Trial Discussion Thread #29

[Interested Bystander]

Are you saying that 9 crimes in 3 years is a low rate of crime? For a high security estate with walls, electric fences, and security guards? Really?

I read that SA has 8 times the murder rate of the US. And, we aren't exactly shining examples for the world. But, 8 times worse?

So if you can't feel safe in a high security estate, you can't feel safe anywhere in my opinion. Hence the wild west approach to security that Oscar seems to have adopted sounds reasonable to me. He was just horrendously bad at it.

Since the security staff have been changed there have been no crimes since 2011. Before that the minor thefts that took place were due to domestics, security staff, etc i.e. those who had legitimate access to properties. No violent crime as far as I remember, other than by OP.

 

[Cherwell]

Are you saying that 9 crimes in 3 years is a low rate of crime? For a high security estate with walls, electric fences, and security guards? Really?

I read that SA has 8 times the murder rate of the US. And, we aren't exactly shining examples for the world. But, 8 times worse?

So if you can't feel safe in a high security estate, you can't feel safe anywhere in my opinion. Hence the wild west approach to security that Oscar seems to have adopted sounds reasonable to me. He was just horrendously bad at it.

You missed the post correcting that. The source was wrong.

SupernovaNic, that article is wrong! In the whole history of OP's estate, there were precisely three crimes (in a number of years).

Crime one: OP shooting Reeva.
Crime two: OP's watch mysteriously disappearing.
Crime three: There was a burglary in another of the homes a few years ago. Not sure of the circumstances but do remember it was explained in court.

Sorry. this post was edited because you did use a source! My apologies!! It just so happens that the source quoted the court's facts wrongly... I was listening at the time. Three crimes only!

 

[sleuth-d-]

Dixon thought they fell off after OP hit the door with the cricket back which caused vibrations enough to loosen them.

thank you.
that door really, really, took a hammering.

 

[molly333]

I was thinking today about the duvet. The duvet alone is enough to prove OP's story is totally fabricated.

First he said the duvet was covering Reeva's legs.

He described walking over the area where the duvet was found 4 different times.

But the duvet was found on the floor next to blood spatter. There was blood on the duvet. There were that OP claimed he dropped clearly over the corner of the duvet.

Unless the defense can show that the police planted the blood and moved the duvet and jeans there's no way OP's version can be true.

If he lied about the duvet then he lied about everything else. The witnesses heard Reeva's terrified screams, not OP's.

Did they test the blood to know it is Reeva's?

Blood on bedding is common, and Reeva slept there.

It was not very much blood. Just a few drops.

Oscar himself could have dropped it there. He was covered in blood.

This in no way implies anything relating to the night of the murder.

Plus the defense will show that things were moved in the crime scene pictures.

It's a non starter.

 

[molly333]

You missed the post correcting that. The source was wrong.

Ok I just saw the other source--6.3 times the murder rate of the US.

It doesn't change my argument.

I live in a place in the US where I do not have to lock my doors.

This type of place is rare here.

Even 1 crime in that type of community is unacceptable.

The minute there is 1 crime here, I go back to being hypervigilant.

 

[Val1]

Good catch on the "socks"

I strongly believe he is referring to his stump socks not the foot socks.

Further, I think the stump socks that OP was wearing when van Staden photographed him in the garage were put on:
- after Reeva had been placed at the foot of the stairs
- before the police had arrived on the scene.

Recall that he made at least 3 trips upstairs between the time that Reeva had been placed downstairs and when the police arrived. It is my belief that he was on his prosthetics most if not all of the evening (certainly after 2:00am)and that the photographed socks were put on after the event,probably during one of his 3 unescorted trips upstairs .

In support of this theory, I have assembled and attached a collage of photos of OP's taken by van Staden shortly after van Staden arrived. The stump socks which I assume are some type of cotton blend, appear to have no blood on them, while his prosthetic legs are covered with blood right up to the stump socks.

The retrieval of his stump socks post-event may also be the reason for blood drops on the duvet and carpet near the bed.

That would also help to explain all the bloody towels in the bathroom because he would have wanted to wash them off before putting on clean stump socks on top of having washed his face, arms and chest. I really wish we had a full list of all the evidence collected.

 

[Lyra500]

Are you saying that 9 crimes in 3 years is a low rate of crime? For a high security estate with walls, electric fences, and security guards? Really?

I read that SA has 8 times the murder rate of the US. And, we aren't exactly shining examples for the world. But, 8 times worse?

So if you can't feel safe in a high security estate, you can't feel safe anywhere in my opinion. Hence the wild west approach to security that Oscar seems to have adopted sounds reasonable to me. He was just horrendously bad at it.

When you read on you will see that actually only three of these crimes relate to OP's estate - and two of them relate directly to OP! The other crimes were in the same district, but NOT on the estate.

 

[DebinGA]

Whoa. The video above with Roux questioning Dr. Stipp was scary imo, because m'lady didn't seem to understand there were two sets of "bangs" that night. I hope Dr. Stipp was a very early witness and the facts hadn't been brought out yet, because the gentle judge didn't seem to grasp what was being said.

 

[shane13]

Good Morning Websleuthers.

Are you going through withdrawal?

How are you coping?

And do you have other sources in your life for Oscar-Speak or equivalent?

 

[turaj]

I agree. I don't even know why we websleuthers need to dissect the defense arguments anymore. There is nothing to support their version (self defense, accidental, whatever). Their accused and own experts are bad and lack credibility.

Many on here enjoy analyzing the details and comparing possiblilities etc. but the bottom line seems to be that any defendant that gets up and consistently calls what happening during the course of a murder a "version" tells it all. His concocted story does not really deserve any analysis as it is just a made up story after he did the unthinkable. Frankly it is not even a good story. All you have to do is look at the faces of the defense team and OP's family to know they realize he is done.

After the "Dixon Debaucle" now the pathologist who has been with the defense almost since day one refuses to testify. Who else will follow? They know this case is a guarantee loser and they don't want to be associated with it. I don't think Dixon had much to lose. This break will afford Roux some time to figure how to cut his loss and get out of this.

Frankly I don't understand the break...seems like Gerrie Nel is going on "holiday" and one of his team has another matter. Surely they knew this trial was not going to be short and I think there is more to the break but not sure what it is. Then upon return they actually want to put in some serious hours. Also the thought of OP walking free is really scary...believe me he still has his "black tallon bullets".

As Roux retools the case stay tuned for more surprises. They may be down to very few witnesses as he cannot take a chance on another Dixon...

 

[kaos]

Good Morning Websleuthers.

Are you going through withdrawal?

How are you coping?

And do you have other sources in your life for Oscar-Speak or equivalent?

Listening to politicians is as close as I can get to Oscar-Speak.

 

[molly333]

Since the security staff have been changed there have been no crimes since 2011. Before that the minor thefts that took place were due to domestics, security staff, etc i.e. those who had legitimate access to properties. No violent crime as far as I remember, other than by OP.

I did hear that one crime was caused by security staff. I didn't see the source of the other crimes.

But think about this, if you can't even trust security staff, who can you trust?

 

[Val1]

bib-I hear what you are saying but there is a bit of ambiguity in that portion of the conversation Because Nel has distracted him and has him focused on the time it takes to out his legs on. Also, OP at this point is arguing about the need to get back to the toilette as quick as he can and it seems that taking the time to put on foot socks would run counter to that argument since foot socks are not needed to walk on his prosthetics, while the stump socks not only provide comfort but are necessary to secure a tight fit otherwise the legs can slip around or it the worst case - slip off.

Apparently the prosthetic socks are made to help prevent slippage so I can go with needing those, plus the one shown in court yesterday was definitely not one of the ones worn in the crime scene as there was no blood on it.

 

[molly333]

Many on here enjoy analyzing the details and comparing possiblilities etc. but the bottom line seems to be that any defendant that gets up and consistently calls what happening during the course of a murder a "version" tells it all. His concocted story does not really deserve any analysis as it is just a made up story after he did the unthinkable. Frankly it is not even a good story. All you have to do is look at the faces of the defense team and OP's family to know they realize he is done.

After the "Dixon Debaucle" now the pathologist who has been with the defense almost since day one refuses to testify. Who else will follow? They know this case is a guarantee loser and they don't want to be associated with it. I don't think Dixon had much to lose. This break will afford Roux some time to figure how to cut his loss and get out of this.

Frankly I don't understand the break...seems like Gerrie Nel is going on "holiday" and one of his team has another matter. Surely they knew this trial was not going to be short and I think there is more to the break but not sure what it is. Then upon return they actually want to put in some serious hours. Also the thought of OP walking free is really scary...believe me he still has his "black tallon bullets".

As Roux retools the case stay tuned for more surprises. They may be down to very few witnesses as he cannot take a chance on another Dixon...

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.

 

[turaj]

I bet every prosecutor dreams of having the "embarrassment of riches" OP has given Nel.

Don't you feel that even Nel sometimes cannot believe what OP and Dixon "gave him". He would let them talk and then get this slightly playful look....and then take off as they gave him way more than even imagined to work with. Both prosecution witnesses have done this...Nel is just like a kid in a candy store.

 

[molly333]

When you read on you will see that actually only three of these crimes relate to OP's estate - and two of them relate directly to OP! The other crimes were in the same district, but NOT on the estate.

I don't see how any of this helps the fact that the crime rate and murder rate is through the roof in SA.

Would I feel safe there? NO.

 

[Mr Ron]

Personally I'll be waiting till after the closing arguments to make a personal decision as to what I think OP is guilty of with regards to what happened on the evening of the 14th February.

I've only just started reading the transcripts of the prosecution case prior to Pistorius taking the stand and there's still a hell of a lot of the defence case to be put. I don't think anybody should reach a judgement until all the facts are weighed and the arguments finalised.

That said I'd be surprised if he wasn't found guilty of the charges relating to the restaurant. Then again the defence is far from finished.

From what I've seen I don't think the prosecution has made a strong enough case (so far) for him to be found guilty (beyond reasonable doubt) of having premeditated the murder of Reeva Steenkamp specifically. However the way the case has been tried before court and witnessing the prosecutor's style in cross examination means that an extrapolation of the prosecutions final arguments is difficult. Nel seems to take a piecemeal approach to questioning, whereby things are put on record in a fairly haphazard fashion - out of order of their happening.

If we relate this, for example, to his questioning of Pistorius I suspect that he may have found enough inconsistencies, logical contradictions and admissions to at least put Pistorius in grave danger of being found guilty of culpable homicide and possibly even murder even if it is granted that the greater part of Pistorius' testimony is true. Again it depends on how well the prosecution weaves these miriad inconsistencies into a cogent closing argument and how well the defence can explain them in a different fashion.

We just have to wait and see.

 

[Lyra500]

I don't see how any of this helps the fact that the crime rate and murder rate is through the roof in SA.

Would I feel safe there? NO.

Several people who live in SA have posted on here very eloquently. The most recent made the points that firstly SA is not as bad as some people make out and secondly that the type of estate where OP lived is extremely secure. That is why people pay a fortune to live there. Hence OP's claims of feeling insecure are at least rather questionable. Quite apart from the fact that he sleeps with the doors open, leaves broken windows unfixed and doesn't seem to know when or if he has set the alarm - and chooses not to use the panic button.

 

[soozieqtips]

Ok I just saw the other source--6.3 times the murder rate of the US.

It doesn't change my argument.

I live in a place in the US where I do not have to lock my doors.

This type of place is rare here.

Even 1 crime in that type of community is unacceptable.

The minute there is 1 crime here, I go back to being hypervigilant.

BBM - You mean you wouldn't leave your balcony doors open while you slept?

 

[molly333]

Personally I'll be waiting till after the closing arguments to make a personal decision as to what I think OP is guilty of with regards to what happened on the evening of the 14th February.

I've only just started reading the transcripts of the prosecution case prior to Pistorius taking the stand and there's still a hell of a lot of the defence case to be put. I don't think anybody should reach a judgement until all the facts are weighed and the arguments finalised.

That said I'd be surprised if he wasn't found guilty of the charges relating to the restaurant. Then again the defence is far from finished.

From what I've seen I don't think the prosecution has made a strong enough case (so far) for him to be found guilty (beyond reasonable doubt) of having premeditated the murder of Reeva Steenkamp specifically. However the way the case has been tried before court and witnessing the prosecutor's style in cross examination means that an extrapolation of the prosecutions final arguments is difficult. Nel seems to take a piecemeal approach to questioning, whereby things are put on record in a fairly haphazard fashion - out of order of their happening.

If we relate this, for example, to his questioning of Pistorius I suspect that he may have found enough inconsistencies, logical contradictions and admissions to at least put Pistorius in grave danger of being found guilty of culpable homicide and possibly even murder even if it is granted that the greater part of Pistorius' testimony is true. Again it depends on how well the prosecution weaves these miriad inconsistencies into a cogent closing argument and how well the defence can explain them in a different fashion.

We just have to wait and see.

When they charged Oscar with pre-meditated murder, there were articles in the SA newspapers saying police believed he had hit Reeva with the bat, had shot her while on his prosthetics, etc.

I think they jumped the gun with the pre-meditated murder charge before all the facts were in. Maybe they were just covering their bases and that's how they do things there--I don't know.

But they have not proven pre-meditated murder and their case is over.