Trial Discussion Thread #3 - 14.03.08-09, Weekend

[Jamtart]

I don't see why you'd have to switch your side of the bed if you have a shoulder injury. It seems the simple solution would be to just sleep on the shoulder that's not bothering you or on your back. Why would you need to switch sides to do that? And personally, if my right shoulder was injured I would find it more comfortable to sleep on the right side of the bed so if I laid on my left side I'd be facing away from the middle and get more air. That's just me though.

I think I would swap sides if I was sharing the bed, so that the affected shoulder was on the outside edge...if I was in a great deal of pain, or it was painful to touch I would be worried in case my other half rolled over on it or banged into it...I did that when I had an ankle injury to keep it out of harm's way

 

[Jamtart]

BBM

Exactly. For example, he had a few cell phones within reach. He could have grabbed his loaded gun, picked up the cell and called security and advised them of the possible intruder. Then woken up his sleeping girlfriend, and exited. Or waited on the balcony with their loaded weapon and shot anything that moved, while waiting for security.

Why did he think someone climbed into his bathroom, when his two guard dogs never barked. My German Shepherd GOE NUTS if anyone comes near our yard. I dont get scared unless my dog is barking a certain way. She barks at squirrels and cats and the garbage truck and I ignore it. But if she feels that someone is lurking, she has a very aggressive, loud and scary bark. Why would he think his dogs weren't barking if there was someone crawling into his upstairs window? He obviously did not think it though.

If OP's version of events is true there are indeed many alternative, far more prudent actions that he could (and obviously should) have taken and you or I would have reacted differently...however this is a man who had previously tweeted something about coming home to hear the noise of the washing machine and immediately going into 'recon mode' (ie battle mode) because his first thought was that it was an intruder in the kitchen.

 

[kittychi]

We absolutely should write down a detailed timeline..
I'm way too confused LOL ullhair:

.

Agreed! I still don't know where it fits in that Oscar went downstairs, opened his front door, went out and started his car, opened the car door and ran back up to get Reeva before security & Dr. Stipp et al arrived at his door.

Was he really going to take her to his car and only put her down on the floor because all of those people showed up at his door?

.

 

[shane13]

Technically, no , Shane.. a barrister, a legal attorney, ones legal representative operates under the Clients instruction at all times..

of course , ones legal rep makes suggestions , naturally, but for the purposes of the court, and any trial for that matter, the legal rep is under the instructions of the Client.. the legal rep doesnt take on the trail under his OWN say so , or perspective..

Oscar has been adjudged sane enough to issue instructions to his legal chap, other wise Roux wouldnt be there..

Roux is indemnified from any repercussions that may ensue precisely BECAUSE he is under his clients instructions.

Any body, anyone who has a member of the bar representing them at trial has and is deemed to have issued them with instructions on what is their case to put before the court.

If Roux is running his own show, Oscar could fire him, and a judge would back him up and Roux would be censured.. probably disbared..never to be allowed to practise law again.

so we can with utter and serene certainty say, that Roux is acting under his client's ( Oscar) instruction.. from go to whoa.. this is what Oscar is paying for. As we all do. we pay for the legal rep to put our case under our instruction.

Really?

Oscar is a runner, not a crime scene tactician or logician.

 

[Harmony 2]

Because if this was indeed a tumultuous relationship, it could provide a motive for the killing - as none has been mentioned so far in the trial.

ETA: I was not suggesting that those comments were truthful or should be believed. That is why I asked if there was any more information about her and about their relationship - maybe from a more reliable source.

Comments are considered rumors and we don't allow rumor here at websleuths. There is no way to verify who is making the comments or the veracity of their claims.

This is what RS's mom stated about the relationship.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...teenkamp-fought-a-lot-say-models-parents.html

 

[minor4th]

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.

Well, let me clarify - he didn't tailor his account based on witness statements because he didn't have any yet. It's possible he thought about what happened and made up an account in anticipation to what witnesses might say.

I agree that it's very confusing the way they present evidence, intermingled with argument and commentary and "I put it to you" and so forth. Very frustrating indeed.

 

[minor4th]

Comments are considered rumors and we don't allow rumor here at websleuths. There is no way to verify who is making the comments or the veracity of their claims.

This is what RS's mom stated about the relationship.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...teenkamp-fought-a-lot-say-models-parents.html

I understand and I did not post the comments - and I suggested and agreed that comments cannot be relied on as truth. I asked if anyone knew anything or any source that might give us more information.

Sorry if it came across that I supported the comments or believed them or encouraged them being posted on the board.

ETA: Thank you for the link to the article!

 

[minor4th]

Am I the only one who always describes the right or left side of the bed from the position of lying in it? That is, if I say I sleep on the left side of the bed, I mean my left when I am in the bed.

Yes, you are the only one :loveyou:

 

[minor4th]

And it brings us right back to the 4 shots in general. Anybody who is familiar with guns and who is certified to shoot a gun, as Oscar was, understands that 4 gunshots will very likely kill somebody especially in a small confined space. That alone is definitely indication of intent to kill. So we still need to focus on him "knowing" that it was Reeva in the bathroom. They need to nail down that proof.

The potential witnesses to the right of Oscar (from Stipp's vantage point) that had their lights on that night are huge. I wonder if perhaps they may have seen Oscar & Reeva that night. They would overlook his bedroom balcony, right? I really hope they testify and have something substantive that we can dig in to.

I do wish that both Nel and Roux were more articulate in their questions and arguments. They seem to ramble about and I find myself confused or just totally zoning out when they speak. This case is so complex that it would be a thousand times more helpful to have clear, well-articulated arguments, as well as exhibits that we could view. They really need to be more accommodating to us :giggle:

I did read yesterday that both neighbors on his left and right will be called to testify. Roux has hinted that they heard "nothing" - if that's the case, that is just one more oddity in this case because you would think they would have at least heard gunshots or yelling.

 

[shane13]

Comments are considered rumors and we don't allow rumor here at websleuths. There is no way to verify who is making the comments or the veracity of their claims.

This is what RS's mom stated about the relationship.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...teenkamp-fought-a-lot-say-models-parents.html

Harmony:

Thank you.

Do you know the rest of that story about "Oscar driving lke a lunatic"?

Oscar refused to listen to Reeva imploring him to slow down. Only when Oscar took the phone from Reeva and spoke to June Steenkamp--who threatened him with "the Mafia"--did Oscar finally slow down.

The driving problem, whch I have attributed to Schadenfreude or sadism,--loving to watch his passengers squirm in fear of their lives--was confirmed by NY Times reporter, Michael Sokolove.

He had the OP story published in the Sunday NY Times Magazine IIRC. He detailed that Oscar drove him at 155 mph in the rain.

Later after the shooting, in a TV interview, he revealed that it was even worse. Oscar was driving at 155 mph in the rain and was tailgating cars in front.

Many people who knew Reeva said she was one of loveliest human beings they ever met. So thank you for not allowing such foul comments. I am not saying Reeva was a saint or such, but those comments are not likely true at all.

 

[katydid23]

If OP's version of events is true there are indeed many alternative, far more prudent actions that he could (and obviously should) have taken and you or I would have reacted differently...however this is a man who had previously tweeted something about coming home to hear the noise of the washing machine and immediately going into 'recon mode' (ie battle mode) because his first thought was that it was an intruder in the kitchen.

When did he tweet this?

I am curious, because I have a hard time believing that he was in pure 'recon mode' all of the time. He left a ladder outside his home under the window. He was in bed with the sliding glass door to the balcony open.

Why would he assume that a noise in the bathroom was an intruder if his two guard dogs down below, roaming the yard, were not barking? And why wouldn't he think it might be his girlfriend in the toilet? He said he had just spoken to her before he went to get the fans, so he knew she was awake. Why didn't he look to see, when he retrieved his gun, and when she didn't answer him? None of that makes sense to me. As a man of the house, I would think that protecting his woman was of utmost concern in case of a home invasion. And he didnt even take a moment to see where she was or to warn her of the impending danger?

 

[katydid23]

I did read yesterday that both neighbors on his left and right will be called to testify. Roux has hinted that they heard "nothing" - if that's the case, that is just one more oddity in this case because you would think they would have at least heard gunshots or yelling.

Unless of course they are good friends of his, and have their own agenda, as protectors.

 

[Jamtart]

Yes, you are the only one :loveyou:

Nope, he/she (sorry Cherwell but I don't know which applies!) isn't. That's how I would describe it too

 

[minor4th]

Timeline from phone calls - please add additional information if it is known:

• 2:00 a.m. - Werwe heard what sounded like a woman's voice on one side of an argument
  
  
• 2:20 a.m. - Security check at Oscar's house; everything was normal
  
  
• 3:00 - 3:15 a.m. -Shtipp was woken up by 3 "shots" and got up and went to balcony to see where it was coming from
  
  
• 3:00 - 3:17 a.m. - Stipp reports he heard a woman "screaming or yelling" 2 or 3 times
  
  
• 3:15 a.m. - Burger and Johnson awoke to the sounds of loud screams they identified as coming from a female
  
  
• 3:15- 3:16 a.m. - Burger and Johnson report they heard yelling "help, help, help"
  
  
• 3:17 a.m. - Stipp heard "2 or 3" additional "shots"
  
  
• 3:17 a.m. Burger and Johnson heard "3 or 4" sounds they believe to be gunshots
  
  
• After 3:17 a.m. - Werwe heard "loud crying" that she initially thought was a woman, but her husband identified the voice as Oscar Pistorius
  
  
• 3:20 a.m. - Oscar calls Netcare and reports that they advised him to take Reeva to the hospital and not wait for the ambulance
  
  
• 3:21 a.m. - Oscar calls security - only crying is heard
  
  
• 3:27 a.m. - Stipp calls security for the second time and then hears Oscar screaming "help, help, help" (?? - IMO it's unclear if this was an intentional call and whether Stipp actually heard Oscar screaming after his 3:17 call to security -otherwise, this seems like an impossibility)
  
  
• 3:28 a.m. Both Stander and Stipp are at Oscar's house; Stander calls ambulance from Stipp's phone
  

Unknowns - please fill in the info if you know:

1. What time was the call to security when Oscar said "Security, everything is fine"

2. Did Werwe report hearing gunshots or "help, help, help" and if so did she give a time?

 

[minor4th]

Unless of course they are good friends of his, and have their own agenda, as protectors.

If they are, I supposed that will be brought out at trial. I'm also not going to rely on Roux' offhand comment that they heard "nothing." We'll see what the evidence actually reveals.

 

[minor4th]

YES!!!! This lays out it for me. It is the testimony that Roux and OP must discredit because there's only 1 explanation if this is true.

The problem with this is that neither Stipp, nor Burger and Johnson reported in their initial statements that they heard a man's screams intermingled with a woman's. Both reported only hearing the screams of what they believed to be a woman.

 

[Jamtart]

When did he tweet this?

I am curious, because I have a hard time believing that he was in pure 'recon mode' all of the time. He left a ladder outside his home under the window. He was in bed with the sliding glass door to the balcony open.

Why would he assume that a noise in the bathroom was an intruder if his two guard dogs down below, roaming the yard, were not barking? And why wouldn't he think it might be his girlfriend in the toilet? He said he had just spoken to her before he went to get the fans, so he knew she was awake. Why didn't he look to see, when he retrieved his gun, and when she didn't answer him? None of that makes sense to me. As a man of the house, I would think that protecting his woman was of utmost concern in case of a home invasion. And he didnt even take a moment to see where she was or to warn her of the impending danger?

The tweet was referred to in the first part of this thread, and again in an article I read online. Most people don't go on the offensive at the sound of a washing machine but he apparently does, according to his tweet. That suggest to me that OP thinks differently to me, so I can accept the possibility that his reactions upon hearing a noise in the bathroom during the night might differ to mine. My circumstances are also different.

Look, a lot of OP's behaviour doesn't make sense to me either if I try to understand it within the context of the way that I think and behave. However, with the information that I am reading and hearing about the way that OP behaves (which I guess reflects his thinking processes), then some of his account of that night could make sense. Maybe he left the window open because it would be difficult to access the balcony by climbing up the outside wall, maybe he locked the bedroom door because he believed that burglars would be more likely to enter by the ground floor so that made sense to him....even if it doesn't make sense to us. The point I am making is that just because it's not what I would do, or what you would do doesn't in itself necessarily mean that he's lying. There seems to be some evidence to suggest that he is reckless with firearms and gung-ho, a bit arrogant and aggressive, and possibly a bit paranoid....in that context his behaviour doesn't seem totally unbelievable to me.

 

[minor4th]

When did he tweet this?

I am curious, because I have a hard time believing that he was in pure 'recon mode' all of the time. He left a ladder outside his home under the window. He was in bed with the sliding glass door to the balcony open.

Why would he assume that a noise in the bathroom was an intruder if his two guard dogs down below, roaming the yard, were not barking? And why wouldn't he think it might be his girlfriend in the toilet? He said he had just spoken to her before he went to get the fans, so he knew she was awake. Why didn't he look to see, when he retrieved his gun, and when she didn't answer him? None of that makes sense to me. As a man of the house, I would think that protecting his woman was of utmost concern in case of a home invasion. And he didnt even take a moment to see where she was or to warn her of the impending danger?

From Business Insider:




And then there's this from January 2012 New York Times interview and article about Oscar Pistorius:

As he put together lunch for all of us — fruit smoothies, breaded chicken fillets he pulled from the refrigerator — he mentioned that a security alarm in the house had gone off the previous night, and he had grabbed his gun and tiptoed downstairs. (It turned out to be nothing.)

 

[MeeBee]

Am I the only one who always describes the right or left side of the bed from the position of lying in it? That is, if I say I sleep on the left side of the bed, I mean my left when I am in the bed.

Lol, I never know if I should describe it that way or looking at the bed. I usually describe it as if I'm looking at the bed. I'm sure you're not the only one. In the case of Oscar and Reeva, I assume they're describing it that way too based on the drawings of the layout of the room. But...I'm not too sure about it now.

 

[minor4th]

I just found this bill of additional particulars from the state. Thought y'all would find it interesting. Note that the state reports that OP was likely on his stumps when he fired the shots and was at a distance of greater than 60 cm from the bathroom door.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/208363280/Pistorius-Documents