Hello all,
This is my first post on this site so thought Id introduce myself. I am a criminology graduate, currently on maternity leave and in that time this trial has gripped me! It was through searching for discussion on the trial that I came across this fabulous website.
Im just going to get straight in to it and the way yesterday's questioning ended really got me thinking. OP said yesterday that the fan was not blocking the exit on to the balcony and that the police had moved it there. He stated that the fan, in relation to the police photo was further towards where the bed sheet is on the floor and I'm sure he said it would have been sitting on top of the quilt, although in his version the quilt was not there. However to me, this contradicts OPs previous statement that the hind leg of the fans tripod stand was actually out on the balcony. From my perspective of the photograph if the fan was sitting where the quilt was on the floor, then the hind leg could not reach on to the balcony. However the fact that Nel did not pick up on this as soon as OP said it surprised me. Maybe its just my perspective.
I look forward to further discussing proceedings with you all.
Welcome!
Well as a recent grad, you've come to a case that is one-off for many reasons IMO.
What you cited could be an innocent slip up. Or as I've said many times, "this one runs deep."
Part of that is about possible corruption and collusion.
One part of this is that I've said that both sides' versions of the actual killing may not be what happened which IMO is much worse than they want the people to know.