Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[supernovaNic]

Watching today's last half, I wish Nel were tighter on questioning. But maybe it's a tactic. Maybe he is being confusing to confuse OP and get OP to say something without thinking of his answer first. I don't know. Seems like a lot of time wasted trying to explain what he was asking OP. Ugh. Just ask a straight clear question.

 

[04009margaret]

What's the 1% rule?

FYI - I am more convinced of culpable homicide now that I've heard his testimony than I was before.

LOL I was hoping you could explain

 

[Cherwell]

Here is another link which helps understand what the Defence may be going for.

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Non-insane-automatism.php

From the above link:
"There must exist an involuntary action arising from external source or reflex action"

Better make that four involuntary actions.

 

[Feynman]

excerpted quote:

But so many posts here are 'LOL he is crumbling!', 'Nel is going to chew him up and spit him out!', hilarious laughing emoticons (I personally can't find the humour in any of it :twocents and talking about his constant lies, when I have yet to see one conclusive 'lie' - mistakes, inconsistencies, but no (as yet) straight up lies.. I'm not following so many posts because of the relentless blood baying here. Just me?

There is a definite torch and pitchfork mentality among some of the posters here.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Then Nel would argue that it would be automatic for OP to ask his bed partner if she heard the same thing he did, just like OP has done in the past more than once. It is also automatic for OP to put his "legs" on since he has "limited mobility" on his stumps. I don't see how this will help the defense.

MOO

That is not how I read the situation but I have no legal background only an interest.

For me what he has been saying today on the stand is that him firing the gun was automatic and without thought of the consequences due to his sudden fear.

Automatism is a very unusual plea but if it works he can get away without a custodial sentence.

 

[emmavoberry]

I don't think he made that case, for post-shooting fear (specific ones) in his first official statement. Anyone know?

 

[Val1]

Originally Posted by Val1 View Post
bbm - I believe you may have missed the memo, OP is now claiming that he woke up, RS asked if he was having trouble sleeping to which he replied in the affirmative, goes and brings the 2 fans further into the bedroom but didn't unplug them, closes the sliding doors and blackout curtains but sees RS's jeans on the floor and picks them up and goes to cover the led light on his wall unit something or other, then hears the bathroom window sliding all the way open... then he freaks out, gets his gun, whispers to RS to call the police and then heads on down to confront "intruders" that he had no intention to shoot to kill, with his black talon bullets. If I missed anything, sorry, but there were a lot of changes....

He hit the toilet door, saw an opening and was tempted to peak in and see if it was Reeva, hit the door two more times, ripped out the boards, then didn't look in to see if it was Reeva and instead leaned over the door to pick up the key, not noticing her dead body, then unlocked the door from the outside, opened the door and saw Reeva not breathing, but still alive, then sat with her for 5 minutes before calling for help but trying her password protected phone to call for help.

Oh, and that his defense team wrote up the affidavit that he signed that contained false information.

bbm Thanks to everyone for all the other things that I hadn't included, another one being that OP had admitted, almost under his breath, when he had said that RS was awake when she spoke to him, that she had either not or never gone to sleep that night at all.

 

[soozieqtips]

Watching today's last half, I wish Nel were tighter on questioning. But maybe it's a tactic. Maybe he is being confusing to confuse OP and get OP to say something without thinking of his answer first. I don't know. Seems like a lot of time wasted trying to explain what he was asking OP. Ugh. Just ask a straight clear question.

I think someone may have mentioned earlier that Nel's method of questioning could be a way to prevent OP from giving scripted answers to questions Roux might have told him to expect.

 

[Interested Bystander]

From the above link:
"There must exist an involuntary action arising from external source or reflex action"

Better make that four involuntary actions.

Yes. To me what he did was entirely voluntary but I can definitely see how the Defence might argue this point. I don't think anyone has seen this coming.

 

[BritsKate]

But his testimony is not complete. So what happens when/if Nel gets OP to admit to more lies? Will that not be seen as the State proving their case? Just three days on the stand, with only a little more than half a day of that being cross examination is enough?

If one peruses blogs by SA attorneys, one may surmise that culpable homicide was practically a done deal before the trial even began anyway. An acquittal is pretty much negligible simply because the statement he made all but actually admits culpable homicide. Proving it was never going to be much of a stretch, regardless of who was prosecuting the case. He'd practically have to prove temporary insanity for an acquittal.

JMO

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Am trying to figure out the explanation for the damaged bedrooms doors and whether or not he still maintains they were locked so he couldn't get out of the room.

Did he say today that he had to force them when he went upstairs for Reeva's bag ?
Thinking I must have misunderstood something because that was after he had taken Reeva downstairs ? So he couldn't possibly have had to force them .

 

[TorisMom003]

If one peruses blogs by SA attorneys, one may surmise that culpable homicide was practically a done deal before the trial even began anyway. An acquittal is pretty much negligible simply because the statement he made all but actually admits culpable homicide. Proving it was never going to be much of a stretch, regardless of who was prosecuting the case.


JMO

I would agree with that. But then I also believe that he will found guilty of the greater charge instead of the lesser one.

 

[james83]

Whispered to Reeva to get down and call the police but thought nothing of it when she said nothing back and didnt even move.
Cool story bro.

 

[TorisMom003]

Am trying to figure out the explanation for the damaged bedrooms doors and whether or not he still maintains they were locked so he couldn't get out of the room.

Did he say today that he had to force them when he went upstairs for Reeva's bag ?
Thinking I must have misunderstood something because that was after he had taken Reeva downstairs ? So he couldn't possibly have had to force them .

OP apparently got confused himself on that point. I believe it was said by OP that he damaged the bedroom doors on his way back into the bedroom after opening the front door. He needed both open in order to carry Reeva downstairs and to the car.

 

[04009margaret]

Wow, what's going on in USA today. Just got a news break that a car has ploughed into a daycare centre, 1 killed 11 injured

 

[Goforgold]

Reeva, she didn't bring in the fans & shut the patio door

He appeared to 'stumble' when giving evidence of asking Reeva to bring in the fans etc. Of course this proves nothing at all, but it stuck in my mind.

 

[TorisMom003]

excerpted quote:There is a definite torch and pitchfork mentality among some of the posters here.

And excuse every lie as some kind of misunderstanding, not a lie, whatever can be thought of at the time among some as well.

Personally I fully believe that he killed Reeva in cold blood so yes, I say lock his behind (and the rest of his body) up for 25 plus years. If that can be seen as torch and pitchfork mentality then so be it. I will gladly own it.

To bad OP can't own what he has done, not only to Reeva but all of the other things as well.

MOO

 

[emmavoberry]

There is a definite torch and pitchfork mentality among some of the posters here.

Yes. Conceded. It would be terribly unfair and ugly, our savoring OP's potential downfall, our gallows humor, if we did not believe he is guilty of deliberate murder and that he might get away with it. We want justice for Reeva and she is dead and we think he meant her to be be and is lying. So all we have is our smirking to offset the fear that another OJ injustice is coming our way. Now, admittedly, none of us can KNOW. We weren't there blah blah. Still, many of us, based on what we can know, see a mountain of circumstantial evidence that points to Oscar ruthlessly and mercilessly killing defenseless Reeva in the heat of a moment he now bold-facedly lies about. We are playing jury. We are holding our own mock trial. Best we can do to participate in getting justice for Reeva, vicariously.

 

[DebinGA]

The defense hasn't made a convincing argument yet that OP's life experiences caused his "sudden terror" syndrome. He said his mom slept with a gun under her pillow, but did we hear if she ever had to use it against intruders in his presence? His dad supposedly got carjacked, but OP didn't mention a confrontation or any injuries resulting. He claimed he stopped a couple of attacks on strangers, but unless there are police reports listing him as a witness, why believe him?

 

[Gbtaketwo]

OP apparently got confused himself on that point. I believe it was said by OP that he damaged the bedroom doors on his way back into the bedroom after opening the front door. He needed both open in order to carry Reeva downstairs and to the car.

Thanks
This is very confusing now because I thought he said yesterday that they were damaged because of humidity and that is why he put the cricket bat there .
Looks like I have a lot of re reading to do to be clear on this point