Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[MeeBee]

BBM - then why not just say "Yes, I killed her". It's just one more thing that he doesn't want to verbally admit. He also said he'd 'taken responsibility' but I don't have a clue what he meant by that. Taken responsibility for what exactly? Killing Reeva? He could hardly deny it and there's no one else for him to blame for once, so what do you think he meant when he said "I've taken responsibility"?

Well, Nel said he hadn't taken responsibility for the killing and OP contends he has. Pretty straight forward.

 

[sleuth-d-]

apologies if this has already been cleared up, but i heard op had two [sleepy] dogs.
were they not at the house that night?
if they were, where were they...?

thanks for any pointers to information, and/or clarification

 

[Viper]

What's the 411 on the judge? Is she known to be tough, etc?

LOL! OP could not have gotten a worse luck of the draw with this judge! She's a former woman's right advocate and reporter. She sentenced a rapist to 258 years! - convicted of three rapes in the women's homes. She cited the issue of a woman being safe in her own home as a factor in her sentencing - oh no...

 

[04009margaret]

And for good reason because that is exactly what Nel was trying to achieve.

To me Nel's questions are either so confusing or totally loaded with assumptions that it's really impossible to answer them with a simple answer. In the US a lawyer would not be allowed to ask questions that way - and Oscar would serve himself if he would regularly ask for clarification before answering a question that suggests an answer that may not be true.

I think we can all agree this trial is nothing like the trials we're used to watching. Even the introduction of the evidence exhibits is different & how there introduced.

 

[HauntsForHope]

Seems like ...

My weapon was discharged by mistake.

vs

I killed Reeva.

 

[DebinGA]

But he has owned it. Why does he have to say the specific words? What difference does it make how he says it???

Why was OP unwilling to say the words "I killed her" ... maybe prefaced with something else like, "I was terrified and shot unthinkingly. But, to my horror, I found I had killed Reeva." That would have helped him imo. Instead, he repeated "It was a mistake" at least 3x.

 

[IfIMay]

I'm fascinated by your reasoning...seriously.

An attorney is trained to argue any point to any degree with a straight face. 4 years of training. :wink:

 

[BlueShoe]

BBM - I don't believe he thought there was an intruder, so I can say he totally made up an intruder he didn't see.

Yes, but it would only be a lie if he had also said he SAW the intruder, doncha know. :facepalm:

 

[ShadyLady]

BBM - then why not just say "Yes, I killed her". It's just one more thing that he doesn't want to verbally admit. He also said he'd 'taken responsibility' but I don't have a clue what he meant by that. Taken responsibility for what exactly? Killing Reeva? He could hardly deny it and there's no one else for him to blame for once, so what do you think he meant when he said "I've taken responsibility"?

From what I just heard him say, he won't even take responsibility for pulling the trigger.....saying it was an "accident". He did not intend to shoot anyone."Fear" pulled the trigger....."he" did not. So I guess what he means....is that he has no control over his emotions. AND that is the one thing I can agree with him on.

I really don't understand the logic being used to defend him. I am open to hearing the other side.

 

[HauntsForHope]

apologies if this has already been cleared up, but i heard op had two [sleepy] dogs.
were they not at the house that night?
if they were, where were they...?

thanks for any pointers to information, and/or clarification

"...Investigators have also confirmed that two dogs were at the property at the time."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...horse-bid-pay-200-000-bill.html#ixzz2yQ7L7RtP

 

[aa9511]

wait, what???????

" I did not intend to kill Reeva, nor anyone else for that matter." :liar:

What about the part yesterday when he testified that even after he shot 4 shots, he was still IN TERROR that "the burglar" was going to come after him, or maybe "burglar #2" from the ladder was going to come after him?

 

[soozieqtips]

LOL! OP could not have gotten a worse luck of the draw with this judge! She's a former woman's right advocate and reporter. She sentenced a rapist to 258 years! - convicted of three rapes in the women's homes. She cited the issue of a woman being safe in her own home as a factor in her sentencing - oh no...

After sentencing a policeman who shot and killed his wife after a row about a divorce settlement, Judge Masipa said:

“No one is above the law.
You deserve to go to jail for life because you are not a protector.
You are a killer,”.

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/eloquent-reserved-judge-oscar-pistorius-trial/

I can't find any information on whether she's heard cases where the murderers are famous people in the public eye.

 

[nastasya]

I don't think it was either. I think it'd be very hard to say the words, out loud, that you'd killed someone you loved, if you've done it by accident.

I disagree entirely.

If he killed her accidentally, it would be easy to admit. It doesn't pierce his inflated ego.

If he killed her from a place a rage it shows he lost control.

If nothing else, killer has displayed he's obsessed with control. Losing control is the last thing he would ever admit to.

 

[jay-jay]

I've always thought that 66 seconds was not long enough.

Dispatcher answers phone. OP says he needs an ambulance. Dispatcher asks for address. OP gives it. Dispatcher asks what is wrong. OP tells dispatcher ALL of Reeva's injuries. Dispatcher then would need to say to bring her in instead of waiting for ambulance.

Now, would the dispatcher really tell someone to bring Reeva in in the car instead of waiting for an ambulance IF the extent of Reeva's injuries had truly been explained? I don't think so.

MOO

I was just about to reply saying the exact same thing .. that is certainly how it works in the UK .. they actually force you to stop talking about the actual emergency in the first instance and make you give your address first (in a fairly specific way, too .. no good trying to give them directions or anything, they don't want to hear all that and they tell you that too, because the very first piece of information they need is a specific location in order to get an ambulance on it's way) .. and then they go on to ask all the things you've listed there. I also find it very difficult to believe they would ever tell someone to bundle up someone with extensive bullet injuries like that, get them into a car and drive them to hospital .. that's just nuts. Maybe it all just works differently in SA, but that scenario certainly wouldn't happen in the UK .. ever.

 

[HauntsForHope]

Oddly, no one has mentioned the dogs. I imagine they would have been agitated during the fight. No one heard barking? They surely would have reacted to the gunshots.

 

[aa9511]

Just my opinion, but when OP has to make a point about how someone else is wrong or to blame for something, he is very calm and cool, and insistent on explaining every detail, to make sure people understand.

Yes, it's only when he's backed into a corner and has no one to put the blame on but himself, that he goes into his sob/vomit/donkey-noise session.

Is he trying to be a Jodi #2??

 

[minor4th]

An attorney is trained to argue any point to any degree with a straight face. 4 years of training. :wink:

4 years of college, but only 3 years of post-graduate school

And you're somewhat correct. I could argue the other side of the case just as well.

 

[MeeBee]

Why was OP unwilling to say the words "I killed her" ... maybe prefaced with something else like, "I was terrified and shot unthinkingly. But, to my horror, I found I had killed Reeva." That would have helped him imo. Instead, he repeated "It was a mistake" at least 3x.

Well...Imo, if it was an accident then it might be a very difficult thing to say out loud and hear. I'm putting myself in his shoes and I just get it. Like, if, god forbid I killed someone I loved by accident and the prosecutor came at me trying to get me to, essentially, admit to something I've already admitted to, but with that phraseology, I'd find it very difficult to say, "yes, I killed [insert name].

Think about those cases where a person accidentally shot a loved one thinking they're an intruder. What purpose would it serve to make them say, "I killed so and so?" I just don't understand.

 

[Magdalyn]

Don't know how OP can refer to this as a 'mistake'. The word just doesn't fit.

Well, when he kills his girlfriend, he feels 'mortified'.

As in, shucks, wow, totes riddled the old lady with bullets the other day, this is just humiliating and embarrassing for me. Mortifying, I tell you.

 

[minor4th]

Yes, it's only when he's backed into a corner and has no one to put the blame on but himself, that he goes into his sob/vomit/donkey-noise session.

Is he trying to be a Jodi #2??

Seriously? Does anyone really think he is in the same category as Jodi? That would really surprise me.