Trial Discussion Thread #3 - 14.03.08-09, Weekend

[Estelle]

The problem with this is that has already been testimony that suggests a witness mistook sounds Oscar was making for sounds made by a woman. We know that is what the defense will try to suggest with regard to the screams witnessed. In that event it becomes crucial to prove that the first sounds heard were not the the fatal shots. That has not been done.

From OP's Bail Hearing Affidavit with the focus on possible SOUNDS/SCREAMS/YELLS HEARD BY NEIGHBOURS FROM OP SOUNDING LIKE A WOMAN AND THE SEQUENCE OF SHOTS AND CRICKET BAT SOUNDS:

On my way to the bathroom I

1. SCREAMED "GET OUT OF MY HOUSE"

2. SCREAMED "REEVA PHONE THE POLICE"

3. FIRED SHOTS AT THE TOILET DOOR

4. SHOUTED "REEVA, CALL THE POLICE"

5. RETURNED TO BATHROOM CALLING "REEVA"

6. SCREAMED "HELP" FROM BALCONY

7. TRIED TO KICK TOILET DOOR OPEN

8. BASHED TOILET DOOR WITH CRICKET BAT

9. PANEL/S BROKE OFF

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/19/world/africa/south-africa-pistorius-affadavit/

IMO OP would have been shouting words which would not have sounded like the bloodcurdling screams that MB and CJ or the other neighbours heard. I would have imagined, the neighbours could have heard the words if OP did shout them - not as screams.

The semantics are interesting here because IMO a scream does not consist of a word so in 1,2 and 6 it should read "shouted" not "screamed"

So I am now thinking that Roux already had this idea when he assisted OP in writing his Affidavit, that he would write "screams" in those three places rather than "shouted" and then claim at trial that OP screams like a woman.

I find it very interesting that the word, "scream" was used as I would not have used it in this context, would you?

 

[Jamtart]

Apart from OP's alleged paranoid fear that night , why are we to believe that Reeva felt the same in the loo when OP was shouting for her to call the police and his voice appraoching toward her and that she kept silent while being killed violently? .. It was mentioned in the affi that bedroom door was locked and if Reeva got up and went to the loo passing thru the bathroom from where an intruder would ever come in? From the sky ? All of these nonsense things are too much . We don't know the reason but it's clear as day that OP murdered Reeva in cold blood IMO ...

So trying to fit all those heard woman's screams was in fact OP's own voice , awaikened neighbors, shoulder injuries and switching sides , OP changing affidavits or whatever and 2 fans and pitch darks and fully closed curtains and slides and Reeava's clothes on and hidden 5th phone and forgotten password , Reeva's alleged silence and , yelling 'Help help help' but in fact not calling anyone , everhthing is fine (!) , so many coverups I can't count .. I have never heard so much weird and absurd version of events altogether in a case ..More laughable is the efforts to paint this version to an innocent OP and accident format .. Comeon guys noone is stupid .. Whether you accept it or not golden boy is in fact a tin garbage boy and disgraced himself to the whole world online and a human being in no way can shoot 4 times thru a closed door to another human being otherwise that is murder .Home invasions being common in SA , being vulnerable or paranoid is not an excuse imo.

Can you explain about the 'hidden 5th phone' please? I only starting reading up on the case when the trial started so am still trying to get up to speed with all the information. This thread has been a goldmine of useful info. Thanks

 

[lisasalinger]

I have not seen anything reported about what was in her overnight bag. Either way, I don't think it's unusual that she would be sleeping in a t-shirt and yoga shorts.

I have no idea how it could be proved the order of the shots, but I don't really see how it matters either way. If he shot her with 4 shots in quick succession, it is reasonable to believe she had no opportunity to scream. And if she did scream, it is also reasonable to believe that he didn't hear it over the gunshots.

BBM

I agree that sleeping in a t-shirt and yoga shorts is not unusual, but isn't it interesting how it fits in to his version of events. He states she was doing yoga right before she went to bed.

We could look at it two ways. It's either true that she was, or he added it in there to explain her wearing clothes at 3am.

That's why I'm wondering what was in her overnight bag. If she typically slept in PJs and had them in her bag, why did she not change before bed?

Again, doesn't directly prove intent but just another piece of the story about what they were actually doing at that time of the morning.

 

[soozieqtips]

It's very convenient that the room was 'pitch black' once he'd pulled the blinds, and he therefore couldn't have seen Reeva wasn't in bed. Also, how come he didn't fall over or bump into stuff while navigating his way through the pitch blackness on the way to the bathroom? I know I bump into stuff all the time if I switch the lights off in the front room and then go down the hall to the bedroom. Did he have a seeing-eye dog with him or something??

Also, re: the switching sides of the bed on that particular night. I think someone pointed out on WS last year that he could have lied about that to explain why he wouldn't have seen Reeva wasn't in bed when he had to walk past the bed to the bathroom. Her side must have been closest to the bathroom? This is from The Guardian:

Botha said that Pistorius would have had to pass his bed to walk from the balcony to the bathroom,
suggesting he would have noticed whether or not Steenkamp was in bed.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2013/feb/20/oscar-pistorius-bail-hearing-day-two-live-coverage

So he can say that because she was on the other side of the bed that night, he couldn't see her. Very strange considering her stuff was on the left side as it had been the night before.

Roux said Pistorius had a shoulder problem and so he slept on the other side of the bed than usual on the night in question. Steenkamp had spent the previous night there too, and had slept on her usual side that night. Nel expressed scepticism about this explanation.

EDIT: I said 'left' meaning as you face the bed.

 

[atthelake]

Something we should all keep in mind is that Oscar gave his statement at the bail hearing before having any information about what the state's witnesses would say - also Shipp's statement to police was given before the bail hearing and before any other witnesses had given their accounts and before the media had reported on these events.

For those reasons, Shipp's statement should be given considerable weight IMO and Oscar cannot be said to have tailored his account to explain away witness accounts.

Respectfully, How do we not know this? That Oscar didn't tailor his story...

your quote of "and Oscar cannot be said to have tailored his account to explain away witness accounts"

You are correct that it was given before the bail hearing, but how can you be SURE that it was not tailored from Oscar?

I'll give you... It's not in evidence that the lawyer DID contact the doctor YET. It was relayed to the doctor to expect a call from Oscar's lawyer less than ONE HOUR after this happened IIRC. THAT is in evidence.

Again, it's so confusing to me that in SA court they haven't laid the FACTS of phone calls etc out before the earwitnesses. I'm hoping that they lay it out in court as it seems folks are speaking to such, but it hasn't been laid out. Just the SA defense atty talking and leading and confusing as to facts imho. Again, perhaps a cultural difference that is wanting me to pull out my hair lol.

 

[Carol70]

I would feel happier, given he had not called an ambulance or the police, if he had said please call the police and an ambulance. By not doing so, if Reeva was still alive, he will have possibly contributed to her death by not providing medical assistance. To knowingly not provide help to an injured person is illegal in the UK. Is it not the same in SA?

I'm not sure to be honest, I know it is against children, to knowingly not seek medical help if they are ill or injured, not sure if it's the same for adults. I actually don't think it is after regularly reading about elderly people who are neglected to the extremes when being looked after by family, mostly in the townships, there are never any arrests.

 

[Jamtart]

For sure, the comments of other people who appeared to know them are certainly food for thought. They defiantly indicate all was not well in the relationship and possibly answers the question we were all asking last year as to where was Reevas valentine gift from OP. I'm now wondering if the pros will call any of these witnesses of the relationship to refute OPs claims of being in love even to the detriment of Reevas memory. Time will tell I guess.

I have seen two mentions of Reeva being accused of blackmailing OP on these types of article comments...does anyone know anything about those allegations? Surely that would if true provide another possible motive?

 

[Carol70]

/Respect. Snipped.


They really need to be more accommodating to us :giggle:

Hahaha lol.

Reminded me of this morning when this is the one day I've actually had time to go over properly the weeks events and my family need me to make lunch, something to drink, do this, do that etc, told them all to bugger off because I'm on jury duty!!

 

[atthelake]

<snipped>

I have no idea how it could be proved the order of the shots, but I don't really see how it matters either way. If he shot her with 4 shots in quick succession, it is reasonable to believe she had no opportunity to scream. And if she did scream, it is also reasonable to believe that he didn't hear it over the gunshots.

trying to understand your use of the term "reasonable" but to me, is obfuscation of the facts laid out...which is what I see is the primary thrust also of the defense... OBFUSCATION!!! Respectfully disagree that it's reasonable that he would not have heard her screams over the gunshots. Everyone else did.. unless you want to conjecture that it was him SCREAMING as he was shooting?

 

[Really?]

Did anyone catch--with certainty--just where Mr Baba was when the "Everything is Fine" from Oscar conversation took place?

I originally thought Mr Baba was at the main security gate. But now I think he may have been already outside Oscar's house.

What say you?

security gate

 

[lisasalinger]

It's very convenient that the room was 'pitch black' once he'd pulled the blinds, and he therefore couldn't have seen Reeva wasn't in bed. Also, how come he didn't fall over or bump into stuff while navigating his way through the pitch blackness on the way to the bathroom? I know I bump into stuff all the time if I switch the lights off in the front room and then go down the hall to the bedroom. Did he have a seeing-eye dog with him or something??

Also, re: the switching sides of the bed on that particular night. I think someone pointed out on WS last year that he could have lied about that to explain why he wouldn't have seen Reeva wasn't in bed when he had to walk past the bed to the bathroom. Her side must have been closest to the bathroom? This is from The Guardian:



http://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2013/feb/20/oscar-pistorius-bail-hearing-day-two-live-coverage

So he can say that because she was on the other side of the bed that night, he couldn't see her. Very strange considering her stuff was on the left side as it had been the night before.


EDIT: I said 'left' meaning as you face the bed.

BBM

The whole pitch black bedroom and not seeing Reeva just bugs me so much. He was the one that made the room pitch black by closing the balcony door, blinds & curtains.

In that same exact moment he hears a "terror-inducing" sound in the bathroom. Why not just crack open the curtains an inch to give you light enough to see where Reeva is? It was he who induced the pitch-blackness and he had the immediate means to fix that without turning on a light.

He presents the incident as if he had no other choice but to blast through a door way and kill who was on the other side but if you look at the story, you can see 100 other extremely logical things that he could have easily done along the way.

 

[shane13]

security gate

Thanks.

Are you certain?
When did you listed to testimony?

When I re-listened yesterday, it seemed like he had driven over there after Dr Stipp recommended this.

 

[atthelake]

I was just about to start my post with "I understand" and then immediately realized I have Roux syndrome.. :floorlaugh: Ok so let's see how I can phrase this a little better...

Is it possible that Oscar meant there was no security risk? Sure. It's also possible that I am going to marry Leonardo DiCaprio.

Common sense is such an enormous part of trial, and life. We can't live without it and those that do typically don't fare very well.

Honestly put yourself in Oscar's (supposed) shoes... you have just accidentally shot and killed your loved one. You are trying to convince the court that you are screaming and wailing so much that all of the witnesses in the neighborhood think you are a woman. And then within minutes you calmly say "I'm fine" to a security guard who checks on you. Does that make sense at all? He can't have it both ways. He can't be wailing like a woman and he can't "be fine" at the same time.

I do get that you are trying to give OP every change possible, and I respect that. But in your heart of hearts, can you honestly tell us that this is reasonable to you? If your answer is yes, then I will respect that.

As many of us have been discussing, we all bring to this trial our own backgrounds...and some on this thread are verified (iirc defense) attorneys from the United States who like to probe and question and put forth a defense within the threads. WS to some perhaps is sort of a "mini-focus group" - to put forth challenges and suppositions and opinions for feedback.

 

[Patagonia]

And actually, given Oscar's version of events, personality can have absolutely no bearing on why her shot her dead since he says he did not know it was her when he shot through the bathroom door.

People cannot have it all ways. Either he knew it was Reeva and shot her dead which is murder or he thought it was an intruder and shot them dead, which is still murder.

It doesnt matter what Reeva was like, it is still murder.

Before I came across such comments (first via Twitter; there are so many people out there saying similar things, I was extremely shocked at first reading that people could write things like that, but they do seem to be the people from SA, who know them personally, and (apart from being disgusted), I did end up believing Oscar wasn't really much into Reeva, actually (and had an affair with her mostly because Samatha cheated on him. There wasn't much of a relationship between Oscar and Reeva, and the time they spent together was riddled with fighting. That is the impression I got from researching this case.

But I have to say that that actually made me believe Oscar even less. And be even more convinced that he shot her knowing full well it was her behind those doors. After a fight, in a blind rage (as he was known to have a temper and often overreact). Before that, I was actually on the fence, or more accurately - willing to give him a benefit of a doubt. Now, not so much any more. I will reserve to give my final opinion after the trial is finished, but right now, I would bet on his guilt. (Although, I do think Roux is doing a better job than Nel, if I am looking at it in a strictly legal sense.)

Patagonia - i have to say i find pasting all those poisonous comments a bit questionable. How do you know that those people actually know Reeva or OP? How do you know most of them are not huge OP fans just stirring up trouble?

Like I said, via Twitter, I came across many people that say pretty much the same things (about the nature of their relationship), and I came to the conclusion they knew them personally, yes. I can't back that opinion up without posting more comments, though

But I do apologize for posting them, it was an honest mistake, I didn't realize it was against the rules. And I certainly didn't want to offend anyone. I just thought they would be contributing to the matter, in a way I explained above. As they possibly provide with a motive, which is a huge thing for the Prosecution, in my opinion. And possibly could prove (above any doubt) that OP lied in his Affidavit.

 

[soozieqtips]

BBM

The whole pitch black bedroom and not seeing Reeva just bugs me so much. He was the one that made the room pitch black by closing the balcony door, blinds & curtains.

In that same exact moment he hears a "terror-inducing" sound in the bathroom. Why not just crack open the curtains an inch to give you light enough to see where Reeva is? It was he who induced the pitch-blackness and he had the immediate means to fix that without turning on a light.

He presents the incident as if he had no other choice but to blast through a door way and kill who was on the other side but if you look at the story, you can see 100 other extremely logical things that he could have easily done along the way.

Exactly. There he was 'panicking' and fumbling around on his stumps in the pitch black when he could have just turned on a light or opened the curtain. But of course he couldn't do that because he'd have had no excuse as to why he hadn't seen Reeva. I swear a child could come up with a better story than this. And why would he be scared of turning on the light? He thought the intruder was in the bathroom, not the bedroom.

 

[shane13]

Hey Carol:

To your knwledge, which is the biggest talk radio show in South Africa? They now usually also have an internet listening site.

But also which biggest talk radio show allows callers?

 

[soozieqtips]

Before I came across such comments (first via Twitter; there are so many people out there saying similar things, I was extremely shocked at first reading that people could write things like that, but they do seem to be the people from SA, who know them personally, and (apart from being disgusted), I did end up believing Oscar wasn't really much into Reeva, actually (and had an affair with her mostly because Samatha cheated on him. There wasn't much of a relationship between Oscar and Reeva, and the time they spent together was riddled with fighting. That is the impression I got from researching this case.

But I have to say that that actually made me believe Oscar even less. And be even more convinced that he shot her knowing full well it was her behind those doors. After a fight, in a blind rage (as he was known to have a temper and often overreact). Before that, I was actually on the fence, or more accurately - willing to give him a benefit of a doubt. Now, not so much any more. I will reserve to give my final opinion after the trial is finished, but right now, I would bet on his guilt. (Although, I do thing Roux is doing a better job that Nel, if I am looking at it in a strictly legal sense.)



Like I said, via Twitter, I came across many people that say pretty much the same things (about the nature of their relationship), and I came to the conclusion they knew them personally, yes. I can't back that opinion up without posting more comments, though

But I do apologize for posting them, it was an honest mistake, I didn't realize it was against the rules. And I certainly didn't want to offend anyone. I just thought they would be contributing to the matter, in a way I explained above. As they possibly provide with a motive, which is a huge thing for the Prosecution, in my opinion. And possibly could prove (above any doubt) that OP lied in his Affidavit.

Why are you so sure these trolls knew them personally? Just because they said so? There's lots of information about OP and Reeva in the public domain that they could use to make it seem there was a personal connection, but to be honest, the vitriol against Reeva convinces me they didn't know her at all and simply have an obvious agenda. OP supporters is the most likely. I don't think the prosecution is going to take any notice of a bunch of psycho nutters posting hateful things about Reeva.

You could have just posted the link to the site rather than post all those comments. Maybe you could edit your post?

 

[Zinn]

Thanks.

Are you certain?
When did you listed to testimony?

When I re-listened yesterday, it seemed like he had driven over there after Dr Stipp recommended this.

I haven't listened to the testimony, but I've followed it by reading the tweets of a reporter in the courtroom. That reporter quoted the witness (Baba) as saying he was at the security gate at 2:55 and was informed by another guard on bike duty that he'd just heard gunshots. Moments later, security received two calls from neighbors regarding gunshots.

(IIRC, Baba said he first drove to the home of one of the callers who then pointed out OP's balcony. However, I'm not 100% certain of my recollection. It could have been a different guard who went to the caller's house.)

But back to what I more firmly remember, according to the reporter, Baba stated he drove to OP's house and called him from outside his house. That's when he claims OP told him everything was fine. O.P. then called him back and was crying.

I believe Roux suggested O.P. called security first, but Baba testified that was not the case, Baba called O.P. first.

As always, all of the above is just my opinion.

 

[Really?]

sorry if this has been asked before.....but anyway....do we know whose phone Reeva had with her in the bathroom?

 

[wishIknewmore]

Welcome! What are your thoughts on whether Oscar's guilty or innocent? What jumps out at you the most?

I think OP shot Reeva in a fit a rage and tried to put together a story, with the help from his attorney's that fit the evidence. I think OP was "trigger happy" and perhaps a little paranoid. Due to his celebrity status, he felt "above the law" which explains his initial actions (ex. like saying everything is OK), which makes me believe he thought it could all be kept quiet. There are way too many holes in the story for this to be the whole truth. What I'm not sure about is his frame of mind right now. I believe he might be a narcissist which means all the mannerisms of sadness and guilt we see is more about putting on a show. His tears are more about how this effects him. If he's not a narcissist, then perhaps we are seeing genuine remorse.