Trial Discussion Thread #30

[steveml]

Hi Steve.

Had Oscar lived in Pretoria for a substantial number of years or moved there more recently? I can't recall.

Hi,

I've not looked into much of OP's background history. He was boin in Johannesburg and later went to Pretoria Boys High School, so I suspect he has been in Pretoria for quite some time.

 

[BritsKate]

I keep forgetting how different this system is compared to ours. :banghead:



Nel was trying to get OP to testify against himself on the stand to a crime he is not even charged with.



Did you see my reference to the man who shot his pregnant wife coming out bathroom thinking she was a burglar?



I think he got an 8 year suspended sentence.

We've all seen that case I think. Differences: no one heard screaming for several minutes before he states he fired and he fired once.


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[TrueDetective]

Because Gerrie did not want them as state witnesses. We have an adversarial system here.
Gerrie wants them on the cross.

Barry can't afford not to call at least one of them to testify to Oscar's state of mind after the fact as 'friendlies'. (Oscar needs that for any of his 10000 defenses to work...)

I repeat, Gerrie wants them on the cross. He took a gamble, but I reckon he knows Barry almost 'has to call them'.

Should be better than Dixon I reckon.

Cape
Do you think DT layman witnesses (unpaid presumably?) will want to testify at all seeing which way the wind is blowing?

Do you think one or both of the Standers will?
If they don't is there any way Nel can call further witnesses that he really, really wants to x-exam?

Can imagine Nel tearing them a new hairstyle.

 

[molly333]

But this one doesn't look suspicious?

It did look suspicious at first to me. It doesn't any more.

All the DT has to do at this point is prove that Oscar can scream like a girl and game over, IMO.

The prosecutor really doesn't have anything. He was assuming he had a simple case--woman screams, gunshots, murder.

Then Dr. Stipp came along.

 

[Emz73]

Cape town crim. You are like a breath of fresh air. Always great to hear new info and opinions.

If Nel said the gunshots were at 3.17 (? Exact) and the stipps looked at their clock when they heard gunshots at 3.17. Oscar says 3.12. (Obviously he can "see" time running around, shooting, screaming, shouting etc etc )What do you think the bangs were at 3 am? And also what do you think Nel thinks the bangs were at 3am.
Ta.

 

[DebinGA]

He used the noise the fans were making to 'cover' for the fact that he didn't hear Reeva move out of the bed. But he had to move from the fans quickly in order to hear the window slam - hence his story about faffing around with jeans and LED lights.

BBM means "bolded by me" to spotlight something

Thanks for responding to my question, Cape Town Crim. I contend, perhaps wrongly, that OP's bathroom window panels could only hit the window frame if being closed, not opened as OP claims.

 

[molly333]

You are aware that the man shot once, at a moving target he thought was a burglar. He also rushed her to hospital immediately.

He didn't do: FOUR shots, no movement, Black Talon ammo into a space as big as a wheelie bin. He didn't run around for 15 minutes wailing and screaming. He didn't sit over his wife's body crying and he certainly didn't phone a 'friend'.

Simple.

Yes, but big difference that could account for his actions, Reeva was dead upon receiving that head wound.

The four shots is maybe not so problematic--he couldn't see who he was shooting and didn't know he had hit anyone.

 

[TrueDetective]

Hi Cape - loving your posts!

Okay, couple of questions. Please bear with me :smile:

1. One of the Standers (Johann) has been in court listening to evidence as far as I recall. I thought witnesses weren't allowed to be in court before giving evidence?

2. The missing phone. The DT handed it in a couple of weeks later. Since OP's house was a crime scene and someone deliberately removed the phone, can the Judge at least ask how the DT came to be in possession of it, ie; who gave it to them?

3. Do you have any idea what loose ends Nel might tie up in his closing argument? There seemed to be many things that he didn't pursue that several of us thought he would pursue. Is that part of his master plan to weave it all together right at the end? Can he imply that whoever removed the phone must have been someone of authority?

4. Is it at all possible that the Judge could be influenced/intimidated by people in higher places to let him walk free? If the scene was disturbed intentionally and included stealing a watch to make it look like the police were bumbling thieves, then certain people have gone to great lengths to protect OP. Bearing that in mind, do you think the Judge is immune to pressure from external sources?

Thank you!

Direct, probing, key questions.
You should be a prosecutor.

 

[Emz73]

It did look suspicious at first to me. It doesn't any more.

All the DT has to do at this point is prove that Oscar can scream like a girl and game over, IMO.

The prosecutor really doesn't have anything. He was assuming he had a simple case--woman screams, gunshots, murder.

Then Dr. Stipp came along.

Really??? You still honestly after everything you've read and people have linked to you, believe the prosecutor doesn't have anything?

 

[TrueDetective]

It did look suspicious at first to me. It doesn't any more.

All the DT has to do at this point is prove that Oscar can scream like a girl and game over, IMO.

The prosecutor really doesn't have anything. He was assuming he had a simple case--woman screams, gunshots, murder.

Then Dr. Stipp came along.

Baking powder?
Pass the biscuits.

 

[BritsKate]

Yes, but big difference that could account for his actions, Reeva was dead upon receiving that head wound.



The four shots is maybe not so problematic--he couldn't see who he was shooting and didn't know he had hit anyone.

The four shots, without seeing what he was shooting, make a putative self-defence claim more problematic, not less.

MOO

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[molly333]

Cape town crim. You are like a breath of fresh air. Always great to hear new info and opinions.

If Nel said the gunshots were at 3.17 (? Exact) and the stipps looked at their clock when they heard gunshots at 3.17. Oscar says 3.12. (Obviously he can "see" time running around, shooting, screaming, shouting etc etc )What do you think the bangs were at 3 am? And also what do you think Nel thinks the bangs were at 3am.
Ta.

I don't think Oscar says 3:12 for the shooting. The defense team specifically puts the gunshots first. The gunshots for the defense would be the ones you are referring to as '3am.'

 

[soozieqtips]

Direct, probing, key questions.
You should be a prosecutor.

Cape Town Crim is our brand new shiny toy and we get to play with him until he gets bored and 'Nels' us.

Yep. I've invented a new verb :floorlaugh:

 

[soozieqtips]

I don't think Oscar says 3:12 for the shooting. The defense team specifically puts the gunshots first. The gunshots for the defense would be the ones you are referring to as '3am.'

OP said he didn't look at a clock so he's just guessing about times.

The other witnesses looked at their clocks when the commotion started.

 

[weeeva]

Do I detect a hint of bias that you might think he also is Mr Innocent?
Come on weeva, if anyone has seen the documentaries about the Dewani case then you cannot seriously presume innocence.
He has questions to answer, the case has been brought to trial and again... there is a murdered woman at the heart of it.
Have an open mind YES but as onlookers based on the information we already have it is not bias - it is an opinion based on the facts and information available at the time.
Anyway, this is OT.. I'm sure there will be a busy forum soon if not already

I feel exactly the same way as I do about OP's case, and I will wait for the court evidence before I make up my mind either way. I hope the evidence is more clear-cut in the Dewani case than it has been in the present case, cos I don't want this uncertainty to repeat itself. It is not good for the blood pressure.
And yes many will go straight into the Dewani case biased.
But we can argue the bit out when the trial starts.

 

[molly333]

The four shots, without seeing what he was shooting, make a putative self-defence claim more problematic, not less.

MOO

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

It's better than knowing he was putting 4 bullets into Reeva.

All the Judge has to do is believe that he believed he was in imminent danger for his life.

 

[BritsKate]

I don't think Oscar says 3:12 for the shooting. The defense team specifically puts the gunshots first. The gunshots for the defense would be the ones you are referring to as '3am.'

He testified to 5 minutes being the shooting time before he broke the door down. It makes it 3:12 which contradicts the defence assertion the first bangs were gunshots or means all the witnesses were wrong on time.

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[TrueDetective]

Yes, but big difference that could account for his actions, Reeva was dead upon receiving that head wound.

The four shots is maybe not so problematic--he couldn't see who he was shooting and didn't know he had hit anyone.

Another couple of rounds would make sure though right.
Or not? How many black talon bullets would you say was reasonable defence against a window slide, a door slam and a "wood move"?

Quite responsible of him to stop at just the 4 when you think about it.
I wonder how many bullets were in the gun?

And we know, for sure, that there were no holes in the WC door before the shots...

 

[jay-jay]

I have always felt that there was a fairly obvious motive for OP to want to try and discredit Dr Stipp.

Dr & Mrs Stipp's testimony go a long way to making OP's version of events untenable. Barry Roux and Oldwage really put the boot into Mrs Stipp, but Dr Stipp needed to be 'sorted' as he was a very persuasive and credible witness. Hence OP's ham-fisted attempt to suggest he is incompetent. He was concerned about the testimony and resentful about what he probably sees as unwarranted interference in his affairs. How dare Dr Stipp come over and invite himself in and then have the gall to appear as a prosecution witness?

I trust MiLady will see this for the tawdry and contemptible ruse it is.

I'm fairly certain that she feels OP and the DT are insulting her intelligence and I bet she is not best pleased by it (and the only reason why she has been fairly considerate towards OP is because she wants to ensure he cannot claim he didn't have a fair trial and appeal against the verdict).

 

[soozieqtips]

It's better than knowing he was putting 4 bullets into Reeva.

All the Judge has to do is believe that he believed he was in imminent danger for his life.

BBM - and to do that involves her ignoring all the blatant lies he's already told while under oath, not to mention the scrolling list of witnesses he's accused of lying, and the blame he's put on his own DT for not correctly writing up his affidavit or his plea explanation. Must be hard for her to know what to believe after all the lies he's told. And of course, the magic discharging gun that wasn't his fault either. The fact he's refused point blank to concede things that have proved him to be a liar (the gun in Tasha's) would indicate to anyone that his testimony is not credible. Nel's seen to that by tripping OP up almost every time OP's lips moved.