Trial Discussion Thread #29

[patCee]

The contradictions in OP's versions of what happened and plea reminds me of his arrogance in possibly not trusting what his defense team are advising him. He seem to be close to his family. I'm thinking of uncle Arnold's business acumen and possibly others. The family are presenting as religious too, so probably close to a local clergyman.

I've seen this before (not in the same circs) where a person listens (requests) advice from various other people who are competent but who do not have the relevant expertise. Desperately looking for a view that favours their own position. It ends up like OP a shambles that is impossible work with effectively because the truth has become irrelevant.

He's clearly his own worst enemy on all counts.

 

[kittychi]

If you're forming a court statistic based on the amount of cases on WS there's really no point.

In Oct-Dec 2012 in the UK there were 37,949 trials (in 3 months). If you believe that the defendants in more than half of these cases took notes, passed notes and were heavily involved with defending of their case to the extent that OP is, then I will agree with you that OP's actions are typical.

If not, then I think we can safely say that OP's actions were uncharacteristic.

OJ Simpson did the same thing during his trial. IMO he was likely advised to take notes, etc. because he would be on camera and it would be a way for him to look composed rather than flinching and/or freaking out while sitting there.

IMO Same with Oscar. On camera. I can't explain the puking and crying though. Hard to imagine that was advice from his counsel.

 

[sicknote]

Hi.......my version.

I believe that Oscar has testified with half truths to help him remember his chain of events.

Is it a coincidence it happened on Valentines Day? He had no card and no present. It's clear to me they argued over something.

In his version there were things important to him....the location of the cricket bat, the jeans, the slow walk, the slamming of the bathroom door and not looking in her bag before handing it over.

Reeva was definitely eating a few hours before her death.....lets say between 12-2am. She was excited it was Valentines Day and wanted to stay up past 12 to hand over her gift and find out what gift Oscar had for her. Reeva handed her gift over and got nothing in return.....argument broke out before Oscar got time to open his gift.

It got seriously out of hand. Reeva went to the bedroom to pack her things, get dressed and get the xxxx out of his house. He locked her in the bedroom and picked up the cricket bat. The lights were on.....Reeva wasn't packing and getting dressed in the dark. She had no pockets in her clothing and put her phone in her bag. Remember he never looked in her bag.

Oscar ripped the jeans off her as she was getting dressed.....the reason why they were inside out. Oscar couldn't understand why she would take her jeans off before leaving when questioned by Nel. Nel knows fine well Reeva wasn't taking her jeans off, she was putting them on......Nel just played him there for some reason.

Reeva at some point fled to the bathroom with another pair of jeans. Oscar heard the window open and rushed to see what Reeva was doing......he caught her getting ready to climb out the window and hit her on the back with the cricket bat. Whatever happened she was locked in the toilet cubicle.

There were only three marks on the door caused by the cricket bat. Oscar needed a fourth bang to confuse everyone about the two sets of bangs. Just by magic Reeva slammed the door....it sounded like bang......bang, bang, bang.

He then executed her.

It goes a lot deeper though. The double taps that were first mentioned. Does Dixon have recorded double taps on his computer? Nel certainly thinks he does.

Im going as far as to say Dixon wasn't given page nine of the autopsy report, hence his "what" when he seen it for the first time. He honestly couldn't believe it when he seen it. Same as the Balcony light information.

Dixon has destroyed the entire DT evidence before they even testify. He knew he had been had. He was different on day two.

Im struggling with the empty bladder though. I think she must have went when she was getting Oscars gift and card. She was dead five minutes later.

 

[shane13]

Hi.......my version.

I believe that Oscar has testified with half truths to help him remember his chain of events.

Is it a coincidence it happened on Valentines Day? He had no card and no present. It's clear to me they argued over something.

In his version there were things important to him....the location of the cricket bat, the jeans, the slow walk, the slamming of the bathroom door and not looking in her bag before handing it over.

Reeva was definitely eating a few hours before her death.....lets say between 12-2am. She was excited it was Valentines Day and wanted to stay up past 12 to hand over her gift and find out what gift Oscar had for her. Reeva handed her gift over and got nothing in return.....argument broke out before Oscar got time to open his gift.

It got seriously out of hand. Reeva went to the bedroom to pack her things, get dressed and get the xxxx out of his house. He locked her in the bedroom and picked up the cricket bat. The lights were on.....Reeva wasn't packing and getting dressed in the dark. She had no pockets in her clothing and put her phone in her bag. Remember he never looked in her bag.

Oscar ripped the jeans off her as she was getting dressed.....the reason why they were inside out. Oscar couldn't understand why she would take her jeans off before leaving when questioned by Nel. Nel knows fine well Reeva wasn't taking her jeans off, she was putting them on......Nel just played him there for some reason.

Reeva at some point fled to the bathroom with another pair of jeans. Oscar heard the window open and rushed to see what Reeva was doing......he caught her getting ready to climb out the window and hit her on the back with the cricket bat. Whatever happened she was locked in the toilet cubicle.

There were only three marks on the door caused by the cricket bat. Oscar needed a fourth bang to confuse everyone about the two sets of bangs. Just by magic Reeva slammed the door....it sounded like bang......bang, bang, bang.

He then executed her.

It goes a lot deeper though. The double taps that were first mentioned. Does Dixon have recorded double taps on his computer? Nel certainly thinks he does.

Im going as far as to say Dixon wasn't given page nine of the autopsy report, hence his "what" when he seen it for the first time. He honestly couldn't believe it when he seen it. Same as the Balcony light information.

Dixon has destroyed the entire DT evidence before they even testify. He knew he had been had. He was different on day two.

Im struggling with the empty bladder though. I think she must have went when she was getting Oscars gift and card. She was dead five minutes later.

Welcome!

What's on page 9?

 

[Interested Bystander]

His eyes were squinty every time the camera panned to him in the last couple of days. I think he was medicated, maybe a little too much

He looks heavily medicated to me too. Clenched jaw is probably anxiety.

 

[shane13]

He looks heavily medicated to me too. Clenched jaw is probably anxiety.

He's got a a bad TMJ.

 

[whiterum]

Hi.......my version.

I believe that Oscar has testified with half truths to help him remember his chain of events.

Is it a coincidence it happened on Valentines Day? He had no card and no present. It's clear to me they argued over something.

In his version there were things important to him....the location of the cricket bat, the jeans, the slow walk, the slamming of the bathroom door and not looking in her bag before handing it over.

Reeva was definitely eating a few hours before her death.....lets say between 12-2am. She was excited it was Valentines Day and wanted to stay up past 12 to hand over her gift and find out what gift Oscar had for her. Reeva handed her gift over and got nothing in return.....argument broke out before Oscar got time to open his gift.

It got seriously out of hand. Reeva went to the bedroom to pack her things, get dressed and get the xxxx out of his house. He locked her in the bedroom and picked up the cricket bat. The lights were on.....Reeva wasn't packing and getting dressed in the dark. She had no pockets in her clothing and put her phone in her bag. Remember he never looked in her bag.

Oscar ripped the jeans off her as she was getting dressed.....the reason why they were inside out. Oscar couldn't understand why she would take her jeans off before leaving when questioned by Nel. Nel knows fine well Reeva wasn't taking her jeans off, she was putting them on......Nel just played him there for some reason.

Reeva at some point fled to the bathroom with another pair of jeans. Oscar heard the window open and rushed to see what Reeva was doing......he caught her getting ready to climb out the window and hit her on the back with the cricket bat. Whatever happened she was locked in the toilet cubicle.

There were only three marks on the door caused by the cricket bat. Oscar needed a fourth bang to confuse everyone about the two sets of bangs. Just by magic Reeva slammed the door....it sounded like bang......bang, bang, bang.

He then executed her.

It goes a lot deeper though. The double taps that were first mentioned. Does Dixon have recorded double taps on his computer? Nel certainly thinks he does.

Im going as far as to say Dixon wasn't given page nine of the autopsy report, hence his "what" when he seen it for the first time. He honestly couldn't believe it when he seen it. Same as the Balcony light information.

Dixon has destroyed the entire DT evidence before they even testify. He knew he had been had. He was different on day two.

Im struggling with the empty bladder though. I think she must have went when she was getting Oscars gift and card. She was dead five minutes later.

Refreshing to read a post that is not totally based on OP's version/s the bringing in the fan crap etc.

Thank you !!!

 

[shane13]

Big mistake Reeva prob. made was telling him she was calling (or going to call) the police. (Then again how could she know just what he was capable of?)

And maybe he was there right on top of her, so to speak, that last hour making it difficult for her to call, and the bedroom door was locked preventing her from leaving, which IMO she prob wanted to do from the beginning of that last full hour of her life.

 

[Interested Bystander]

He's got a a bad TMJ.

If he didn't have temporomandibular dysfunction before the trial I bet he has now!

 

[shane13]

If he didn't have temporomandibular dysfunction before the trial I bet he has now!

A bit of irony: Oscar feigns helping Reeva after she was already dead or nearly so. Her jaw muscles clamp down on his finger(s) [requiring medical help from Dr Stipp.]

Later photo clearly shows (IMO) he has TMJ (jaw problems).

 

[Interested Bystander]

Does anyone have a list of the calls that evening please? I am a little fascinated by the fact her phone was open for such a long time. Finally shutting down at 1.48am on Valentine's Day. I cannot remember whether there were incoming texts or calls that she didn't respond too during that time or whether Nel only chose to read out previous calls/texts between the couple. I know she made no calls that night.

 

[PPKik]

A provisional answer, from someone who's a lawyer in Holland, not South Africa (the two legal systems are akin to each other, but obviously not the same).

Premeditated murder requires there to be some sort of moment where the murderer, not yet having embarked on the immediate actions which will lead to the actual killing, can and should reflect upon what he is about to do. There is a moment, therefore, where he should rationally stop. He does not, however; he goes on and commits the murder.

If, as has been stated here, Pistorius got into an argument with his girlfriend and then got a gun and shot her, that need not be premeditated at all. Whether it is or is not would totally depend upon the specific circumstances. And those circumstances would be very difficult to determine, given the fact that we effectively have only Pistorius's word for what happened. Please understand that the argument itself - the fact that they fought - would be insufficient.

<Respectfully snipped for space>

BBM

I'm a little confused and hope you may able to clarify.

You wrote: "Premeditated murder requires there to be some sort of moment where the murderer, not yet having embarked on the immediate actions which will lead to the actual killing, can and should reflect upon what he is about to do...."

In your example using Pistorius: "If...Pistorius got into an argument with his girlfriend and then got a gun and shot her, that need not be premeditated at all."

If "Pistorius got into an argument with his girlfriend and then got a gun and shot her," I can't see how that precludes premeditation, in your example.

For someone to be in an argument and decide to get a gun to shoot someone else, there seems to me to be ample time to reflect, not just during the act of getting or picking up a gun, but then in making the decision, even if instantaneous, to pull the trigger.

In this example he has made a decision to use deadly force, and not in self defense. I'm trying to understand how any "specific circumstances," other than his life being threatened, in this hypothetical, could mitigate or exclude premeditation.

Thank you in advance for any explanation that may make this clearer to me.

 

[Interested Bystander]

A bit of irony: Oscar feigns helping Reeva after she was already dead or nearly so. Her jaw muscles clamp down on his finger(s) [requiring medica lhelp from Dr Stipp.]

Later photo clearly shows (IMO) he has TMJ (jaw problems).

Very true.

I bet his jaw really aches by the end of the day.

 

[shane13]

The contradictions in OP's versions of what happened and plea reminds me of his arrogance in possibly not trusting what his defense team are advising him. He seem to be close to his family. I'm thinking of uncle Arnold's business acumen and possibly others. The family are presenting as religious too, so probably close to a local clergyman.

I've seen this before (not in the same circs) where a person listens (requests) advice from various other people who are competent but who do not have the relevant expertise. Desperately looking for a view that favours their own position. It ends up like OP a shambles that is impossible work with effectively because the truth has become irrelevant.

He's clearly his own worst enemy on all counts.

BBM
The problem for Oscar vis-a-vis his witnesses is that Oscar keeps changing his story. And...the witnesses can't keep up.

Afterall, Oscar is one of the world's greatest sprinters. (The witnesses just can't run with him or his changing alibis.)

 

[shane13]

<Respectfully snipped for space>


I'm a little confused and hope you may able to clarify.

You wrote: "Premeditated murder requires there to be some sort of moment where the murderer, not yet having embarked on the immediate actions which will lead to the actual killing, can and should reflect upon what he is about to do...."

In your example using Pistorius: "If...Pistorius got into an argument with his girlfriend and then got a gun and shot her, that need not be premeditated at all."

If "Pistorius got into an argument with his girlfriend and then got a gun and shot her," I can't see how that precludes premeditation, in your example.

For someone to be in an argument and decide to get a gun to shoot someone else, there seems to me to be ample time to reflect, not just during the act of getting or picking up a gun, but then in making the decision, even if instantaneous, to pull the trigger.

In this example he has made a decision to use deadly force, and not in self defense. I'm trying to understand how any "specific circumstances," other than his life being threatened, in this hypothetical, could mitigate or exclude premeditation.

Thank you in advance for any explanation that may make this clearer to me.

BBM
Good point.
In Pros Trial affidavit (or whatever it is called), Pros Authority precisely said that was their basis for PM charge. ANd it makes sense and I am sure is the proper legal basis, otherwise their best Prosecutor, Nel, wouldnt sign on to it, from Day 1 or maybe Day 4 or so.

Their logic is as you say, given the argument, he had so many other things he could have done. But when she fled to the other room, what he chose to do was to pick up his gun and go after her with the intent to killl her. the way it happened, number of bullets fired, type etc. all part of the PM charge.

But the main point is what you have stated, and is in the Prosecutor's affidavit. After she fled to the other room, he chose to arm himself, pursue her and execute her, when he had so many other choices of what to do.

 

[Cherwell]

Just to clarify, Christo Menelaou is not OP's next door neighbour. IIRC, somewhere in that article he says he drove round to OP's house that morning.

Also, on the plan that has been posted several times, the next door neighbours on both sides are named and they all appeared in the witness list. It will be interesting to hear what they have to say if they appear.

I wonder also if OP's housekeeper and gardener have anything to contribute.

His window looks out onto an empty plot and Olympic and Paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius’ house.

http://drum.co.za/celebs/hes-heartbroken/

Yes, thanks. It sounds like he might live near the Stipps then, but there seem to have been quite a few empty plots at the time.

http://www.citypress.co.za/multimedia/graphic-what-did-oscar-pistorius-neighbours-hear/

 

[zoran]

right at the beginning OP said he was besotted by Reeva and he was more into her than she was into him. If he was infatuated with her and really who could blame him, he would have completely lost it when she decided that night that it was over for her. He loved her alright , way too much but just acted cool about it.
The rest is history

 

[shane13]

right at the beginning OP said he was besotted by Reeva and he was more into her than she was into him. If he was infatuated with her and really who could blame him, he would have completely lost it when she decided that night that it was over for her. He loved her alright , way too much but just acted cool about it.
The rest is history

Maybe, but I think he wanted her more than loved her.

From what I know, she was not with him on previous holidays--christmas, new years, and and he had not introduced her to his sibs and uncle Arnold. [to the best of my knowledge.]

 

[james83]

Still mad at Nel that he didn't get back up after Roux led Oscar through the valentine's card section and ask where Oscar's card for Reeva was, i was sitting there waiting for him to do it, was gutted when he said he had nothing further, missed a trick.

 

[PPKik]

BBM
Good point.
In Pros Trial affidavit (or whatever it is called), Pros Authority precisely said that was their basis for PM charge. ANd it makes sense and I am sure is the proper legal basis, otherwise their best Prosecutor, Nel, wouldnt sign on to it, from Day 1 or maybe Day 4 or so.

Their logic is as you say, given the argument, he had so many other things he could have done. But when she fled to the other room, what he chose to do was to pick up his gun and go after her with the intent to killl her. the way it happened, number of bullets fired, type etc. all part of the PM charge.

But the main point is what you have stated, and is in the Prosecutor's affidavit. After she fled to the other room, he chose to arm himself, pursue her and execute her, when he had so many other choices of what to do.

Thank you, but my question was to try to understand the quoted poster's example on what was and was not premeditation.

This is not my theory of what happened (at least not yet), because I have been unable to follow the trial at all closely, so I just don't know. The only thing I am fairly certain of is that OP was reckless and had no understanding whatsoever of gun safety, or when you can and cannot use deadly force. And who leaves a semi automatic cocked like that? It takes a spit second to make it safe.

Reading posts tonight about the cricket bat, and OP breaking the door, either before or after he did shoot into the toilet, caused me to wonder why the toilet door was locked in the first place. I assume this has already been discussed, though I am far from catching up on this complex case.