on the tile floor?

One would think that IF there was a burglar who was more than likely armed and behind a closed bathroom door, OP would have shot several rounds in one area and then moved to shoot several more on the opposite side. There would have been bullet holes all over that door if it had been me. He was taking a huge risk for his and Reeva's safety by assuming that the 4 shots fired blindly in 1 only area actually rendered the burglar helpless. Otherwise, the armed burglar (s) now knew OP's position so could return fire. He also had know way of knowing if there was more than 1 person hiding in the toilet. Again, we have a lot of "what ifs" and pure speculation on my part but its just more things that don't make sense if OP was truly in fear of their lives.

 

[jay-jay]

I do find it strange that he was so accurate in choosing where to aim. It could have been a good guess or perhaps she gave away her position by yelling at him, hitting the the door in anger with her fists

^ this ^

 

[Gryffindor]

I agree! Nice explaination. It would be very hard to shoot that way. His shots were so close together that his eyes were on a specific part of the door when he fired all 4 shots. If he could see in, then she could have seen him too so one would think she would have either moved or crouched in a ball in a corner. There's the chance it was all to fast but I don't think so.

I do find it strange that he was so accurate in choosing where to aim. It could have been a good guess or perhaps she gave away her position by yelling at him, hitting the the door in anger with her fists, or backed into the magazine stand which scraped on the tile floor?

One would think that IF there was a burglar who was more than likely armed and behind a closed bathroom door, OP would have shot several rounds in one area and then moved to shoot several more on the opposite side. There would have been bullet holes all over that door if it had been me. He was taking a huge risk for his and Reeva's safety by assuming that the 4 shots fired blindly in 1 only area actually rendered the burglar helpless. Otherwise, the armed burglar (s) now knew OP's position so could return fire. He also had know way of knowing if there was more than 1 person hiding in the toilet. Again, we have a lot of "what ifs" and pure speculation on my part but its just more things that don't make sense if OP was truly in fear of their lives.

She couldn't move after the hip shot , to hide or bang on door, as it caused her to crumble onto the magazine rack. Hence was helpless and incapacitated after shot 1. Only protection after that was raising her arms and hands to attempt shelter.

 

[nastasya]

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 ?

Didn't you see this photo?

Shots were not random.

Last 3 shots were directly at Reeva's head after she fell to the ground.

 

[Gryffindor]

If there had have been any supposed burglar who bizarrely chose to enter on the 2ND floor!!!!????? then I imagine once they were in they'd head straight into the house, if armed, and go straight for the occupants, to impede, threaten or harm, whilst he/she nicked what they wanted.

*Element of surprise, disallowing occupant to arm themselves

Why on earth would they linger in bathroom or indeed head straight for the toilet cubicle?? Bizarre

 

[TorisMom003]

It doesn't really matter if the witness statements match up, don't match up, whatever. The State has put into evidence exactly what the judge needs to rule that OP intentionally killed Reeva. The timeline proves the case. It is impossible for Reeva to have still been alive when OP carried her down the stairs around 3:24 am IF she was shot around 3 am. Blood spatter tells us that she was in fact still alive (although barely) when carried down the stairs. Therefore, the gun shots that hit Reeva 3 times (out of four) did NOT occur at or near 3 am.......they had to have occurred later around 3:17 am.

No matter what OP says on the stand, this is something that he can not explain away. Either he has to admit that he lied and that the witnesses are correct, that the gunshots that killed Reeva occurred around 3:17 am or he can kiss his freedom goodbye.

MOO

 

[TorisMom003]

If there had have been any supposed burglar who bizarrely chose to enter on the 2ND floor!!!!????? then I imagine once they were in they'd head straight into the house, if armed, and go straight for the occupants, to impede, threaten or harm, whilst he/she nicked what they wanted.

*Element of surprise, disallowing occupant to arm themselves

Why on earth would they linger in bathroom or indeed head straight for the toilet cubicle?? Bizarre

They wouldn't, go to the toilet room that is. A burglar is also going to enter a home using the easiest way possible and is NOT going to enter a room that would be occupied first when going into the house.

MOO

 

[nastasya]

Where on earth did I say spray shots?

Those are 4 reasonably straight shots into a door.

I can only guess you've never shot - if you haven't then it's going to be very difficult for me to explain. Just agree to differ and move on.

You proposed that head shot was result of random, not-targeted firing of gun.

It wasn't.

First shot that hit Reeva's hip was in a substantially different direction than next three shots.

Killer paused after first shot, then changed where he was firing. Bullet hit Reeva in the head after killer re-aimed and fired 3 times.

 

[Viper]

It doesn't really matter if the witness statements match up, don't match up, whatever. The State has put into evidence exactly what the judge needs to rule that OP intentionally killed Reeva. The timeline proves the case. It is impossible for Reeva to have still been alive when OP carried her down the stairs around 3:24 am IF she was shot around 3 am. Blood spatter tells us that she was in fact still alive (although barely) when carried down the stairs. Therefore, the gun shots that hit Reeva 3 times (out of four) did NOT occur at or near 3 am.......they had to have occurred later around 3:17 am.

No matter what OP says on the stand, this is something that he can not explain away. Either he has to admit that he lied and that the witnesses are correct, that the gunshots that killed Reeva occurred around 3:17 am or he can kiss his freedom goodbye.

MOO

BIB. Apologies, but that is incorrect. The autopsy concluded that Reeva died within 2-3 last breaths after being shot in the head. In addition the very small amount of blood supports that; if Reeva's heart had been beating for even a minute after she received all of that trauma the blood bleeding out of her 5 wounds would easily have filled the entire WC floor space.

 

[jay-jay]

She couldn't move after the hip shot , to hide or bang on door, as it caused her to crumble onto the magazine rack. Hence was helpless and incapacitated after shot 1.

I think wishIknewmore may have meant that she was standing directly behind the door, banging on it, just before the first shot. That's how it is in my scenario, anyway, and how he managed to hit her so directly.

 

[TorisMom003]

BIB. Apologies, but that is incorrect. The autopsy concluded that Reeva died within 2-3 last breaths after being shot in the head. Fact. In addition the very small amount of blood supports that; if Reeva's heart had been beating for even a minute after she received all of that trauma the blood bleeding out of her 5 wounds would easily have filled the entire WC floor space.

Viper, I have seen the previous posts about the arterial spatter and how that could have been. However, since we did not get to see or hear the testimony of the man that conducted the autopsy then we can only go by what was reported from those that were in court during his testimony.

My main point in saying that Reeva was still alive at the time she was carried downstairs is that there is no way, in any shape or form, that Reeva was shot at/around 3 am as the defense and OP are claiming. I am simply going by what we know as fact, what we are actually able to see and hear during the court testimony.

MOO

ETA: The media can and DO get things wrong often so I tend to not rely on just their versions of what occurred during court.

 

[Gryffindor]

You proposed that head shot was result of random, not-targeted firing of gun.

It wasn't.

First shot that hit Reeva's hip was in a substantially different direction than next three shots.

Killer paused after first shot, then changed where he was firing. Bullet hit Reeva in the head after killer re-aimed and fired 3 times.

Hi, was the image from Juror13's blog?? Can't find it. Thank you x

 

[jay-jay]

If there had have been any supposed burglar who bizarrely chose to enter on the 2ND floor!!!!?????

I think that's fairly common though .. because people are more likely, generally, to lock up all their doors and windows on the ground floor but are more lax with their upstairs windows.

(edit: do you mean 'first floor'? I don't recall the bedroom/bathroom/toilet suite as being on the second floor .. there is a ground flour and a first floor .. unless that is a UK thing ..)

Why on earth would they linger in bathroom or indeed head straight for the toilet cubicle?? Bizarre

I think that (in OP's version), that would've been because the 'burglar' would've heard a noise himself (i.e. OP) and hid in the toilet cubicle.

(.. not that I believe any of this stuff, you understand ..!)

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Didn't you see this photo?

Shots were not random.

Last 3 shots were directly at Reeva's head after she fell to the ground.

No I hadn't seen that ,thank you for posting .Was that presented in court or did someone else draw the extra lines on ? ( not that I doubt it for a minute )
When you look at that I go back to what I thought originally and posted about yesterday which is that he would not have aimed shots there if he thought he was aiming at an intruder. He must have heard or seen something to draw make him shoot in the direction of the toilet because he can't seriously expect us to believe the intruder was using the loo . I think he heard her fall as well as scream .
Screaming is normally a split second reaction to sudden pain . I scream out instantaneously if I just hit my funny bone or walk into a coffee table and hit my shin . Goodness knows how he could have continued shooting ,just so awful to think about .
I keep trying to give OP the benefit of the doubt but I am afraid I just cannot accept all the stretches of imagination required for his version to be true .
Of course I will listen with interest to the defence and may change my mind .

 

[Gryffindor]

I think wishIknewmore may have meant that she was standing directly behind the door, banging on it, just before the first shot. That's how it is in my scenario, anyway, and how he managed to hit her so directly.

Thanks for that :-D I think she was standing in the "safest" corner of the cubicle, in order for that 1st trajectory to hit her right hip. Possibly holding onto the inside handle, if there was one, to keep it closed

 

[jay-jay]

Thanks for that :-D I think she was standing in the "safest" corner of the cubicle, in order for that 1st trajectory to hit her right hip. Possibly holding onto the inside handle, if there was one, to keep it closed

No, the ballistics expert testified/confirmed that Reeva was standing directly behind the door .. face on to it.

 

[shane13]

is it possible to believe, that Oscar, having paid big gobs of money, ( or to be precise, Henke paid) to buy a dog that barks for him, that he would be let loose with a pen and paper and left to construct his OWN statement for the Bail hearing??

like.. they never checked it or went thru it word by word with a revocation of bail pending??


( not that I think they did a good job. it was mediocre work. but even so. )

of course the prosecution will state it, claim it and lay that to rest.. Roux made a performance of Darrin Fresco having an attorneys advice for his statement..

its perfectly normal.. to think they wont is irrational.

Hmmm.

A week or 2 ago, you went on and on with me, claiming OPO's BH affidavit etc was 100% from OP [or words to that effect.]

Recall I wrote that "OP is a runner not a crime scene strategist"--let alone one in some type of shock, or at least under duress.,

Why the state change now in your writing?

 

[Gryffindor]

I think that's fairly common though .. because people are more likely, generally, to lock up all their doors and windows on the ground floor but are more lax with their upstairs windows.

(edit: do you mean 'first floor'? I don't recall the bedroom/bathroom/toilet suite as being on the second floor .. there is a ground flour and a first floor .. unless that is a UK thing ..)



I think that (in OP's version), that would've been because the 'burglar' would've heard a noise himself (i.e. OP) and hid in the toilet cubicle.

(.. not that I believe any of this stuff, you understand ..!)

Certainly in the UK, a locked door means nothing. They access downstairs, back door, kitchen window etc. Entry usually through a window using glass cutters or through breaking in through a door.

Upstairs burglar at Oscar's time of the morning is ludicrous as the burglar chose the most likely entry point where the occupants would be , i.e. in bed ???