Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[minor4th]

BIB. No it is not.

OP did not have "wheelchair friendly" doors, he simply had double doors at the entry to his bedroom, nothing more. His home was not equipped with an elevator to transport a handicapped or wheelchair bound person to the upper level. In addition, if all of the doors in the home were ordered by OP to be handicapped accessible they would all be oversized, not double doors, to accommodate the width of a wheelchair. No one in a wheelchair wants to struggle with trying to open two doors.

OP was yet again using his physical deformity to play for sympathy from the court and the public. Disgusting. Especially so because he has time and again explained that he does not have a disability, he is as capable as any man.

I disagree.

 

[TorisMom003]

Refresh me, someone, anyone...

1)Why did he decide to stop shooting at 4? Reeva screaming stopped after the 4th shot is my guess, but did Oscar prevaricate, sorry, tell his version, about why he stopped shooting at 4?

2)How did he know the bathroom door was locked, thus knowing instantly he'd need a bat to get inside? Did he rattle the knob whilst also screaming to 'get out of my house'?

1) No OP has not stated why he stopped shooting at 4.

2) After firing the 4 shots, going to the bedroom, realizing Reeva was more than likely in the toilet room he ran back to the door and tried to open it finding it locked. Then he went back to the bedroom, out the sliding doors onto the balcony to yell HelpHelpHelp (I believe the order is correct for the doors), put on his legs, grabbed the cricket bat, went back to the toilet room door and banged on it three times to open it.

This is of course OP's story and not a fact that has been proven.

 

[Viper]

The we are agreed? We both want cross examination of OP to end.

Oooooh noooo my friend! Not. At. All.

 

[Magdalyn]

He needs to settle down then and not be so anxious and guarded. If he is telling the truth then he needs to just tell it.

I think a lot of OP's problem is that he is very emotionally unstable still and is really unable to completely regulate his emotions or even think clearly.

Or, he's emotionally unstable always, and forever unable to regulate his emotions. Which got him into this situation to begin with. :twocents:

 

[Trooper]

In a big case from2010, I heard Nel kept the defendant on the stand 8 days.

As for the tactics, Nel had to put OP on notice. He has started feeding OP the rope, and Oscar, who can't resist, is hanging himself with it, inch by inch, imo.


We're dealing with a judge and assessors and not a Florida jury so I think that no matter OP comes up with, ei the new "accidental shooting in self defense", an intelligent decision will be rendered.

Unrelated but I thought I would add that I thought it was in poor form for OP to invoke Reeva's name when stating why he was taking the stand. I would have advised against it...

I might have more respect for him if he had pled guilty to culpable homicide and thrown himself at the mercy of the court OR if he would even do it now, even an Alfred plea...

Nel's cases are textbook stuff on X-examination of the accused... being the prosecutor he does have the advantage of appearing to be Mr. Meek and Mild at first, but he is in his element in the area of x-cross.

the time, even if SA had an Alford element is long gone. Oscar had one window of opportunity, and that was when the state rested its case.. after that , its full steam ahead till the gruesome end.. Of course he had an opportunity before the trial, naturally.. but now its on it's course come what may. The defence have in fact put their theory of defence forward, and it doesn't include any mental disability at all. No automatism, no nothing of the sort. The Defence theory, on record, is that everyone is mistaken. Or lying. Or collaborating.. Or conspiring.

I am bitterly disappointed in Roux in this context.. the bail aff and the trial aff were shoddy and not the best work for a client paying big bucks.. Oscar could have a solid foundation on appeal for bad workmanship at the coal face with his Barrister.. that Roux let Oscar ramble on, bringing in his adventures as caped avenger, the Clark Kent of Pretoria, rescuing folks , patting dogs, charity stuff, all this character evidence was just plain nuts, and even Roux expressed, ruefully, that he let it go on too long.. Too long is too right, but he let the content of it veer into giving Nel a window as big as the Opera House to stroll into.

 

[crasshopper]

Possibly because if he went further out onto the balcony as stated in his BH affidavit, then maybe he would have then been facing in when bringing it or them in to the bedroom and with curtains open etc, would have had to have seen the absence of Reeva.

Note also the addition of blinking LED light. So this now gives him some light as opposed to the earlier "pitch dark" claim.

Note also that he alleges being on his stumps and allegedly needing to lean on to walls etc for balance, etc., but then he can carry or bring in the fan(s) w.o. needing to hold on to walls or such??

Overthinking things can lead to problems...

 

[Huna]

Those who don't like the way cross-examination is going or who are sad at the thought of OP put through 'psychic pain' will just have to sit tight I'm afraid. We are watching justice being played out and it's important.

 

[TorisMom003]

Or, he's emotionally unstable always, and forever unable to regulate his emotions. Which got him into this situation to begin with. :twocents:

I agree. Evidence of this:

* Shooting a gun in a crowded restaurant
* Shooting a gun out the sunroof of a car
* Getting out of the car with a loaded weapon to confront a driver that is "following him"
* Berating Reeva in public for not doing what she was told by him
* Going "Code Red" at the sound of the washing machine turned on


I feel like I am missing some. Anyone that can think of more please feel free to add to the list.

MOO

 

[minor4th]

The importance of this point of whether OP went out onto to the balcony or did not go out onto the balcony is that all along everyone thought he had gone out onto to the balcony and that's when Reeva got up out of bed and went into the bathroom.

If he never actually left the room, but rather just pulled the standing fan from the doorway into the bedroom, how could he have failed to see or hear her get out of bed?

I expect to see Nels close in on one point after another like this.

That's a good point.

See, I can still look at the evidence objectively

I have problems with Oscar's version and believe that some portions just don't fit together very well or they are hard to believe.

The problem I have is - if he's guilty of murder, the state needs to prove it. They need to prove that his account cannot possibly be true. It's not enough to say that his story doesn't sound true or it's far fetched or it's easier to believe he became enraged and killed Reeva and then regretted it. If there is no solid evidence refuting Oscar's account and no real evidence of intentional murder then we're stuck with OP's account.

So if this was an intentional murder, I hope to goodness the state has something more than they've shown us so far and I hope that OP's account falls apart under questioning.

 

[minor4th]

Or, he's emotionally unstable always, and forever unable to regulate his emotions. Which got him into this situation to begin with. :twocents:

I think you're probably right about that.

 

[Duchy]

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.

But when asked to take responsibility he answers 'I did' as if it is something he had to do and then it is done. The right answer is 'I do' not 'I did'.

He doesn't need to look at a picture, he was there? Of course he was otherwise he wouldn't be where he is now.

 

[Viper]

The flaw here is "for him". What makes you think such a design is "for him"?

Oh well, you got me there. OP has tons of house guests that are wheelchair bound I guess... Or maybe not! In fact I cannot think of a one, can you?

 

[crasshopper]

Good night everybody!
Thank you for the stimulating discussion.
A demain!


Edit: Viper I don't think that is fair. In fact I think society is better when people with various "disabilities" are successfully mainstreamed. Much as I believe OP is guilty, I do believe he has sincerely been involved with the handicapped and particularly young amuputees. On his own time and through sponsored events. jmho o/w I agree with your posts! (and I do think OP is manipulative)

 

[Duchy]

He could man up and softly answer "I did."

jmho

Nooooooooo.....'I do'.

 

[Trooper]

I think Judge Masipa will request Roux to move the defendants family out of the main courtroom and into the annexe.. It's obvious that Oscar is playing to that particular gallery, as defendants often do.. their antics may well be the cause of his constant meltdowns. Oscar isn't really playing to anyone else except his family at this point in time.. .. on the surface it looks like he is presenting himself as the underdog, the martyr to the system, the bloke who suggested he was a double tap shooter, and now wants to be a bloke who accidentally, 'before I knew it ' fires off 4 rounds ...

While the Judge has a duty of care for every person in her court, it still is up to Roux to have his client trial ready and up to speed.. Roux hasn't at any time hinted that Oscar is not able by reason of mental instability to instruct his own attorney, and unless and until this happens, its Oscar on the stand .

Roux would have to present a very detailed medical report to claim that Oscar is so debilitated by his experiences that he cannot issue instructions to his attorney, before that kite is flown.

Do I think he is debilitated to that extent?? no. I do not.

 

[Duchy]

He did do that, unless you already knew that. Nel asked him again and OP said, "I did, My Lady."

Yeah well say it again then and change it to 'I do'.oke:oke:oke:

 

[TorisMom003]

Hubby is not following this case, however he does ask me pretty much everyday what is going on with it. I have told him the basics and he has heard my views on how/why I think that OP's version is BS. Today he came home from work and told me that he was surprised that some of his co-workers were talking about this case. I asked him what was said, what they thought. Some of them thought that OP was telling the truth, that he did not intend to shoot Reeva and that it was an accident. That is until he explained some of the things that OP has said and what the evidence shows. Some of them then wanted to know how to find out more about the case instead of just getting their information from media sources that seem to have an agenda. I politely gave him a slip of paper with WS address on it for him to pass along to them. Hopefully we will have more people that are interested in the case and looking for the truth come here to read (and possibly post) about OP and Reeva.

 

[Gavel Rash]

Thank-you Trooper...Oscar's brilliant guise "The Clark Kent of Pretoria" :floorlaugh:

'Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a race horse, able to leap tall tales with a single rabbity bound' :floorlaugh:

 

[Viper]

He needs to settle down then and not be so anxious and guarded. If he is telling the truth then he needs to just tell it.

I think a lot of OP's problem is that he is very emotionally unstable still and is really unable to completely regulate his emotions or even think clearly.

BIB. Agreed!

 

[minor4th]

In a big case from2010, I heard Nel kept the defendant on the stand 8 days.

As for the tactics, Nel had to put OP on notice. He has started feeding OP the rope, and Oscar, who can't resist, is hanging himself with it, inch by inch, imo.


We're dealing with a judge and assessors and not a Florida jury so I think that no matter OP comes up with, ei the new "accidental shooting in self defense", an intelligent decision will be rendered.

Unrelated but I thought I would add that I thought it was in poor form for OP to invoke Reeva's name when stating why he was taking the stand. I would have advised against it...

I might have more respect for him if he had pled guilty to culpable homicide and thrown himself at the mercy of the court OR if he would even do it now, even an Alfred plea...

In a perfect world I would have rather him said things differently. I do think the judge will get to the bottom of it and make a sound decision.