Trial Discussion Thread #25 - 14.04.14, Day 22

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
N: You shouted in the passage and then shouted and screamed in the bathroom. You then fired the shots after that.
Nel talks about the Stipps and their evidence.
P: Your evidence about Stipp?

N: They said they heard a women screaming before the shots.

N: What they heard must have been your voice. Every one of them on your version, they say the light was on.

N: Immediatedly after the shots they said the lights were on…Were they lying?

P: That’s correct, I think they did. They must be lying.

P: They must be lying. [EVERYONE IS LYING…but not O-scares-us] I can’t remember the lights being on.
 
Glad the judge stopped that line of questioning, as it was a bit ridiculous.
 
I really can't wait to see how Roux responds to all of this.
 
N: If you can scream like a woman, why haven't they heard it?

O: They have better things to listen to...I don't know....I'm not an attorney...

Judge steps in: 'If he hasn't got a view, he doesn't have one'.
 
OP did the screaming test at 'the place where I reside now'

O: Milady, I've never screamed like that before...I don't know what I sounded like that night..desperation...
 
Wow, this is amazing stuff today. I don't understand why Nel says he wants something on the record as isn't it all on the record? Any SA lawyers to explain this for me please.

I am sure Roux is abiding by the court rules of not discussing the testimony with his client. And particularly when it is in the international media spotlight. This is just one case for him and he is not going to jeopardise his career. When this is over he will just move on to the next case.

I do think that OP's family may have told him to just answer the questions. He does seem better at that today so maybe he finally has taken someone's advice. It's not helping him much though.
 
op friday : there were no screams. op : now there are screams.
 
N: The firing of the shots...I'm not rehashing it-

OP interrupts, goes back to screams and disputes about Stipp and Burger names. Nel acknowledges his eye for detail is right. Again.
 
Nel: Why did you stop firing? Why did you only fire four times?

O: I'm struggling to keep up.....I'm not sure...
 
If the defence have a recording of 'OP' screaming like a woman, how are we able to verify that it is actually him, if it does indeed sound like a woman? I don't believe he could ever sound like a woman, so if they do have such a recording, I don't believe it is him doing it. If they have a recording of him screaming, it will sound like a man screaming in a high pitched voice .. it won't sound like a woman, fact.
 
N: Why not fire at the window?.

O: Why would I fire at the window?

N: Someone might be on the ladder.

OP says he didn't fire any warning shot into the shower because the ricochet 'would have hit me'.

Then adds he never said that???
 
I think probably some of the problem here is Nel and Oscar are using different terminology to describe the same thing.
 
OP "knew" "they" had come up the ladder through the bathroom window so what did he expect "them" to do, throw "themselves" out?

And what if two intruders got stuck head first in the narrow toilet window on the scrum to throw themselves out would he have shot them in the arse or alerted security?
 
Glad the judge stopped that line of questioning, as it was a bit ridiculous.

Is Nel right about him changing his plea depending on how he describes his actions?

Judge asks to see counsel. I wonder if it has to do with this plea business.
 
OP has realised his mistake in saying he didn't fire into the shower cubicle as a warning shot (because it might ricochet back at him) and now he is back tracking ..
 
Hmmm
As soon as OP gets emotional and loud, Nel asks for break...
 
N: Did it just go off or did you pull the trigger!

O: I pulled the trigger.

Then OP makes an explanation on how he did not aim at any point, did not aim at danger, starts to break down and Nel says;

"Oh no, you're not trying to get emotional again. Milady, may we break for lunch?'

And judge wants to see counsel outside...ooohhh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
232
Guests online
1,749
Total visitors
1,981

Forum statistics

Threads
599,794
Messages
18,099,640
Members
230,925
Latest member
MADELINE123654
Back
Top