Trial Discussion Thread #23 - 14.04.11, Day 21

[shane13]

Oscar replied to Nel asking if Reeva screamed after the first shot? with no, no one heard a woman screaming. Very telling. His answers are so guarded and contrived.

Yes, I caught that.

He went from talking about "Reeva not screaming" to fascinatingly say IIRC-- "not any woman screaming."

It's almost again like he's thinking not of what happened, but of what the outside witnesses heard.

 

[jassy writer]

I think the majority of the police are great guys trying to do a really difficult job. Have never ever had experience of detectives doing any of the above. Traffic police are known to be susceptible to a bribe... my BF was stopped a few years ago for talking on his cellphone and as soon as the cop came to his car window, he took out his wallet and handed over his available cash - about five hundred rand.

Whereupon the cop told him, No, that's too much. Give me two hundred.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[shane13]

I think the majority of the police are great guys trying to do a really difficult job. Have never ever had experience of detectives doing any of the above. Traffic police are known to be susceptible to a bribe... my BF was stopped a few years ago for talking on his cellphone and as soon as the cop came to his car window, he took out his wallet and handed over his available cash - about five hundred rand.

Whereupon the cop told him, No, that's too much. Give me two hundred.

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

WOW. An honest, corrupt cop. Who knew they existed?

 

[BritsKate]

Do PT work from the premise innocent till proven guilty also, out of interest?

Or assume guilt and do and say whatever necessary, as well as twisting things, to determine guilt?

Have you followed many other trials? I'm not asking to be snarky but Nel really isn't doing anything unethical or untoward. It seems as though Oscar is being viewed as a victim of a malicious persecution. He is accused of breaking the law. It is not Nel's duty to entertain Oscar's version of events but rather to challenge them. Nel's position is to prove the State's assertion that Oscar committed intentional murder - he is, of course, bound by rules of criminal procedure, code of ethics, etc. If he were to violate any of these rules then there is a basis for further sanctions and reprimand. It can be argued - and indeed has - that the presumption of innocence is for the finder(s) of fact. The presumption of innocence requires the prosecutor prove his/her case beyond a reasonable doubt to convince the finder of fact. It also, obviously, ensures certain legal protections for the defendant.

 

[Bazinga]

The affidavit is meant to include what are perceived to be facts of the case, it''s not meant to be a detailed statement.
OP's has far more detail than many.

Why would you present more case information than required to someone as sharp as Nel, even if you are telling the truth?
It's the equivalent of giving the PT some rope to hang you with.
We've already seen how something as minutiae as a thin black cable under a speaker can be distorted by the PT.

If you are innocent you would/could give every piece of information, simply and truthfully. It would sound true and plausible. If Oscar committed only Culpable Homicide (I think most here agree he is guilty of that at least) by shooting an "intruder" who was unidentified and not an immediate threat then Oscar should have, after giving every detail and agreeing to plead guilty to that charge, also pleaded for consideration due to his disability and fear of intruders. He has chosen to zip up and put his chances on his defence.

 

[DebinGA]

Oscar.. I phoned someone to come and pick me up.

Nel. who did you phone??


Oscar..I cant remember..

Nel. you cannot say thisin court.. this is a traumatic event. you must remember.. it is improbable that you cannot recall. your counsel would have asked you.

Oscar.. I cant remember, I told counsel I couldn't remember. .

Nel. this is not true. you remember how you turned left, how you turned right, but you do not remember who you called?? you don't want anyone to check up.

Oscar. If Icould remember, I would gladly say.

Nel. on your version. you left your car there. how did you get your car back??

Oscar.. I don't remember someone must have taken me back to get it.

Nel. this is a serious incident. if someone shoots you on the highway , you could die. . and you didn't report it to the police??

Oscar.. I didn't trust the police to investigate.. what could they do??

Nel. and this is your family process. its your fathers view..

Oscar.. I don't follow the papers, I don't know what my father thinks..

Nel. you have no idea what your father said re guns in SA..

Oscar.. I grew up in a family where the police didn't sort out anything..

Anyone believe OP would leave his expensive car at a crowded restaurant after just being followed and shot at, and not remember today how he got his car back? No fear that it would likely be stolen? It's clear again today that his contempt for SA police isn't a new thing.

 

[Trooper]

Oscar.. I grew up in a family where the police didn't sort out anything

Oscar ..no reason for me to go to police stn to report it...then a whole list of crimes he didn't report them, including being afraid of police as he'd heard one criminal had connections there...

In Silverwoods, you were never a victim of crime?

O: That's correct Milady....except for the police stealing my watches, that's the only crime I've had at my house...


Oscar.... I had not trust in the police to do anything.

Nel. this is a serious incident. if someone shoots you on the highway , you could die. . and you didn't report it to the police??

Oscar.. I didn't trust the police to investigate.. what could they do??

This is from the morning session today..


and we are meant to believe that Oscar told Reeva to 'ring the police'..

pffft.

 

[molly333]

WOW. An honest, corrupt cop. Who knew they existed?

haha....That's the definition of an honest cop in S. Africa? They won't let you overbribe them? :floorlaugh:

 

[Gryffindor]

Have you followed many other trials? I'm not asking to be snarky but Nel really isn't doing anything unethical or untoward. It seems as though Oscar is being viewed as a victim of a malicious persecution. He is accused of breaking the law. It is not Nel's duty to entertain Oscar's version of events but rather to challenge them. Nel's position is to prove the State's assertion that Oscar committed intentional murder - he is, of course, bound by rules of criminal procedure, code of ethics, etc. If he were to violate any of these rules then there is a basis for further sanctions and reprimand. It can be argued - and indeed has - that the presumption of innocence is for the finder(s) of fact. The presumption of innocence requires the prosecutor prove his/her case beyond a reasonable doubt to convince the finder of fact. It also, obviously, ensures certain legal protections for the defendant.

No as they aren't televised in UK. And I work full time but on hols just now till Monday. This is the 1st I've watched. Thank you for your kind response.

 

[Patagonia]

My biggest problem with Oscar is that he wants to go free without accepting practically any responsibility, nor wrongdoing on his part. Except for the ''honest mistake'', basically a 'noble' one, since he is saying that everything that he did that night - he did to protect Reeva.

And the problem of shooting anyone (even the intruder), through the closed door, being also illegal in SA - well that is something he is also not guilty of because he didn't intend to shoot anyone, right? :facepalm: And this is why he will never admit to even this intend.

And this is what bugs me the most - that he dares to protest his innocence to such a degree. He is not guilty of anything by his own words!!

It is irritating and it is insulting. To Reeva, to her family and friends, and to everybody's common sense. And that makes him the opposite of a Mr. Nice Guy, he would like us all to see him as.

Like somebody here already said - if Oscar really was this nice and good guy, who just made a terrible mistake, then the very least he would WANT to do is to accept his responsibility. And he would certainly not behave, speak, or defend himself in this manner. And he would definitely not be so (almost obnoxiously) stubborn in his avoidance to admitting even the most obvious things. (Like, for example, that his finger must have been on the trigger in Tasha's restaurant!!)

But no, he doesn't do that. He would rather dispute even the elementary laws of physics, than to admit practically any significant wrongdoing of his. Because the only thing that he is really willing to admit to is accidentally making a terrible mistake. But that actually doesn't mean anything; it is not really an admission of any wrongdoing, it is solely admitting that something terrible had happened TO you. Not by you, isn't it? And that is how I see him looking at it, this whole time. And that is what I dislike the most.

 

[Gryffindor]

Perhaps that was why Nel stopped for the weekend, because OP accepted the pause version without question(bang....bang, bang, bang)?

State and defense both agree quick succession. No double tap nonsense.

 

[G.bng]

IMO, Nel closing in on definite win for Culpable Homicide right now, if nothing else...

IMO NEL already has culpable homicide from yesterday if not before, but the fact he today got OP to admit that he went towards the danger to confront the burglar, stating he wanted to stand up for himself, imo is well on the way to murder.

Just because OP won't admit in words he intended to shoot at the intruder, obfuscating around shooting at the door, shooting by accident, not knowing why he shot, etc., imo will not clear him, because even were OP to convince the judge that he genuinely believed he and Reeva were about to be attacked the fact he went towards the danger gun in hand and safety lock disengaged, is contrary to SA law because to claim self defence an attack has to be real and imminent not imaginary, and before resorting to shooting you are obliged to take all possible measures to avoid confrontation. So I think it looks pretty grim for OP because as Sky's SA lawyer for the day just noted, and as I've been saying since I came here, it is of no importance who OP shot at just that it was a human being and by admitting he went to confront the intruder which was not his last resort he has turned himself into the aggressor to boot.

That said, things don't always work the way they seem so it would not surprise me if the judge, when weighing OP's state of mind, his disability, etc. and the reasonableness of his response to a perceived intruder, finds an extenuation to reason a reduction from murder to CH, even though it looks, feels and smeels like murder by transferred intent a possible result already contemplated in the charging doc where it states: "An error in persona will not affect the intention to kill a human being". SA's constitution has one of the strictest interpretations in the world in respect of right to life, even that of a burglar, and OP's acts and testimony are, the way I see it, in full frontal collision with that right.

 

[shane13]

haha....That's the definition of an honest cop in S. Africa? They won't let you overbribe them? :floorlaugh:

Yes there is a strict code among honest dishonest cops there. Strict guidelines exist in their code/guideline books.

Over- or under-bribing is strictly verboten.

 

[Viper]

Hello all! I missed most of today, only caught the last hour. Please if you would tell me what was the new evidence from today. I'm seeing some in the past 5-6 pages, but it is mostly old arguments about what OP said long ago. What did OP say today? TIA

 

[Bazinga]

My biggest problem with Oscar is that he wants to go free without accepting practically any responsibility, nor wrongdoing on his part. Except for the ''honest mistake'', basically a 'noble' one, since he is saying that everything that he did that night - he did to protect Reeva.

And the problem of shooting anyone (even the intruder), through the closed door, being also illegal in SA - well that is something he is also not guilty of because he didn't intend to shoot anyone, right? :facepalm: And this is why he will never admit to even this intend.

And this is what bugs me the most - that he dares to protest his innocence to such a degree. He is not guilty of anything by his own words!!

It is irritating and it is insulting. To Reeva, to her family and friends, and to everybody's common sense. And that makes him the opposite of a Mr. Nice Guy, he would like us all to see him as.

Like somebody here already said - if Oscar really was this nice and good guy, who just made a terrible mistake, then the very least he would WANT to do is to accept his responsibility. And he would certainly not behave, speak, or defend himself in this manner. And he would definitely not be so (almost obnoxiously) stubborn in his avoidance to admitting even the most obvious things. (Like, for example, that his finger must have been on the trigger in Tasha's restaurant!!)

But no, he doesn't do that. He would rather dispute even the elementary laws of physics, than to admit practically any significant wrongdoing of his. Because the only thing that he is really willing to admit to is accidentally making a terrible mistake. But that actually doesn't mean anything; it is not really an admission of any wrongdoing, it is solely admitting that something terrible had happened TO you. Not by you, isn't it? And that is how I see him looking at it, this whole time. And that is what I dislike the most.

Agree completely.

 

[Mme Butterfly]

Reeva and Oscar were both attention seekers - a relationship which was vociferous and full of tension right from the beginning by all accounts . Oscar seems to have a problem with emotional control even in court for some reason. He displays emotional swings from one extreme to the other, as we are witnessing in the trial.

 

[soozieqtips]

11.56 Pistorius says the neighbours couldn't have said they heard a woman screaming during the shots,
because there weren't any screams.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...759350/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

Then he's forced to admit his ears were ringing so he wouldn't have heard if there were any screams. Love how he's now giving 'evidence' on behalf of the neighbours.

Hole. Dig. Deeper.

 

[steveml]

Her mother gave an interview sometime ago in the YOU magazine about the entire ordeal they went through. Reeva and June were very traumatized by what happened. I don't believe June will be taking the stand however, I don't understand why not as she should be a good source of info on the state of her daughters relationship!

I think the court system works the same in SA as most countries, therefore witnesses are not allowed to watch the trial before testifying.
If you have already seen someone in the courtroom, they are either not being called as a witness, or they have already testified.

:smile:

 

[turaj]

Just starting to watch Friday 4/11...only about 15 minutes into it and we have another item for Roux list...this Nell is so good...frankly he is more interesting to watch than JM (Jodi Arias) as he is so methodical. He seems to be reasoning right along with those in the gallery, watchers on TV and of course Milady. Roux is at his table madly trying to find the bail hearing and he knows Nell is right each time. I would imagine changing evidence is really bad in the eyes of a judge.

Oh boy he is tired again!!! Oh no sobbing. Wonder how long this will even go today. You can tell that OP has been told not to blame Roux anymore but he can't seem to help himself.

Nell has it "made to order evidence" ie "tailoring evidence" non stop...the judge sees it.

 

[Trooper]

Reeva and Oscar were both attention seekers - a relationship which was vociferous and full of tension right from the beginning by all accounts . Oscar seems to have a problem with emotional control even in court for some reason. He displays emotional swings from one extreme to the other, as we are witnessing in the trial.

I suppose getting murdered by your boyfriend is a way of gaining attention.. its a novel idea, but I take the point..


but isn't it self defeating?? and of course, one isn't around to enjoy the attention. . that seems to be the only flaw though.....................