Trial Discussion Thread #28 - 14.04.17, Day 25

[james83]

No he wasn't. I urge you to go listen again. It was specifically about a kick mark.

No they deal with more than one mark.

 

[soozieqtips]

I'm not aware that Mr Dixon ever said that he used someone the same height as OP? In any case, I think it can be concluded from the pictures (despite the 10cm difference) that it would be extremely unlikely that anyone would have been able to see a man on stumps in the top half of the window, don't you?

They did at least make an attempt to show this to the judge. Again the PT elected not to show any information to the contrary. The judge may well prefer this to the alternative of nothing.

I could spend quite a while discussing the evidence that the SAPS and PT have purposely not included because it weakens their case. I won't though, as it doesn't surprise me and is only to be expected.

BBM - that's incorrect. It was 20cm.

"Dixon admitted using a man on his knees who was 20cm shorter than the double amputee athlete on his stumps. "It is something I omitted," Dixon conceded. "I overlooked it at the time."

All that's missing is "I didn't have time to think".

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/17/pistorius-expert-witness-joking-reputation-destroyed

 

[james83]

^
^
THIS. Its obvious really when you stop thinking so hard about it.

So true, and it amazes me how people are overlooking key facts like this just because of a few disputed bangs.

 

[aa9511]

A - hip wound
B - Upper arm
C- web of finger
D-head wound

This is the order of wounds D thinks took place.

Wow.

So the 3 in succession were all by the head area. Now, how did Oscar manage to aim so directly at the head??

I am thinking there must have been some crack in the door!

How else could he have aimed so directly at the head??

 

[IfIMay]

So true, and it amazes me how people are overlooking key facts like this just because of a few disputed bangs.

Defense attorneys dream juror. So caught up in each tree that they can't see the forest.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Did OP say that he put the cricket bat under the bedroom door handle because, even when locked, the fit of the door was such that it didn't hold that well?

If so, I suggest that he chased Reeva upstairs and she locked the bedroom door. He barged it to open it (the primary door would give, that's why he offers that information to the judge as he's using it in his lies) which leads to the marks on the second door, which probably didn't give because of the latch into the floor.

 

[steveml]

If we raise the person by 20 cm and then raise the camera to the level of the Stipp's bedroom it would make a huge difference, no?

The truth is we don't know. This is why I suggested it would have been ideal for the state to show some evidence to back up the witness claims.

They had every opportunity to do this, but chose not to.

 

[TipDog]

So she lay dying for 20 minutes? Or are the Stipps lying about hearing shots at 3?

You are saying our theories here are all fabricated? Not based on evidence or witnesses? Why bother coming here then?

In support of the point of you are making - IMO, none of the neighbors are lying. There is no motive for them to. They may be mistaken or have the timing incorrect or their hearing is subpar, but in this case, the suggestions that they are lying really should be removed from the discussion.

Unless, we really wish to go completely Twilight Zone.

 

[Feynman]

partial quote:

OP : I have never said I whispered to reeva

LIAR, he said it half a dozen times both in bail plea and in testimony

etc

In his bail affidavit, OP says nothing about talking to Reeva. In his plea explanation, OP says he "had shortly before spoken to Reeva" - nothing about whispering. So there's his testimony, where he does say it, I can't remember how many times.

 

[aa9511]

hope anyone here with a qualifying cable subscription is aware that ESPN3 has been streaming this entire trial in HD

WHAT?! OMG. I'll have to check if I have ESPN3 now....that would really suck if I ended up having it this whole time! Pretty sure I don't have it though.

 

[zwiebel]

Was the amputee in court next door, due to be sentenced for killing his wife this morning, given life? I just saw a link upthread and lost it, making a post. I can't recall how to spell his name to google.

I remember thinking it was good he finally came clean, and admitted what he'd done, and that he was too scared to say at first. I suppose that's the most you can ask for, when someone has taken a life.....

 

[IfIMay]

The truth is we don't know. This is why I suggested it would have been ideal for the state to show some evidence to back up the witness claims.

They had every opportunity to do this, but chose not to.

The witness testimony, under oath, as to what they saw IS evidence. It then becomes the defense interest to challenge and DISPROVE the evidence. Which they tried to do with sneaky smoke and mirrors. EPIC FAIL. If it goes unchallenged, and Roux saying it's not right is NOT evidence no matter the how forcefully he says it, then it is accepted as the truth of the matter and the Judge gives it the appropriate weight.

 

[aa9511]

The description from Dixon suggests there would be very little pause between shots 1 and 2 as shot 2 was made whilst Reeva was falling.

Oh so add to all of this maybe fact that Reeva's falling. HOW DID OSCAR AIM SO WELL WITHOUT SEEING??

No, I think there was already a small crack in the door from when he tried to get the door open by hitting it with bat. Or maybe just to vent his anger, he just had to hit something. Then he got frustrated, discarded that idea, and went for the gun.

JMO.

 

[soozieqtips]

I agree, without Roy Meadows, Sally Clark wouldn't have spent 5 yrs in jail and would be alive today

Oh I remember that. There were 2 other mothers who ended up in jail because of him too. And then there's good old Freddy Patel who was the pathologist at Ian Tomlinson's postmortem. The one the police liked to have on hand. Being struck off isn't enough. They should do jail time. If they knew there were serious repercussions for misleading, they might think twice.

 

[AlexUK]

I have to say, on a more serious note, given what has been demonstrated in this trial about the recklessness with guns, the violent incidents and this tragedy itself, I fail to see how it was in the interests of public protection to give him bail in the first place. I have to admit, I have little knowledge of the bail proceedings but I find it strange that a man of 27 has been involved in all these negative incidents (quite apart from the murder itself). I have 2 boys now men around the same age who live life to the full and they have never been involved in anything like what OP has gotten himself into.

If he is convicted and sentenced to serve time in jail, presumably he will lodge an appeal? If this is the case is there any chance he would remain free pending the outcome of the appeal?

It seems so unfair that he has taken a life but for most of the last year or so he has been living the life of Riley in a posh mansion in the lap of luxury!

 

[aa9511]

Oh god he's basically saying oscar aimed now and steadied the gun after the second shot. Not good for defence. Oh my.

O M G.

One thing I have to give this guy Dixon, is that he appears to be telling the truth as he knows it and what he observed. He does not appear to be trying to present facts in a favorable light to the defense. He is just telling it like he sees it.

So gotta give him some respect for that.

 

[soozieqtips]

Was the amputee in court next door, due to be sentenced for killing his wife this morning, given life? I just saw a link and lost upthread and lost it, making a post. I can't recall how to spell his name to google.

I remember thinking it was good he finally came clean, and admitted what he'd done, and that he was too scared to say at first. I suppose that's the most you can ask for, when someone has taken a life.....

BBM - here you go zwiebel. Godfrey Sefwayi Sengwane.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/amputee-gets-life-sentence-for-murder-1.1677840

 

[steveml]

The witness testimony, under oath, as to what they saw IS evidence. It then becomes the defense interest to challenge and DISPROVE the evidence. Which they tried to do with sneaky smoke and mirrors. EPIC FAIL. If it goes unchallenged, and Roux saying it's not right is NOT evidence no matter the how forcefully he says it, then it is accepted as the truth of the matter and the Judge gives it the appropriate weight.

It doesn't begin and end there. You should always use additional evidence to strengthen a claim, if at all possible. This is exactly why the photographers were in the Stipps house.

It'll be interesting to see reaction if a close neighbour appears on the witness stand and testifies to hearing OP scream at the times when Reeva was supposed to be screaming.

Can I trust they'll have everyone's support?

 

[soozieqtips]

Following the end of his testimony on Thursday, the trial was adjourned until 5 May and Dixon stayed true to his word, relaxing with a beer at the International Police Association in Pretoria. He said of the Facebook post: "That was actually a joke. I said it lightheartedly. I don't let things like that upset me.
You cannot let emotions influence you at all."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/17/pistorius-expert-witness-joking-reputation-destroyed

He should have reminded OP of this!

 

[Emz73]

No I'm not saying the Stipps are lying or that they didn't hear shots at 3:00 - I'm not sure their time is precise, and if it is then I agree there's difficulty making sense of how long she could have lived after the headwound.

Maybe because the bat noise came first?