Trial Discussion Thread #25 - 14.04.14, Day 22

[Rumpole]

WHY???
The manner of his questioning. He is repeatedly saying things are impossible when in my opinion they are not impossible. One example, he was trying to trip OP up about the duvet. Was the duvet on the bed when he returned to the bedroom or not. Now lets be honest here, if someone has just shot 4 bullets through a door possibly killing someone, whether that shooting was premeditated, done is self defence or in a jealous rage, is it impossible that they would notice whether or not a duvet was on a bed or not? I think even the judge is fed up with him now. Please try to excuse my impatience. I don't know if OP is guilty of premeditated murder or not, but Nel's manner of questioning is damaging OP's chance of a fair trial. Fortunately it is not a jury trial and the judge and her assessors will ensure that a fair trial ensues. I know I will be shot down in flames for my view. So be it.

I have already posted... we may be stuck with Nel's nasty style, but I imagine he does have to be accurate in what he puts to the witness. He is misrepresenting what his own witnesses testified to at times. I don't understand why Roux is not objecting more. I accept that Roux could be just letting Nel make a fool of himself for now,... giving him rope to hang himself... but there is too much of it. Too much being heard by the judge before Roux gets a chance to correct all the false assertions made by Nel.

 

[weeeva]

I've found that to be one of the most puzzling bits about his testimony. He's rehearsed it lord knows how many times with his DT and nobody has pointed out to him that if he says "I had no time to think" then he should continue with that line until Nel dropped it. If he really didn't have time to think then there's no other response needed than that but he ends up adding various bits in to fit in with what he's heard already.

OP can't win. If he was to remember every last detail as it happened, Nel would accuse him of rehearsing everything and draw the finger of suspicion at him for having his story too perfect. He would say it is not possible to remember every detail.
And then when OP says he can't remember some of the details Nel would say it was not possible to forget this or that, or not probable. I did not hear OP saying anything at all today not one single thing that was impossible or improbable.

 

[TipDog]

Yes, I agree with this! There is no evidence this was an abusive relationship (physically abusive, as in domestic VIOLENCE").

This morning before trial started I was listening to legal commentary and an interview with a DV expert and her thoughts on this relationship. The interviewer clearly wanted the DV expert to say that there were signs of abuse and that this was an abusive relationship, but she did NOT. Instead she said that it's important to be careful not to label Oscar as an abuser. She further said that Reeva herself says that 90% of the time OP makes her happy and 10% of the time she is uncomfortable and scared of his reaction. Her explanation was that this was a feeling that Reeva developed over time and it indicates that this was not a healthy relationship where both people feel accepted or loved unconditionally, but it's not an indication of an abusive relationship. With that I completely agree.

I, too, believe this barely four-month-old relationship hadn't become abusive - at least not in the manner of what many DV type relationships entail.

Instead, I think it is far, far more sinister and that is where the muck is jamming the dam. Oscar on the stand is what all of us should be focusing on. Forget the theories, forget whether you like the DT or PT or the judge even. Watch and listen to that young man.

He's 27 years old which is still very, very young. He doesn't seem very intelligent (not meaning to be cruel, just an observation) and he definitely does not take responsibility for his actions.

Looking at the events in his life leading up to Feb 14 last year, he has been on a short fuse for a long time. Tragically for Reeva, she was the match. I have no proof of this, these are just my musings. But for me, that would make perfect sense why he is both tremendously remorseful and so freaking defiant when it comes to refusing the truth of what he's done (shooting at the restaurant, shooting out the roof of his car, threatening to break someone's legs...etc.). It's him. All him.

I'm suggesting that there is no reason. There was no huge gigantic fight that went on for hours and hours. There was likely both sex and arguing that was fairly normal up until something lit his match and she didn't do as he asked her to do (get the *advertiser censored** out of my house). So, in a fit of rage, he grabbed his gun and shot her. It happens (really, it does). And it has nothing to do with the victim (to be very clear, I'm not blaming Reeva in the least; she just had the dreadful luck of meeting OP).

I don't think we'll ever know exactly what happened. But Nel, whether you dig him or despise him, is doing an outstanding job of discrediting OP. Like I mentioned before, if OP were telling the truth, the facts would support him. The facts don't, that I can tell (unless he keeps changing his version to fit his version....), and I'm hoping it won't matter if the PT somehow draws it out of him. I'm hoping the judge will see the same sinister I think a lot of us are seeing and lock him away at least long enough for his testosterone levels to decrease and his fuse to go out.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I wouldn't want to imagine OP at home as a partner:

Stressed with obligations and sport, self-centered, coarse, jealous - and additionally so opinionated, that every conversation with him would be a disaster after 5 minutes, always his triumph at the end. And that all with loudly shouting/screaming or even crying/howling to be the little baby, which needs consolation.
Unimaginable, awful, hazardous!!!!!!

His charm (if he wants to have), good-looking and well-speaking (interview) I want to forget now and forever.

I'm mad as hell, I have to read his testimony with all his lies, double-lies and accusations and also to read about vomiting, crying, whining, sobbing. What an unpleasant man.


THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR MANY GREAT POSTS ALL THE TIME!!!


.

 

[TrueDetective]

1st BIB

Agreed, there are some wild theories floating around and some that absolutely seem unrealistic. But given that OP's version isn't realistic unless you wish to twist your brain into hocus pocus mode, it is pretty reasonable that the imagination would run wild with this one. Something happened that night that led to up to the events that unfolded in the murder of a defenseless woman. At this point, IMO, none of us do nor will we ever know what those events were. Given that assumption, it is reasonable that theories get explored, as ludicrous as they may seem.

Bottom line though - a young woman is dead after been shot in a horrific fashion behind a closed door. She knew the truth but, so tragically, isn't here to tell the court. I might would believe somehow, someway, OP got up and shot her by accident if he'd give a straight answer instead of the circus we're witnessing currently. He also might have garnered more respect if he were not trying to get away with and relieved of any responsibility for all charges against him.


2nd BIB

1. No evidence of these two being in love at the time of her death. Her message to him 1.5 weeks prior said she was the girl who fell in love with him - past tense. She also wondered if they couldn't give each other what they need. Given that RS seemed like the kind of woman who mostly spread lovey dovey written messages, that one long diatribe to OP about his behavior (and her being scared of him at times) cannot simply be shrugged off as normal relationship interaction. She made a point in that, a valid one and one that I think was an omen to the morning she died.

2. OP said originally that they were deeply in love but when breaking down on the stand, he said words to the effect of "someone I cared for" - another inconsistency. Nothing points to them being deeply in love or her being loved.

3. No plans to spend VD together. No gift for RS. I find it implausible that while being deeply in love, either of these facts would be present, especially for a couple in their 20s.

But these are just my thoughts...

A classy and very well-balanced response
Solid thoughts...

 

[BritsKate]

I have a different interpretation. IMO he is saying he never intended to shoot anyone b/c it takes all of the blame off of him. He doesn't even want to admit to shooting the intruder. But he has to, b/c obviously he shot the gun and even shot and killed someone. There is no way he can get out of it. If you put a dot on Reeva's body as the event, and then you draw a square around the event, Oscar is placing himself on the edge of that square somewhere. He is placing himself as far away from the dot, the event, as he possibly can.

This is not about "different terminology." This is about Oscar's refusal to take responsibility for anything whatsover.

IMO his testimony regardin the restaurant shooting was very, very bad for him. It showed me that he will in no way take responsibility for anything. It showed me that he will try to deny something happening even when there is evidence clearly against his version.

I have NO DOUBT that if someone else were in the room with Reeva and Oscar that night, that Oscar would put the complete and entire blame on that other person. He would say, the other person shot the gun. The other person killed Reeva. It would be Oscar's word vs. the other guy's word, just like the restaurant incident. He would put compete and entire blame on the other person.

JMO.

That's my take too - he is so twisted up in saying 'I never intended to shoot anyone', presumably to escape the murder charge which requires intent, that he doesn't realize he needs some intent to do something in order for it to be putative self-defence.

But his insistence that he formed no intent to shoot may be digging him into a bigger hole, according to legal experts. They say in doing so, he appears to have abandoned his defense that he shot in self-defense. Instead he seems to be claiming that the action of shooting was involuntary and accidental.
For the self-defense argument to apply under South African law, Pistorius would have intended to shoot the intruder, and his task in court would have been to show his fear for his life was reasonable.


http://www.latimes.com/world/worldn...efense-20140414,0,6171933.story#ixzz2ytFQQ4kH

 

[fox1lady]

Well, in a sense I agree with his refusal to take responsibility or that it sounds like that, but I think the reason he is doing this is to avoid the "hot" words - like "intent" and "deliberate" - but I think he is describing the same thing.

I do not think Oscar is blaming the shooting on anyone. He clearly said today that it is his fault.

How can his story change though as soon as he thinks he's perjuring himself? First his gun "accidentally discharged", then he "fired accidentally whilst in fear whilst he aimed the gun at the door because he thought there were intruders coming out to attack him", then he changes back to "I can't remember firing, I didn't have time to think"

 

[weeeva]

Don't know if it's OP's voice, Nel's voice or what's seem to be so much repetition but I am ready to move on as quickly as possible with OP's version and get to seeing what else the defense council has.

Also personality surprised that OP seems to have so many answers instead of more "I don't knows" To me if OP really thought he was in danger that night he wouldn't be able to remember so many details.

This is just what I was pointing out in my last post. Some people feel he should have more "don't knows", and others think he should remember every single detail. Nothing is obvious in this case. There is too much room for doubt.

 

[TrueDetective]

I need to correct myself on something I said yesterday about culpable homicide and putative self defense. Having listened to a couple of SA legal experts this morning, apparently OP could actually be acquitted even if he erroneously shot and killed Reeva believing he was lawfully shooting in self defense.

Once it is decided that it's reasonably possibly true that he genuinely believed there was an armed intruder in the bathroom/toilet, then that takes away the intent necessary for murder (intent). But then the inquiry is whether, given that belief, he acted reasonably - if he acted reasonably, then he is acquitted. If he did not act reasonably, then he is negligent and has committed culpable homicide.

How can he possibly have acted reasonably based on the following 3 things - the entirely false perception of an unseen and unspoken intruder sliding open a bathroom window, then closing a toilet door and finally "wood moving" - a fear of that door maybe reopening. That's all folks... No glass breaking, no alarms going off, no dogs barking, no shouting, no threats, no confrontation.

Even if those three things happened ( which they did not ) EVEN IN Oscar's own version - those things sound like his girlfriend going to the toilet!! There is NO sufficient threat or evidence of any threat to warrant his fear and his reckless actions and no decent judge will acquit him based on so so little.

 

[minor4th]

I, too, believe this barely four-month-old relationship hadn't become abusive - at least not in the manner of what many DV type relationships entail.

Instead, I think it is far, far more sinister and that is where the muck is jamming the dam. Oscar on the stand is what all of us should be focusing on. Forget the theories, forget whether you like the DT or PT or the judge even. Watch and listen to that young man.

He's 27 years old which is still very, very young. He doesn't seem very intelligent (not meaning to be cruel, just an observation) and he definitely does not take responsibility for his actions.

Looking at the events in his life leading up to Feb 14 last year, he has been on a short fuse for a long time. Tragically for Reeva, she was the match. I have no proof of this, these are just my musings. But for me, that would make perfect sense why he is both tremendously remorseful and so freaking defiant when it comes to refusing the truth of what he's done (shooting at the restaurant, shooting out the roof of his car, threatening to break someone's legs...etc.). It's him. All him.

I'm suggesting that there is no reason. There was no huge gigantic fight that went on for hours and hours. There was likely both sex and arguing that was fairly normal up until something lit his match and she didn't do as he asked her to do (get the *advertiser censored** out of my house). So, in a fit of rage, he grabbed his gun and shot her. It happens (really, it does). And it has nothing to do with the victim (to be very clear, I'm not blaming Reeva in the least; she just had the dreadful luck of meeting OP).

I don't think we'll ever know exactly what happened. But Nel, whether you dig him or despise him, is doing an outstanding job of discrediting OP. Like I mentioned before, if OP were telling the truth, the facts would support him. The facts don't, that I can tell (unless he keeps changing his version to fit his version....), and I'm hoping it won't matter if the PT somehow draws it out of him. I'm hoping the judge will see the same sinister I think a lot of us are seeing and lock him away at least long enough for his testosterone levels to decrease and his fuse to go out.

Read my alternative theory # 2 in the post linked below. I think it describes pretty much what you are theorizing

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Theory Thread - What happened at Pistorius' house on the night of Feb. 13, 2013?

 

[minor4th]

How can he possibly have acted reasonably based on the following 3 things - the entirely false perception of an unseen and unspoken intruder sliding open a bathroom window, then closing a toilet door and finally "wood moving" - a fear of that door maybe reopening. That's all folks... No glass breaking, no alarms going off, no dogs barking, no shouting, no threats, no confrontation.

Even if those three things happened ( which they did not ) EVEN IN Oscar's own version - those things sound like his girlfriend going to the toilet!! There is NO sufficient threat or evidence of any threat to warrant his fear and his reckless actions and no decent judge will acquit him based on so so little.

I'm not saying he acted reasonably.

 

[fox1lady]

I'm confused by what Reeva was supposed to call the police and say. Oscar at no time mentioned a noise to her, for all he knew she didn't have a clue what he was getting worked up about, he didn't tell her what she was supposed to say to the police, just that she should call them (according to his version). Have any of the lawyers asked this question?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

The problem is, without some history of violence or threats, you can't make a rational leap to the conclusion that on that night he lost his temper and couldn't control himself so reached for his gun and killed Reeva. There's no context for that.

I don't understand at all, why not taken into account, that the police were called several times for DV to his home, as last on the same evening 13.2.13 . That can't be unimportant!

 

[minor4th]

I don't understand at all, why not taken into account, that the police were called several times for DV to his home, as last on the same evening 13.2.13 . That can't be unimportant!

None of that is true though.

 

[strydohj]

It is a pity they have not requested records from the security company as to when the alarm system was activated and deactivated. Pretty standard feature for an SA alarm system linked to a control centre.

 

[DebinGA]

The problem is, without some history of violence or threats, you can't make a rational leap to the conclusion that on that night he lost his temper and couldn't control himself so reached for his gun and killed Reeva. There's no context for that.

OP's history includes documented instances of his screaming at women. One included OP physically removing two women from his house, slamming the door in one's face and punching the door so hard broken pieces flew out an injured the woman's leg. OP dropped his lawsuit against that woman recently and is in negotiations re damages due her. Asked how he liked living with a superstar, his 2012 Olympic roommate replied, "I moved out. Oscar was always on the phone yelling at people." Anecdotes abound re OP's bad behavior, even though the press are only now printing them.

 

[G.bng]

For sure Deb, and prosthetics have come a long way since Douglas Bader! OP will be able to bend and flex his knees etc. but may still do things differently than a non amputee. When Mangena gave evidence that the shots in the door from someone of OP's height may have been an uncomfortable position, he was viewing it from the position of a non amputee... such a position might be preferable for OP. Same with the cricket bat strikes.

OP is missing from mid calf down. He has both knees and flexes them and that is not due to his prosthetics but because he has knees.

 

[DebinGA]

I'm not saying he acted reasonably.

His best chance at seeming reasonable was producing a documented history of being a crime victim multiple times, but he flunked that test big time.

 

[BritsKate]

Yes, I agree with this! There is no evidence this was an abusive relationship (physically abusive, as in domestic VIOLENCE").

This morning before trial started I was listening to legal commentary and an interview with a DV expert and her thoughts on this relationship. The interviewer clearly wanted the DV expert to say that there were signs of abuse and that this was an abusive relationship, but she did NOT. Instead she said that it's important to be careful not to label Oscar as an abuser. She further said that Reeva herself says that 90% of the time OP makes her happy and 10% of the time she is uncomfortable and scared of his reaction. Her explanation was that this was a feeling that Reeva developed over time and it indicates that this was not a healthy relationship where both people feel accepted or loved unconditionally, but it's not an indication of an abusive relationship. With that I completely agree.

If an abusive relationship were limited to physical violence, I might agree. Domestic violence, or rather, intimate partner violence as its now called extends far beyond physical abuse. And they changed it to IPV to encompass dating, same-sex, teen and other relationships that don't confine themselves to classic DV. Sadly, in some states, a victim is still unable to obtain a restraining order unless they are living with their abuser.

I don't know if Oscar was an abuser but I think there's a lot to suggest a mentality very common to someone who is. I do most definitely think he's guilty of being abusive towards her - I don't think anyone could really dispute that.

I really do believe if someone is scared of their partner, or their partner's reaction, even 10% of the time it's likely indicative that there's something well and truly wrong.

JMO and FWIW

Steenkamp’s words—”I just want to love and be loved”—are heartbreaking. That’s usually what is going on with someone who is being manipulated by an abuser. They just don’t know that the person they want to love them has another agenda entirely.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/...pistorius-before-her-death-is-heart-breaking/

 

[Carmelita]

How can his story change though as soon as he thinks he's perjuring himself? First his gun "accidentally discharged", then he "fired accidentally whilst in fear whilst he aimed the gun at the door because he thought there were intruders coming out to attack him", then he changes back to "I can't remember firing, I didn't have time to think"

IMO we don’t know Oscars thought process. He may not be thinking that he is perjuring himself. He may be honestly bewildered that he is believed to be capable of murdering Reeva in cold blood and his every response comes through that lens of incredulousness.

He is not very bright, he himself said in an interview that predates the death of Reeva that one of the reasons he became involved in sports was that he was not very good with academics. He is an unsophisticated, adrenaline filled 27 year old man. He was also spoiled, wealthy, revered, very image conscious, he liked the adulations that his fame and wealth brought him, and he was considered not only a hero for the disabled but also nation’s hero. He seems to have bought into his hero image as much as his fans did so if events occurred as he claims that they did I suspect he would be acting in much the way he is.

As to the relationship, it seems to be a budding causal relationship, sex and friendship, friends with benefits I believe it is called. No big declarations of “Love of my life” on either side.

Oscar has said a couple times now that he loved her (I believe, I know he said it once) but mostly he said that she was a person he cared about. If the relationship was a casual one, (which it appears to have been) it would be a bit callous of Oscar to mention the “friends with benefits scenario” it is more respectful to put the relationship on a little higher ground than that.

All I am saying is there is another way to view what is going on. All that matters is the judges point of view.