Trial Discussion Thread #19 - 14.04.07, Day 17

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Guys, am playing catch up again, but thanks for keeping us up to date, especially Zwie.

I can understand why people think it is boring or selfish and making everything about OP, but If you look on the other side, it is a really good thing and in the Interests of Justice....

When Judge Masipa finally makes her judgement, there will be much less chance of appeal or complaint from the DT as OP is being given every chance to tell the truth and put his version without being pressured or forced into missing things out etc. MOO
 
I want OP to take the stand, he should tell everyone what happened. If he didn't take the stand in this crime I'd want the book thrown at him.
Nel will go in heavy with witnesses and is entitled to do so. It was just a bit surprising to see this very sarcastic side of him today.

I wasn't very complimentary of Mrs Stipp at all to be honest - I'll hold my hands up. She frustrated the hell out of me.
However, as the case went on we grew to like each other more, and any initial stormy waters are now merely mill-ponds.

I think I even said she was gutsy not too long ago.

But he is known for his vigorous robust cross & Roux had better have prepared OP for it, if not his client is going to be in trouble. I don't mind his style today, we were all falling asleep with his other style. If it brings out the truth, then that's what he needs to do for Reeva. On the Oscar radio, nobody is criticizing his style, in fact they have glowing reports about him.
 
He really did have all of his lines memorized. Normally people testifying will give an answer that is lacking, at least a few that are lacking, and the attorney that is asking the question will restate or clarify what he is asking to prompt the witness. I did not see that happen once. Correct me if I am wrong, but not once Did Roux have to go back to OP on a single question.

It will not be so under cross examination by Mr. Nel. I almost screamed when he told the Professor, "No professor it is not that you might be wrong, YOU ARE WRONG!"

I missed that part, must have been when my visitor arrived.
 
...so I looked it up, but in his biography, it says she died 'following drug complications after an hysterectomy'.

RSBM

I thought she had died of an allergic reaction to malaria treatment?

Can anyone confirm?
 
I really do have a major problem with that ladder OP left lying right down in front of the house, near his wide open balcony doors.

I'm forever working on my old wreck, but I'll struggle to put a huge ladder at least out of sight at night (if not locked up), and when I have scaffold - well, to leave a window open is an open invitation and I would not do it. I live in a very safe area.

Mr Z would, but thoughts of crime never even cross his mind. I just cannot reconcile OP is setting out all the reasons why he had good cause to be afraid of intruders (and I can accept that) but then asking people to accept he slept with windows wide open and ladders left outside??

It's just doesn't add up. A gun wouldn't be much use if an armed intruder had snuck in while OP and Reeva slept, and shot them first. Either he was not as worried as he says, or he will have to come up with some explanation about the open doors and ladder, to make me happy.
 
Well, both pathologists agreed at death the bladder empties, and she was wearing shorts pulled all the way up when she died.

Perhaps during the time of him picking her up from the toilet floor and carrying her to the ground floor her pants were pulled up again by him?

I also get that people don't want him to speak of Reeva in the manner that he is. In a way I think because he was the only other person there that night he HAS to paint the picture as he remembers it, regardless how others perceive this to be or comes across to the public. This is purely his version of how events panned out and to him, the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth.
 
Perhaps the Judge allowed Roux' request for early adjournment to avoid appellate issues.
When the Judge spoke to Nel saying OP is exhausted, you can hear it in his voice - or something similar, her voice had a strength to it I haven't notice before. She is usually so soft spoken.

During OP's time on the stand, I could not help but think, Reeva is the victim, Reeva is the victim...
 
The only sensible explanation I can give to this is that OP isn't often there.

If he's elsewhere, training and such, I don't suppose he's worried if somebody's going to break into the house.
That sense of paranoia isn't brought on by worrying about your valuables or material things whilst your away, the vulnerability is created once your in the house.

The fact that the pane was measured and ready to go in, at least suggests that the repair was in hand.

But he WAS there during this time. IMO the paranoid story weakens with this broken window.
 
Reading accounts of today's testimony which I only followed here ...

Did OP claim the 2009 boat wreck had "a massive impact" ... leaving him "fearful and withdrawn"? What's he afraid of... boats, piers, his own stupidity?

Did OP claim the 2012 head bash he received by person unnamed at a social function required stitches to the back of his head? Police report filed? If not, why not?
 
What I got from this whole thing is OP likes to talk alot on crime on himself and others but his actions tells another story.

At least that is consistent with his statement. He talks alot being so scared that night and yet his actions show he wasn't scared at all.

That is my biggest problem with him, his words, emotions & actions just don't gel with me. His long background today was self serving & I just had the opinion it was full with exaggerations. I don't know, even though distraught, at times his arrogance came through.
 
But he is known for his vigorous robust cross & Roux had better have prepared OP for it, if not his client is going to be in trouble. I don't mind his style today, we were all falling asleep with his other style. If it brings out the truth, then that's what he needs to do for Reeva. On the Oscar radio, nobody is criticizing his style, in fact they have glowing reports about him.

I've been meandering around various places watching South Africans discuss the case, during this long break. I was surprised by the confidence I saw expressed in Nel, and his ability to be fierce, by people who seemed to know a lot about him. Now I know why!
 
I really do have a major problem with that ladder OP left lying right down in front of the house, near his wide open balcony doors.

I'm forever working on my old wreck, but I'll struggle to put a huge ladder at least out of sight at night (if not locked up), and when I have scaffold - well, to leave a window open is an open invitation and I would not do it. I live in a very safe area.

Mr Z would, but thoughts of crime never even cross his mind. I just cannot reconcile OP is setting out all the reasons why he had good cause to be afraid of intruders (and I can accept that) but then asking people to accept he slept with windows wide open and ladders left outside??

It's just doesn't add up. A gun wouldn't be much use if an armed intruder had snuck in while OP and Reeva slept, and shot them first. Either he was not as worried as he says, or he will have to come up with some explanation about the open doors and ladder, to make me happy.
I think this is one of the many things I struggle with . He just did not live as a person with fears of a crime Even in the UK where crime is relatively low people tend to have broken windows boarded up immediately . Their are 2 glass companies offering a 24 hour boarding up service in our small market town alone .
A vulnerable person would be more security conscious ie no ladders left around, no open windows at night (unless burglar bars security grills were fitted ),use alarm ,repair broken windows immediately IMO
His story would have been more believable if he hadn't said he knew there were ladders outside .
So difficult to work through things in this case to give the benefit of doubt because everything is so contradictory
 
Perhaps during the time of him picking her up from the toilet floor and carrying her to the ground floor her pants were pulled up again by him?

I also get that people don't want him to speak of Reeva in the manner that he is. In a way I think because he was the only other person there that night he HAS to paint the picture as he remembers it, regardless how others perceive this to be or comes across to the public. This is purely his version of how events panned out and to him, the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Dr. Saayman testified (and it has been agreed to by both sides) that the bullet that struck Reeva through her right hip also penetrated the shorts she was wearing when she was shot.

So, no - her shorts were NOT pulled up after she was shot & killed.
 
Absolutely, and it would certainly be mentioned. So we can exclude that posibility.

Would it need to have been mentioned already? There have been a number of papers passed to the judge which we are not yet party to, but have been submitted as evidence .. and perhaps that piece of evidence is one of them.
 
Can't help but wonder if OP will sob when faced with tough questions from Nel or if he will be alert, composed and n guard?
 
Reading accounts of today's testimony which I only followed here ...

Did OP claim the 2009 boat wreck had "a massive impact" ... leaving him "fearful and withdrawn"? What's he afraid of... boats, piers, his own stupidity?

Did OP claim the 2012 head bash he received by person unnamed at a social function required stitches to the back of his head? Police report filed? If not, why not?

Any police officers reading, please don't get offended, but I've noticed in public they have a very distinct style of relating a crime incident to the public. They get very formal and a little stilted.

OP seemed to drop into that style when relating the party incident. It wasn't 'a man' approaching him, it was a 'gentleman', and he didn't tell him to go away, but said something like 'I'd rather not discuss that' or something? It was very odd.

He didn't want the media attention, apparently, so didn't report it for two days. But then he did. So that's a bit confusing too.
 
Dr. Saayman testified (and it has been agreed to by both sides) that the bullet that struck Reeva through her right hip also penetrated the shorts she was wearing when she was shot.

So, no - her shorts were NOT pulled up after she was shot & killed.

Aah yes! Forgot that, thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
2,201
Total visitors
2,262

Forum statistics

Threads
600,474
Messages
18,109,125
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top