Trial Discussion Thread #23 - 14.04.11, Day 21

[Patagonia]

I can't see her getting out on her side of the bed in the dark with all the fans and cords on the floor. The only thing that I could think is she would have gotten out on his side of the bed.

And, why was she up when he woke up? He sat up in bed and she said something to him immediately.

Yes, indeed!

My belief is that they never went to sleep that night.

And there was something else interesting in his testimony today, regarding this, what I wanted to mention: Oscar kept referring to the time of the shooting as - that evening. Now, that certainly doesn't prove anything, but in my experience, if you speak about events that happened in the middle of the night, you would only say that evening if you never went to sleep prior to that time! Only then you would perceive that time of the night as - ''evening''. But if you were woken up at 3 o'clock, however, then you would say - that night - when talking about events that were happening in the middle of the night, wouldn't you?!

 

[steveml]

exactly...he expects us to believe his logic for not calling police after supposedly, really being shot at! but then he expects us to believe the opposite logic applied this night and he wanted police called over a noise. So, a noise=grounds for calling police, but being shot at, doesn't? and then after the killing, he was back to the not calling the police logic. moo

You can only understand OP's logic if you put yourself in his position. That has already been overlooked in the above example, as one scenario has very different implications than the other.

i.e. in the scenario where he asked for the police to be called, he was indoors, in darkness, on his stumps and facing what he believed to be an intruder.

 

[Carol70]

You sleep with a machete next to your bed? I can see you are from SA, and (following this case) I came to understand how dangerous your country is, and the constant state of fear people apparently have to live in. And I really would like to take this into the consideration, as I do believe it is important to have in mind when thinking about this case.

But the degree of this constant fear, and consequent paranoia, is still a little had for me to comprehend. Is it really that dangerous and scary, in day to day life?

It's a bit difficult for me to estimate how much of it is just Oscar's exaggerating in order to build his defense, and how much of it is really present in ordinary people's lives, so to speak? Because I live in a (small) country with very little crime, certainly nothing comparable with having to sleep with a machete next to your bed! Where I live (Croatia; Patagonia is just a ''nickname''), something like that is totally unimaginable. We live basically without any fear of that kind whatsoever. Fear for one's safety is not at all present in a daily life. Our cars don't get hijacked, nor do our homes get robbed, on a daily bases. Especially the homes we live in (that are not empty). And there is practically no fear of that at all. And when there is a murder, then it will be all over the front pages of every newspaper in the country.
As far as the guns go, it is extremely difficult (almost impossible) to get the license for it over here, if you are a civilian. (You can get it only in special circumstances.) So there is really no way someone could claim he was living in fear of the intruders and use it as a defense in a case like this.
//Respectfully snipped

Yes I do and truly believe that I will have no problem using it if needs be. We have been victim to a home invasion before( non violent) but the thought that a stranger stood over me while I slept makes me see red, nevermind the fact that they were within 2m of the bed where my young daughter slept. That in itself kills me. What if..what if..what if...

Please note thou that this does not consume us...we get on with life, go to work, drive around, live a happy and peaceful life however, we are ALWAYS aware of our safety, follow the rules, make sure we are protected by every means available and do absolutely nothing to invite harm our way.

 

[liesbeth]

Roux said something the other day about those who the state never called only being witness to crying IIRC.

The interesting thing would be if these witnesses are all three Sotho speakers. (Sotho is one of the local languages in South Africa.) Because in Sotho the word crying also means "words shouted or screamed" or yelling.

http://www.sesotho.web.za/pronouns.htm

Another interesting thing about Sotho is the use of pronouns. A Sotho speaker often use "he" and "she" interchangeably because the Sotho pronoun "o" does not represent gender. Gender is inferred from the context of the speech.

According to Mr. Roux Oscar's neighbors said it was a "he" crying loudly. One person even heard the words "No, please." Mr. Roux concluded that it must have been Oscar crying and not Reeva's screaming that they had heard. But if these neighbors are Sotho (just looking at their surnames it is possible) then it could have been Reeva's screaming they described.

 

[G.bng]

S. Africa sounds like a nightmare place to live. It's not safe even inside a gated community, you have to bribe the cops, the cops will help themselves to what they want if you allow them in your house, you must do everything possible to preserve the life of an intruder bent on your destruction, you have to account for every bullet and the placement within your house of every gun and magazine. Time for every sane person to move out, if you ask me.

Yes, it could be the majority population might agree that it is about time for the small but much more privileged section of the population, the section that for so many years held and controlled all of the wealth and resources while keeping the majority under privileged population in chains and with just enough to eat, should move out if you asked them, more especially if they are not happy. But they don't move out so maybe it is not as bad as you want to make out or maybe the privilege is still so huge that it fully compensates.

On the other hand, I don't know where you are but I can tell you something about SA's here in the UK. My partner has two very severely learning disabled adult sons who require 24/7 care. The local authority provides a care package of 24/7 live in care for them. Carers comes for a week or so at a time and many are South Africans, blacks of course, working, or should I say slaving, far from home trying to better the lives or their children they have had to leave behind for a time to be able to earn a living. And more dedicated, responsible, patient, caring, honest, clean, attentive and polite is hard to find. Not even British carers the agency has sometimes sent compare favourably with them.

 

[fox1lady]

Obviously your post was an "accident."

Clearly each time your fingers hovered over a key it accidentally triggered that letter's key to be struck somehow.

But that's exactly what the judge is going to have to do. She is going to decide whether a reasonable person would have walked down that passage way, whether a reasonable person would have fired 4 bullets into a door etc so he will be being judged by his testimony and what his thought process was during the event.

A reasonable person with legs much less one without!

 

[kittychi]

Think its safe to say that he killed her, RS specifically, and it was accidentally as he is saying (as I would like to believe it was as well), that he will be distraught about this entire incident for the remainder of his life.

Also why do most people think he is being self-centered on the stand now when all he is doing is giving HIS version of what happened. There is going to be a lot of 'I' sentences, no point in speaking for someone else.

Him being distraught while being under cross is gonna happen.

IMO the accident was that he went too far in his angry rage and took it to a level he probably didn't even think about. That is the accident.

Him acting self-centered on the stand is only one part of what we have seen of him since the shooting. Add to this all of his stop-gap attempts to control the media by hiring a PR agency to mitigate damage to his brand, the flowers sent to the Steenkamps from his office, he never apologized to them until on the stand the other day when he said he could smell Reeva's blood. He acted arrogant when police stopped him, he wouldn't take responsibility for shooting the gun in the restaurant. This is just off the top of my head, but when you put his behavior on the stand in context with everything else we have seen of him, it is more of the same. It seems to be pretty much who he is.

 

[steveml]

But this would not have been the first time OP thought he was facing an intruder. Samantha Taylor testified about one incident. OP tweeted about going code red on a washing machine. Rens testified that OP was trained to "clear the house" of intruders.

He's never fired a gun in defence as far as I'm aware. And as far as bravery goes, a lot of it seems to be more ego than anything else.
I've not heard of any incident where he's even been in a brawl of any kind (other than on the receiving end).

 

[kittychi]

He's never fired a gun in defence as far as I'm aware. And as far as bravery goes, a lot of it seems to be more ego than anything else.
I've not heard of any incident where he's even been in a brawl of any kind (other than on the receiving end).

To me this is kind of the point...he didn't shoot the washing machine, he didn't shoot when he and Sam discussed a noise at night. Why did he shoot this time?

 

[Patagonia]

Oscar had made no statement to police before the bail hearing - why not on if he was innocent and this was an accident? The police and prosecutor were left to make an initial guess and build on that with evidence as the only first hand witness was not talking.

There are SO many why's in his story!

If I was in his shoes, and had just accidentally killed the person I loved, I wouldn't be able to care less about my reputation, lawyers, defense, or evidence against me.

And if I wouldn't, upon realizing what I did, immediately shoot and kill myself too, than I am sure I would speak openly and without hesitation to the police, and definitely at least offer to take the lie detector test (despite it being inadmissible in court), just in order to give some, however small, consolation to Reeva's parents. Especially since they have repeatedly spoke about needing to know the truth about what happened.

Nah, however I look at this, and in the light of his behavior during it all, I just can't root for Oscar.

 

[kaos]

He's never fired a gun in defence as far as I'm aware. And as far as bravery goes, a lot of it seems to be more ego than anything else.
I've not heard of any incident where he's even been in a brawl of any kind (other than on the receiving end).

Did the woman who he kicked out of his house testify? I missed the start of the trial so don't know about her.

Curious that OP mentioned on the stand today too that he'd packed Samantha Taylor's bag but don't know if that was in the context of an argument or not.

 

[liesbeth]

You can only understand OP's logic if you put yourself in his position. That has already been overlooked in the above example, as one scenario has very different implications than the other.

i.e. in the scenario where he asked for the police to be called, he was indoors, in darkness, on his stumps and facing what he believed to be an intruder.

BBM. I do not understand. Why was he on his way to the bathroom in darkness, on his stumps (he said his dogs could knock him over when he was on his stumps) preparing to face the intruder/s? Remember he was trained to 'clear the house', he'd cleared house before so why panic? And why not just put on his legs and get out?

Anyway. For me the question is not how he knew it was intruders but rather how he knew it wasn't Reeva. Any reasonable man in his position would have assumed it was Reeva.

 

[soozieqtips]

To me this is kind of the point...he didn't shoot the washing machine, he didn't shoot when he and Sam discussed a noise at night. Why did he shoot this time?

BBM - I think Nel is slowly and methodically uncovering exactly why OP shot that night, and it has nothing to do with intruders - no matter how many times OP repeats: "I didn't think" (while also claiming to have had 'many' thoughts). Nel's already proved there was a reasoned thought process going on throughout. Get the gun, whisper to Reeva, walk fast, shout at intruder, shout to Reeva to call police (with added word of 'security' today) walk slow, assess situation in bathroom, check window - all thought processes that required, um, thought. So for him to say he didn't have time to think is rubbish. I think he absolutely hates Nel with a vengeance for casting so many shadows on his version that it must be blacker for him now than it was in his bedroom that night!

 

[Patagonia]

yep, my husband has been firmly entrenched in the guilty camp and its been great for debates and arguments but yesterday, he conceded that maybe, just maybe is was just a terrible accident.

It could change thou!

Interesting, because in my case, it's been completely the opposite. In the beginning, I was really willing to give him the benefit of a doubt, and I wasn't sure he was lying (like many people around me were). But as the trial progressed, I am less and less convinced that there is even a chance that he is not lying.

The way he presents himself, and the way he is so stubbornly unwilling to admit to practically any wrongdoing on his part, and especially his (imo) obvious lying about that incident on the highway, as well as the ''magical'' self-firing of the gun at Tasha's, I no longer believe anything he says. And I like him less and less after each day of his testifying.

 

[liesbeth]

He's never fired a gun in defence as far as I'm aware. And as far as bravery goes, a lot of it seems to be more ego than anything else.
I've not heard of any incident where he's even been in a brawl of any kind (other than on the receiving end).

Maybe so. Re the brawl...he did testify about having black eyes and a bump on his head at some time. But he explained that he didn't know who hit him because they took him from behind.

 

[DebinGA]

I don't think so. We're talking about what is on his mind during his testimony. I don't think you can judge a person or diagnose him just by his testimony in court when defending a murder charge

erome Starkey @jeromestarkey · 12h ago
Overcome with emotion, or racking his brains for what to say? #Pistorius sat back in his chair & said zip, as Nel demanded if Reeva screamed

Kudos for Jerome Starkey, who at least showed some skepticism about OP's tear break.

 

[Patagonia]

The person who fires a gun at a disarmed person, receiving no fire in return or further threat, does not need to scream. True, in OP"s case, he can not see whether or not his threat is armed. However, after shooting four times, OP hears no further movement, receives no verbal threat.

I can think of only two conditions to occasion screaming post-shooting: if one realized one shot the wrong person or if one's gun accidentally went off, then screaming in horror at one's mistake makes sense.

Also, if one started one's scream out of fear of the impending threat against oneself and then reflexively continued to scream before one could ascertain that one had vanquished the threat, screaming makes sense.

None of the above would apply to that moment in which OP claims he screamed. It seems that he, once again, has tailored his account to fit his story. Screams were heard, most likely Reeva's, so he contends, conveniently, that he screamed after shooting through the bathroom door four times, paving the way for the judge to consider that witnesses hearing a woman's screams heard a man's, not Reeva's then, but his.

And today he ''admitted'' that even if she screamed after the first shot, he wouldn't be able to hear her because his ears were ringing from the shot he just fired.

Just in case the judge was unable to accept that he ''screams like a woman'' In that case judge can consider it was indeed Reeva screaming, but Oscar couldn't hear her because his ears were ringing.

I would laugh if it wasn't so tragic.

 

[Val1]

I'd love to know the timeline of when Roux (or whomever was his initial lawyer if not Roux) received the witness statements. We know that Roux didn't submit his.. er Oscar's bail statement until days later. We also know other facts were conveniently filled in... er disclosed in the plea. And they fit the witness statements. Quite convenient. After hours of "pouring over" photos and witness statements.

It appears the defense team had at least some of the witness statements before the bail hearing.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-bail-hearing-day-3-20130221

14:12 - Roux: the witness statement does not fit in with the applicant's version.

 

[Carmelita]

A reasonable person with legs much less one without!

I have not caught up with this thread yet and I am reading backwards.

Just my 2 cents but I bet that this is going to be part of the judges ruling, that OP has a lower expectation of reasonableness due to the "unusual incapacity" which he was under due to not having his prosthetic blades on.

 

[HauntsForHope]

It's being covered on NG now..