Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[TorisMom003]

And that would be nothing more than speculation. I don't see how the state intends to prove any of that if it is their case.

And how, pray tell, is the defense going to be able to prove any of OP's story about what happened? That's right, I forgot, they don't have to....right? Know what the State is proving? That OP has lied. He has lied in his BAS. He has lied in his plea statement. He has lied on the stand. And Nel is not done yet, still has plenty to go over with OP. More time and questions to prove that OP is in fact a liar.

MOO

 

[minor4th]

As I tried badly to explain....the state evidence batman says he 'thought' the bats may have come after,and nel clarified by asking could marks have been made as intimidation. yes my lady. but bats first allows for the small crack that the bat was placed into to pry the door. It is state presentation showing diagonal mark on bat consistent with it being placed into this crack, my belief, post shooting that allows for bats first, shots second, hand pulling last. He bats,he looks, he shoots, he pries panels out.

I'm sorry but there really was no evidence at all about the cricket bat hitting the door before the gunshots.

If making a wild a$$ guess, Vermuelen chuckled and conceded that anything is possible (agreeing that it's possible someone could kick a door to intimidate the person behind the door).

As far as evidence, discounting WAG's, Vermeulen could not have been more clear that the gunshots had to have gone through the door before the cricket bat hit it.

To hold out hope for anything else is believing in something the state is not even suggesting.

 

[Gavel Rash]

BIB What are you hoping for? Five witnesses that did not hear what the other five witnesses heard? Or five witnesses that heard a slightly different thing than the previous five witnesses heard? Or five witnesses that heard only OP screaming? What wll cancel out what the five witnesses have given evidence to?

The witnesses spoken of yesterday, close neighbours, who statements say they did not hear screams, just crying, had windows that were facing away from the sound direction coming from bathroom, whereas the Stipps were opposite this window facing the sound.

 

[aa9511]

O: I don't remember where it was plugged in....what I can remember is I did bring two fans in that night.

This is just like Jodi and the 3rd gas can....she just could not hedge on that, even if in the end it nailed her in the butt.

Can someone please enlighten me why he was so insistent on 2 fans in the first place?? Was that just to "buy" him extra time to have Reeva go to the bathroom?

I guess I am confused why he had to lie about 2nd fan in the first place?

 

[MeeBee]

Question is: WHY did Roux let him take the stand??? Maybe OP stubborn and did not listen to advice of his counsel??

He had to. He's the only one who can testify about his state of mind that night and about what happened.

 

[ShadyLady]

Oscar Pistorius Trial: Tuesday 8 April 2014, Session 3 - YouTube

10:09:00.............so he did not hear Reeva get out of bed after they spoke..."came into the room" 10:11:00....from where??? the deck?, he keeps changing stories.

And with fans on he heard window in bathroom open?

 

[MeeBee]

BIB What are you hoping for? Five witnesses that did not hear what the other five witnesses heard? Or five witnesses that heard a slightly different thing than the previous five witnesses heard? Or five witnesses that heard only OP screaming? What wll cancel out what the five witnesses have given evidence to?

I'm not hoping for anything. But if there are other witnesses who heard something different than what the other witnesses heard, then I don't see how anyone can just brush it off or disregard it. Nothing will cancel it out. But it will certainly call into question what the witnesses think they heard.

 

[minor4th]

I don't believe we've heard the 'end' of it yet.

Maybe not but the state is finished with their evidence and that's what they came up with. The defense clearly agrees that the gunshots were before the cricket bat hitting the door.

No matter how terrible Nel makes OP look on the stand, if Nel doesn't have evidence to explain there was some other sound at 3:00 - 3:10 that the Stipps called gunshots ...then the State's version fails completely. I don't mean to be offensive or whatever, but it's really not enough to convict a person of murder just because one can imagine alternate scenarios. Possibilities are not proof - especially when the state has not even raised those possibilities

 

[MeeBee]

This is just like Jodi and the 3rd gas can....she just could not hedge on that, even if in the end it nailed her in the butt.

Can someone please enlighten me why he was so insistent on 2 fans in the first place?? Was that just to "buy" him extra time to have Reeva go to the bathroom?

I guess I am confused why he had to lie about 2nd fan in the first place?

Exactly. Why would he lie about that?

 

[crasshopper]

She would have knocked him over in the hallway.....because he never went onto balcony, she was in bed and he just spoke to her.

Even with a fan running I would think you would hear someone 5 feet away roll and get out of bed.




...insomnia

 

[wb180]

I'm not "thinking thinking thinking." The evidence is that one bang had to be the gunshots and one the cricket bat. According to Dr. Stipp, they sounded the same. There is a compelling demonstration on YT that really makes it very believable to me that they could sound exactly the same from a distance. One was only duller, but the sounds were identical. No discrepancies. It's perfectly logical.

All these other theories and yet the state has not even said what they think the two sets of bangs could have been. Fascinating.

Yep good work on arriving on a conclusion on the available evidence.<modsnip> but everyone is thinking on the available evidence and arriving at their own conclusions which is fine.

Just pointing out that OP has the truth but he isn't giving it out because he doesn't know what the consequences will be to his "life". Which is a pity but I guess makes for interesting discussions

 

[Gavel Rash]

I'm sorry but there really was no evidence at all about the cricket bat hitting the door before the gunshots.

If making a wild a$$ guess, Vermuelen chuckled and conceded that anything is possible (agreeing that it's possible someone could kick a door to intimidate the person behind the door).

As far as evidence, discounting WAG's, Vermeulen could not have been more clear that the gunshots had to have gone through the door before the cricket bat hit it.

To hold out hope for anything else is believing in something the state is not even suggesting.

How does the lack of bangs to break down door, after last 'bangs' that match ballistics and stopped the female screams, correlate? And why would Oscar, in minute detail, tell us how he pried the panel out with the bat? He only said he 'hit' the door and a panel came out. So who pried with the bat?

 

[ShadyLady]

...........and he even "adds" that little detail of covering the blue little light with Reeva's jeans......so were Reeva's jeans still there when police got there? Somehow I don't it.

 

[Trooper]

I was at the park the other day and there is a gun range almost right next to it. You can always hear guns going when you go to this park. As the guns were being fired, I made a mental note that they sounded almost exactly like the construction going near my house. It had a "thud" quality to it that could very much sound like wood on wood or something hard hitting something else hard.

When we hear loud bangs that sound like gunshots our minds go straight to gunshots. Even in instances when we know it's not, like a car backfire or fireworks, our minds still automatically think gunshots. I don't see how the witnesses can be so sure about what they heard and I don't know how anyone can take this certainty as hard, indisputable evidence. At least Dr. Stipp was willing to somewhat entertain the possibility that what he heard was the cricket bat. I mean, one shot had to be the cricket bat and one the gun shots and they both sounded exactly the same to him.

B by me..

I suppose that may apply in cultures where a cricket bat sound is an exotic and rare sound.. but these witnesses are fully and totally au fait with the sound of a cricket bat , and the sound of gunfire.. to transpose we into all is a long stretch in this context. I ,for example would never confuse the two.. I doubt very much if anyone in South Africa would either.. its a matter of what one knows, not what someone in an entirely different environment thinks may be so.

Dr Stipp showed no willingness to agree with Roux's theory.. he merely observed that Roux had made the suggestion that it may have been the sound of a cricket bat , acknowledged it politely as a suggestion and continued on with his affirmation of it being gunshot...

its very hard to read into that that Dr Stipp agreed to the proposal.. he didn't. he was quite firm about it.

 

[Forensics]

She would have knocked him over in the hallway.....because he never went onto balcony, she was in bed and he just spoke to her.

Sorry about that, I should have mentioned that I had extrapolated that she would have already been in the bathroom as per the defence's case....possibly having had to go to the toilet.

 

[aa9511]

Nels asks about 'the accident'.

N: Was the discharge accidental

O: The discharge was accidental. I thought an intruder was coming to take my life.

N: So you never intended to shoot the intruders?

O: I wasn't meaning to shoot anyone. I went to the bathrm to put myself between danger and Reeva...

bbm

Of course he has to subtly put the blame on the person who is dead. It was because of her, I had to protect her.

So basically he is blaming Reeva for why Reeva is dead. :facepalm:

He just DOES NOT GET IT.

What about what his ex testified to - that he got so scared one time he thought someone was in the laundry room or something?

Who did he have to "protect" then?

Why can't he just admit that he was scared of "burglars" for HIS OWN LIFE. Even if Reeva had not been there, he would have done the same thing to the "burglars." Because he would have feared for his own life.

BTW he is actually dismissing his own "self-defense" b/c he is saying he shot the intruders for Reeva, to protect Reeva - that means not for himself thus no self-defense! Hahahahhaha.

 

[TorisMom003]

Exactly. Why would he lie about that?

That would be a question for OP. We can't get into his mind to know why he lied about any of the things that he has lied about. Well, in a way we can. He lies because he is guilty and wants to walk out of court a free man, not walk into a prison for 25 years.

 

[Viper]

I'm not hoping for anything. But if there are other witnesses who heard something different than what the other witnesses heard, then I don't see how anyone can just brush it off or disregard it. Nothing will cancel it out. But it will certainly call into question what the witnesses think they heard.

But on the balance of things, OP needs more than just 5 witnesses that heard something else, he needs 5 witnesses that heard something completely different.

 

[minor4th]

This is just like Jodi and the 3rd gas can....she just could not hedge on that, even if in the end it nailed her in the butt.

Can someone please enlighten me why he was so insistent on 2 fans in the first place?? Was that just to "buy" him extra time to have Reeva go to the bathroom?

I guess I am confused why he had to lie about 2nd fan in the first place?

I suggest that he insists there were 2 fans because there were 2 fans and not because it is a lie and there must be some unspoken motive for it.

It doesn't make sense because of your assumption that it's false.

 

[Inspector Gidget]

IMO,these witness statements about hearing the shots mean very little.Oscar's testimony on the other hand say's it all.I don't want to be in jail for life so I am lying.Believe me I came into this with an open mind.He shot her out of jealousy and rage.