Was it the police who rendered the weapon safe?
yes , indeedy, and very carefully, too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Was it the police who rendered the weapon safe?
You sure ST that's with a pistol. Isn't it a sub-machine gun that once you press the trigger if you keep it pressed it just keeps firing? From all the videos I watched and what I have read with an automatic pistol, or maybe it's called a semi-automatic pistol, you still have to press the trigger again and again if you want it to fire more than once, the only difference is that it automatically loads a bullet in the chamber after each shot so there is no gap, and that's how you can do double-taps... but you still have to press the trigger for each shot.
Do you know anybody who uses plastic bags to stop bleeding? ANYTHING would be better than plastic bags to stop bleeding.
sorry I still trying to figure out how to quote from articles so that the text is in a grey box.
yes , indeedy, and very carefully, too.
In today's testimony OP said something along the lines of "I always make sure my weapon is safe before I hand it over to somebody, I've been trained to do that".
If he's the same guy who went through the licensing rules then it was 11th day.
However horrible it sounds plastic bags are the best diy kit to try to stop bleeding. The are used by police and paramedics in emergencies when nothing purposely meant is available.
In today's testimony OP said something along the lines of "I always make sure my weapon is safe before I hand it over to somebody, I've been trained to do that".
You can have a Glock/pistol that is fully automatic (i.e. hold onto trigger and the bullets come out).
But I'll say again, I don't think there's any way for the state to get around the evidence that the gunshots were at 3:00- 3:10, at which time Reeva died and could not have been the one screaming, and the cricket bat hit the door at 3:17. That's hard evidence that cannot and has not been explained by the state. No one who believes Oscar is guilty will even come close to addressing this - choosing instead to dismiss this and conclude that the witnesses who heard "a woman" screaming were all correct, despite the impossibility.
The gun was in the bathroom on the rug in front of the shower door. The gun was loaded, cocked and ready to fire again. OP may not be lying in that instance because he didn't hand it over to anyone when police arrived that morning.
ETA: Although Mr. Stander did lie to Dr. Stipp when he said that the weapon was secure, that he had it.
Do you think his 'dream team' of lawyers are not on the ball? Or he's shooting his mouth off a bit too much on the stand? I'm starting to suspect a bit of both!
Trip 4. this one is STILL the mystery trip. no explanation for this one yet.. This is the one Stipp thought Oscar may be on his way to off himself with the missing gun.. he asks Standar is the gun secured?? Standar says yes. It wasn't, its still upstairs in the bathroom, loaded, ready to fire . Clarice faffing around talking talking, dabbing.
The gun was in the bathroom on the rug in front of the shower door. The gun was loaded, cocked and ready to fire again. OP may not be lying in that instance because he didn't hand it over to anyone when police arrived that morning.
ETA: Although Mr. Stander did lie to Dr. Stipp when he said that the weapon was secure, that he had it.
I'm not brushing off evidence and it gets kind of personal when you respond to a post with "this is absolute nonsense."
Stipp's heard gunshots at 3:00 ...and against at 3:17.
The state's case is that the gunshots were at 3:17 but that's refuted by their own witnesses who heard gunshots around 3:00 and by their forensic experts who said the gunshots had to have happened before the cricket bat hitting the door.
Gunshots at 3:00 - heard by Dr Stipp and Mrs Stipp
Screaming after the gunshots - heard by Stipps, Burger, Johnson - couldnt have been Reeva since she died after being shot at 3:00.
Cricket bat hitting the door at 3:17 - heard by Dr Stipp, Mrs. Stipp, Merwe, Burger and Johnson, all of whom thought these were also gunshots because they sound the same.
Loud crying after 3:17 - heard by Merwe and the Stipps - this was Oscar as well.
No matter how often and how stridently this is dismissed or ignored or avoided - that's the evidence. And it means that the "woman" screaming after the gunshots could not have been Reeva. What kind of barrier is there that this simple information cannot penetrate awareness?
You are still on the "bat before gunshot sounds gunshot before bat sounds page?" There has been so much evidence since that defense argument. Evidence that cancels out and decides that argument. IMHO