Trial Discussion Thread #29

[Forensics]

Hmm any guesses as to what this display of body language says?

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2014-04-16-pistorius-trial-week-6-day-3/

anger with intent...

 

[Apollo]

Wow. Look at that clenched jaw. Either he's angry/frustrated/stressed ...or he's about to yawn or throw up and he's trying to suppress it.

Or................he's glaring at Dixon and thinking "How much am I paying you to stand there and disagree with me about the magazine rack????????"

 

[Val1]

I don't think that's true. I have posted caselaw that says that a person faced with imminent harm is not required to retreat if retreat is possible. It depends on all of the circumstances in the particular case. In this case, Oscar explained why he didn't think that an attempt to escape would ensure his safety (he was on his stumps, he has bad mobility on the tile outside the bathroom, and he would have had to maneuver the stairs).

Have you read this case? The story is quite similar, other than the guy only shot once and immediately rushed his wife to hospital. I'm pretty sure this is what OP expects to get.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Man-who-shot-wife-in-error-can-sympathise-with-Oscar-20140407

 

[lisasalinger]

What a reasonable person believes....There's the rub. I live in an American city that routinely ranks in the top 10 for number of murders and violent crime. Home invasions during the day are fairly common in my neighborhood, as are break ins, car thefts, etc. Police sirens and strobe lights from police helicopters chasing down thugs are also routine. (BTW, I live in a middle class neighborhood mostly populated with academics, attorneys, and political progressives).

Because of where I live I can believe and accept that OP feared intruders, regardless of his gated community and security systems. His fear is made more believable by the fact that he has a history of hearing sounds in his house and leaping to the conclusion the sounds were made by intruders.

IMO, if he wanted to spin the best possible lie, he would have said that Reeva did not wake up when he got up to bring fans in, etc. Having her be asleep would make it more believable that he thought she was still in the bedroom when he heard a noise in the bathroom.
.

Respectfully snipped and BBM

Don't be fooled that this was just an oversight on his behalf and he later clarified his story. He flat out changed his story.

He originally thought he had the best "story" when he said that Reeva was sleeping in his bail affidavit until he was pressed with the following facts:

1. Nobody would ever believe that he didn't warn her about the danger before he charged in to the bathroom with a gun, hence the "low tone" instruction of "get down and call the police." NOTE: The "low tone" instruction of get down and call the police" was not in his bail affidavit.

2. People needed to know how he knew that she was in the bed. If he hadn't seen or heard her before he got up, how did he KNOW she was in the bed. In order for his story to work, he has to fully believe she is there, hence the addition of speaking. NOTE: The speaking to Reeva was not in his bail affidavit.

3. And then add in several neighbors hearing a woman screaming in terror and that ruins his perceived intruder story so HE needed to become the one doing the screaming which he states he was doing immediately upon entering the passage (explaining why she was locked away in a dark toilet room). NOTE: The relentless screaming was not in his bail affidavit.

The only reason he changed his story was to accommodate these facts of the case.

Why does somebody need to constantly change and adapt their story? Because they are lying. There is no other reason.

 

[weeeva]

The 'version' talk threw me off at first, as well. But that seems to be the way they talk in the SA courts. The prosecutor uses the word. He talks about his version and Oscar's version. The Judge even uses the word. I heard her admonish the Prosecutor that Oscar was telling his version.

So we definitely can't dock Oscar for using a word that all parties use routinely.

Yes, the word has been used countless times by Roux and Nel. Is it any wonder that OP has picked up on it. He more than likely would never have used the word if it hadn't been thrown around in the court room since day one.

 

[Really?]

Premeditation does not rely on a certain length of time. It can occur in a matter of moments.

Getting a 9mm pistol from under the bed, walking down a passageway (past the bedroom door which is an escape route) INTO the room of perceived danger, aiming, and firing not one, not two, not three, but FOUR rounds of black talon bullets through a closed toilet door = premeditated murder.

Good post......sums it up perfectly

 

[lisasalinger]

I've often thought that if Reeva was alive in the toilet whilst OP was breaking down the door, she had an opportunity to try and attract outside attention.

Wooden magazine rack smashing the glass toilet window would be quite a logical action.

I'm quite positive that she was trying to get help with her blood-curdling screams.

 

[Really?]

To followers of the bat was used first theory, would that explain why Mrs Stipp thought the toilet light was on?, because the light from the bathroom was shining through the crack in the toilet door?.

Precisely

 

[Val1]

Agreed. That was what I meant, you know

And no, it doesn't change what I wrote...

This has been addressed before, but OP knew that firing on a closed door at anyone was not lawful. That's what he signed his name to when getting his firearm license.

Edit: Sorry Julian, I don't know why this was tacked on to your post, unless the one I was replying to in the thread deleted theirs..

 

[lisasalinger]

I haven't followed this case that closely and am watching the Spotlight show on CNN right now. Something I didn't know was that OP said he locked the bedroom door as he does each night. Was the lock just one you turn from the inside or was there also a key like the bathroom door?

The door to his bedroom is a double door. The main door locks with a key and the other door has a latch at the top and bottom.

He also had the cricket bad positioned in between the door and his sunglass case because (he said) the locks were not always reliable and the bat provided extra protection... just like people put wooden poles in their sliding door tracks.

He also testified that he activated both the inside and outside alarm system that night from a remote control on his keychain. He says that keychain was on the speaker near the front of his bedroom.

 

[shane13]

You think it's not just satirical?

Yes, seems like another satirical website.
So many.
Makes ya wanta puke.

 

[lisasalinger]

Does anyone recall the measurements of the bathroom window that the phantom intruder was suppose to have climbed through?

I don't have the measurements but visually, it would have been plenty big enough for somebody to climb through. Here's the kicker though.

Oscar heard this window opening, heard it slam against the wood frame when it opened all the way, so no doubt this is the window that he was fearful of.

When Nel was pushing him about how the intruder was supposed to get out of the toilet room when Oscar was yelling at him "get out", Oscar says they could have gone back out the window. But he seems to not remember that they didn't come in that window. The ladder would not be there. They would have plummeted two stories. I think Nel was trying to get him to see this but OP's too flipping stupid.

And as a side note... I too think it's ridiculous that an intruder would pick this one particular window to gain access to the house when the downstairs is filled with glass windows that don't have burglar bars. Makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[jassy writer]

Every time the camera panned to him in the last couple of days he was giving a death stare. I think he is highly unimpressed with Dixon's testimony. Wonder how much money he paid for him? If he'd had a gun, I think he might just have used it!

Here is an excellent article on OP's mindset, and that of other abusers...

http://time.com/56043/oscar-pistorius-reeva-steenkamp-courtroom-theatrics/

 

[lisasalinger]

To followers of the bat was used first theory, would that explain why Mrs Stipp thought the toilet light was on?, because the light from the bathroom was shining through the crack in the toilet door?.

It's a good possibility. Roger Dixon testified that the more you open the toilet room door, the brighter that window appears from the outside. A crack in the door surely would have produced a dim light from outside. I believe that is what she described.

 

[nastasya]

I've often thought that if Reeva was alive in the toilet whilst OP was breaking down the door, she had an opportunity to try and attract outside attention.

Maybe that's why the neighbors heard her screaming.

 

[nastasya]

Yes, the word has been used countless times by Roux and Nel. Is it any wonder that OP has picked up on it. He more than likely would never have used the word if it hadn't been thrown around in the court room since day one.

Of course. It has to be somebody else's fault.

Even the words OP uses are somebody else's fault.

 

[nastasya]

IMO, if he wanted to spin the best possible lie, he would have said that Reeva did not wake up when he got up to bring fans in, etc. Having her be asleep would make it more believable that he thought she was still in the bedroom when he heard a noise in the bathroom.

He originally claimed Reeva was asleep all night, and that they fell asleep together.

That's before the defense team had access to all the cell phone records that showed Reeva's phone was connected to the internet all night long.

Suddenly OP's story changed from knowing Reeva was asleep all night to not knowing if Reeva had been sleeping at all. He said she was awake when he fell asleep, and awake when he woke up.

We don't know what the detailed cell phone or iPad internet access records show - yet.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

That's fine. So in your opinion, and using the facts of the case:

1) What would constitute Premeditation? And how is the fact that OP fired 4 bullets at "a door" behind which he believed a human being was standing. And the WC was tiny with hard tiles on the walls and floor, OP testified that he was aware of the danger of ricocheting bullets.

2) What would constitute simple Murder? This is the intentional killing of a human being. If that person is a burglar that does not matter, under SA Law even burglars are entitled to a right to life, they cannot be murdered unless you see them coming at you with a weapon intending to kill you or cause you great bodily harm.

Perhaps it is time to start using facts in the argument instead of just saying, "I believe what OP said it the truth."

This is a good post because it highlights the double standards of OP
He stated that he didn't want to injure himself from ricocheting bullets but didn't mind the person behind the door suffering that very fate .
I also think it demonstrates that he was in fact not in a panic mode or he wouldn't have been thinking so clearly .
He had very sound thought processing and showed his gun experience IMO

 

[shane13]

More from that website that stated Oscar overate so as to vomit.

Herschelle Gibbs [Cricketer] to Testify at Oscar Trial

"...PRETORIA – Former South African cricketer Herschelle Gibbs will be called upon as a surprise last-minute addition to the witness list, sources within the Oscar Pistorius defence team revealed..."

"Law experts believe that Advocate Barry Roux will attempt to prove that Oscar was not a top order batsman, and therefore bashed down the bathroom door purely by accident.

The former Protea opener is confident that he will be a competent witness. “I’m very familiar with the evidence,” he explained. “My signature can be seen on the bat used by Oscar to bash down the door.”

“In my current capacity as a cricket commentator for SABC Sport, I describe the wielding of bats all day long,” insisted Gibbs. “As such, I should be able to describe Oscar’s stroke making beautifully...”

http://banananewsline.com/category/sport/

If not clear:

 

[Val1]

I've often thought that if Reeva was alive in the toilet whilst OP was breaking down the door, she had an opportunity to try and attract outside attention.

Wooden magazine rack smashing the glass toilet window would be quite a logical action.

Umm weren't you one of those who believed the gunshots came first? Once the gun came into play I don't think there was any time for RS to do anything beyond a last scream.