From your perspective, in what way?
I'm pretty sure I won't get an answer on that (I've not yet had one answer to any previous questions, either), but I'm pretty sure I know what is being suggested here and I personally find it quite unpleasant.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
From your perspective, in what way?
Didn't realise cards were compulsory LOL
It supports OP"s statement that it was a loving relationship and he knew she felt the same way
It supports OP"s statement that it was a loving relationship and he knew she felt the same way
I read somewhere that it was red physio tape. This is where a physiotherapist tapes an area for various reasons.
http://www.physioroom.com/product/P...y_I_Y_Strip_Tape_Red_5cm_x_5m/3366/39267.html
Think the Valentine's card message and Reeva's words says it all.
Where is his card to her?, or wasn't there one?.
Thanks .. yes, I knew about the tape ... but I also thought I kept hearing about a 'pain patch' too .. in addition to the taping ..
in 'covering' he has created another problem
he went to sleep at 10pm ish. awoke at 3am ish.
approximately 5 hours asleep
his only words to reeva are ??
the only words from her [according to him] are 'can't you sleep'.
then he heard the bathroom window open...
how did he not know that his sister had not popped around?
or a friend?
or a friend of hers?
he has someone beside him, that he knows is awake, that he could question to verify events leading up to the time he awoke. but he doesn't ask her.
in 'covering' he has created another problem
he went to sleep at 10pm ish. awoke at 3am ish.
approximately 5 hours asleep
his only words to reeva are ??
the only words from her [according to him] are 'can't you sleep'.
then he heard the bathroom window open...
how did he not know that his sister had not popped around?
or a friend?
or a friend of hers?
he has someone beside him, that he knows is awake, that he could question to verify events leading up to the time he awoke. but he doesn't ask her.
I totally disagree and think far, far too much is being made of that card that Reeva wrote TO Oscar.
I was in a very abusive marriage for a number of years. I wrote similar messages expressing my love in cards over the years. Many, many times. He still almost killed me twice. The second time a gun was involved.
Being in a relationship with a narcissist, self-indulgent, control freak is very complicated. Don't assume she didn't love him. You can't make sense of it until you remove yourself from the toxic environment.
I was very surprised Nel didn't ask OP what he replied to Reeva when she asked if he couldn't sleep... or did he ask him and I missed it ?
Amazing how these protectors of poor, fragile Oscar are prepared to overlook every single lie he has told and every single inconsistency, and to focus on one Valentines gift which in and of itself (and the emotions attached to it, and the absence of a reciprocal gift) could well have caused or contributed to a fight.
<modsnip>
Rendered all of his fruitless efforts stating Reeva wanting to leave, arguing, not happy etc pointless.
Roux said SO MUCH with SO little. 1 sentence. Very effective.
The bat sounds sound like my neighbour chopping wood....
for the gun, surely one of them have a glock they can borrow, just fire it in the courtroom in the cubicle.. let's see if it really is deafening.
It was a very young relationship, they had no commitments together as of yet, no children, not dependant on each other financially, no reason to stay if you didn't want to, and Reeva had been in a bad relationship before, so would have had some wisdom there. As to him not saying he loved her via a card or present, someone always has to say it first in a relationship, it doesn't mean it's not reciprocated..it's a scary thing to say..and on the issue of it being thoughtless that he didn't get a present etc, Oscar would not be the first man to underestimate the importance of these things to a lady.
The complainant believed the statement might have infringed Pistorius rights to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; freedom of expression; and human dignity, generally impacting on his right to a fair trial as contained in the bill of rights... The SAHRC considered the complaint within the context of basic fair trial rights protected in the constitution.
However on a close assessment of the facts of the matter, international jurisprudence, the bar council rules, its own jurisdiction, and authority of the court, the complaint was rejected.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/15/oscar-pistorius-trial-live-15-april