Trial Discussion Thread #34 - 14.05.06 Day 27

[katydid23]

Agreed. IMO there are further questions here as it is alleged that Frank lived there and was there that night.

Why didn't Oscar call Frank for assistance?

There is something not right with Oscar's story here IMO. The Standers would be more sympathetic and useful to him?

This issue tells me that he is LYING when he claims he called Stander for help lifting Reeva up.

---First, he hadn't called netcare yet, so supposedly would not yet hear he needed to bring her in. [which is fishy as well]

2nd, Frank , his man servant was right downstairs. I assume he had a way to reach him. *

3rd, why send security away, if he needed help lifting Reeva?


* HEY< WAIT A MINUTE.....:waitasec: :waitasec: :waitasec:


If OP truly thought there were armed invaders in the home, why didn't he warn Frank, who was apparently asleep downstairs ??????????????????????????????

Doesn't he have Franks cell number?

 

[steveml]

Then why didn't Mr. N do it when he testified?

The idea was to give a general indication of the type of cry. I think it served it's purpose.

Let's go one step further and say it was probably better using a woman to indicate the type of cry because that was more akin to the noise OP made. Is there something so wrong in that?

Put yourself in the accused shoes for one moment. Let's suppose you're innocent of intentionally killing your girlfriend and you told me (as your lawyer) that you were hysterical and screamed loudly in a higher pitch than normal.
I then say to you 'well I understand what you're saying Apollo, so I'll demonstrate this using a bloke with a deep voice'.

I guarantee you'd start looking for a new lawyer.

We have to be realistic here, innocent or guilty OP's been accused by the state of intentionally killing his girlfriend and needs to defend the charge. He's entitled to use any means to help defend the charge, it bears no relation to his guilt or innocence.

 

[aoibhinn]

You've made the same error as I did initially. The Stipps' house is the left hand one at the top. I've already corrected mine (posted earlier).

Thanks, Cherwell. I remembered a similar image that I'd seen earlier and assumed it was correct. I just quickly added the notes in MS Paint. I'll correct it. Also, I believe that Mr. M's (the lady that was late today) bedroom is on the opposite side of the house to OP's bedroom.

 

[Gryffindor]

Barry Bateman's tweet today. Clarifying cricket bat sounds and gun shots as definitive.


"@....... the forensics don&#8217;t support that timeline. It&#8217;s undisputed that the bullets hit the door first, then bat."

 

[JuneBug67]

Why should anyone check their 'it makes no sense!' thinking'? You say that and then jump straight into an interpretation of why Pistorius did what he did and what you think he was thinking. Fair enough if you want to take that approach but I'll stick to examining his actions more than his thought patterns (both will be considered by M'lady) and when I do that, well sorry but here it comes: 'it makes no sense!'.

Because "it makes no sense!" is a really high bar! "I wouldn't have done that." OK. "He should have made different decisions." OK. "_______ would have made more sense." OK. But "it makes so sense!" is a hard argument to make in my mind if a poster is serious about being fair minded. Of course it "makes sense" at a very basic level. He thought there was an intruder seconds away in his house in the middle of the the night and got a gun and confronted the intruder by shooting. That very thing has happened countless times around the world, sometimes to incredibly tragic results just as this did. There are many arguments as to why Oscar might be guilty of shooting Reeva deliberately, but "it makes no sense!" is an incredibly weak one IMO.

 

[DebinGA]

On the previous thread I dared the defence to have their ear witnesses scream in court. Guess I should have double dared them.

Will Roux present an actual OP-screams-likes-a-woman test soon or was today's "impromptu" exhibition it?

 

[lithgow1]

Just being the messenger but on my 'other forum' someone just posted that David Dadic has tweeted that the remark made by Pistorius to Myers goes against his bail conditions. Could be interesting. Evil of me I am sure but I'd love it if it led to bail being revoked. Sure it won't but poetic justice and all that.

 

[Noisy Fan]

For debate ...

I would submit that the bathroom window acted like a port in a loudspeaker in determining the direction the radiating sound travelled from the bathroom, toilet area. Except for this port, and the direction it faced, all other sound radiating from screams and bang-shots would be muffled and absorbed by the walls of the bathroom and house and be greatly subdued.

Also, if Reeva was in the toilet with the toilet door shut and if she was screaming and if Oscar was in the bathroom screaming then his screams should be louder than hers simply because he was in the bathroom with a large open window (speaker) and Reeva was in an enclosed smaller space (the toilet). Particularly if the toilet door was closed and the smaller toilet window was closed her screaming should have been much quieter than Oscars who was in the bathroom with the larger open window.

So, there is good reason that the Stipp's heard the bang-shots and screaming (the window projected the sound almost directly at them). As well with the neighbors farther away but still in the path of the radiating sound. The neighbors on the sides of Oscars house were behind the window and not in line with the outward radiating sound. One did hear sound from the bedroom deck (help help help) which faced that neighbor's house. The neighbor on the other side did not hear the "help help help," but heard Oscar crying (wailing) ...

 

[Cymbaline]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/18/oscar-pistorius-not-wearing-prosthetic-legs-expert



1.55 m... = 155 cm divided by 2.5 = 62 in = 5'2".

This picture shows OP without one of his prosthetics.

http://wpmedia.sports.nationalpost.com/2012/07/0719pistorius.jpg?w=620

 

[JuneBug67]

Unless of course it is all a lie and he knew exactly who was in the toilet room. Which, by the way, is what he is on trial for. OP also has lied on the stand about numerous things, so why should he be given the benefit of the doubt that anything he says is the truth?

Having someone tell others that they should "check their it makes no sense thinking" is really not the best way to get people to stop and think about the rest of a post, IMO.

MOO

In my experience people who are serious about being fair and thoughtful don't mind suggestions that they check their thinking. I certainly don't. People are welcome to suggest that to me any time if it can be backed up with something thought provoking or something I've missed. Not only do I not mind it, I like it. So to each his/her own, I guess.

 

[aoibhinn]

Revised location of bathroom, bedroom and balcony in OP's house, as per plan relative to neighbouring witnesses.

 

[DebinGA]

On the stand OP claimed he screamed at Mr. Intruder, "Get the * out of my house! Get the * out of my house!" and Nel asked him to replicate the sound and he did. I don't remember anyone here saying he sounded remotely like a woman, even though he had all the incentive in the world to try his best to sound like one.

 

[JudgeJudi]

so far.. no one. not one defence witness has heard a man screaming like a woman.. what is Roux doing?? where is this going? the whole defence has gone into a black hole.

He wants to end it because he's feeling like :banghead:

 

[BritsKate]

I think he probably did say it, and doing so was dumb and denying it dumber. But he clearly feels unfairly treated by Myers' past statements and the reasonable interpretation of this is a guilt trip and character judgement rather than a threat. I'd probably admire Myers more if she just let it roll off her rather than behave as if there is some fundamental human right not to be spoken to by Oscar Pistorius when she herself has spoken freely as she saw fit.

Oh yeah, totally. I'd have loads more respect for her too if she didn't bother reporting that a man on trial for killing her friend was speaking to her in a sinister tone, that was unwelcome, and that left her extremely disturbed. :facepalm:

She's not the one on trial. And the fact that defendants are advised not to speak to prosecution witnesses, so they can't be accused of witness intimidation, doesn't apply? It really is this idea, that people who are victimised should simply 'buck up' and take one on the chin, that allows abuse to propagate. From domestic violence cases to schoolyard bullies...no one who feels intimidated or threatened by another human being should be criticized for speaking out against it or for not tolerating such behaviour - especially when done by someone accused of murder!

 

[soozieqtips]

I think he probably did say it, and doing so was dumb and denying it dumber. But he clearly feels unfairly treated by Myers' past statements and the reasonable interpretation of this is a guilt trip and character judgement rather than a threat. I'd probably admire Myers more if she just let it roll off her rather than behave as if there is some fundamental human right not to be spoken to by Oscar Pistorius when she herself has spoken freely as she saw fit.

So you think it's acceptable for the killer to approach one of Reeva's closest friends and speak to her in that manner? I doubt you'd have 'admired' Kim Myers more if she'd let it 'roll off her' because the BIB clearly indicated there was no admiration there in the first place, more of a thinly-disguised contempt that she should have the audacity to consider herself safe from his bullying in court. That's how I interpreted your comments anyway. Personally, I don't see that someone who's on trial for murder should be allowed anywhere near the friends and family of the deceased without their express permission.

ETA - Britskate, I just posted almost the same thing as you. Our posts even have the same time stamp!
Great minds... :smile:

 

[TorisMom003]

On the previous thread I dared the defence to have their ear witnesses scream in court. Guess I should have double dared them.

I know how you feel. I'm feeling even more sure that the defense or someone in OP's circle is reading here. Many threads ago I posted a "devils advocate" post about the fans technically being on the balcony but also being in the doorway to bring in cooler air into the room. Then when OP testifies he has changed the fans being out on the balcony to they were partly in and partly out on the balcony.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19-21, Days 13-15

MOO

 

[crasshopper]

IDK if this has been posted yet but the fact that OP addresses Stander as 'Uncle' points to a much closer relationship than Stander or the DT admit to and supports that it has been purposefully downplayed. (Of course the fact OP called Stander first, as much discussed, is telling.)

Oom [Afrikaans for uncle] Johan, please, please, please come to my house, I shot Reeva," Stander said Pistorius told him over the phone.

At the paragraph describing testimony at 11:33 am BST.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/05/oscar-pistorius-reeva-steenkamp-trial-murder-5-may-2014

 

[DebinGA]

Revised location of bathroom, bedroom and balcony in OP's house, as per plan relative to neighbouring witnesses.

Well done, aoibhinn, No wonder the Stipps' eyes initially focused on the lit up Mr. N's house.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Dr Stipp heard "help, help, help" after both sets of bangs (which has always made more sense to me). This has been supported by Mrs N's evidence who most probably heard the last bang of the second set. The other 'post event' defence witnesses today haven't contradicted this. They didn't hear anything except OP crying or wailing. But the sequence is inconsistent with OP's version ("help, help, help" before using the cricket bat to break the door - logically the second set of bangs in his version). I know who I believe and I get the impression that the defence witnesses have said nothing to worry Nel and the prosecution version of events.

Nel looked so calm and relaxed. He knew this was going nowhere for the DT.

 

[lithgow1]

Because "it makes no sense!" is a really high bar! "I wouldn't have done that." OK. "He should have made different decisions." OK. "_______ would have made more sense." OK. But "it makes so sense!" is a hard argument to make in my mind if a poster is serious about being fair minded. Of course it "makes sense" at a very basic level. He thought there was an intruder seconds away in his house in the middle of the the night and got a gun and confronted the intruder by shooting. That very thing has happened countless times around the world, sometimes to incredibly tragic results just as this did. There are many arguments as to why Oscar might be guilty of shooting Reeva deliberately, but "it makes no sense!" is an incredibly weak one IMO.

I'll admit that at this stage of the game I find it almost impossible to be 'fair minded'. I just don't believe him but in any case I'm not talking about deliberately shooting RS - I believe he did but that's besides the point. I am talking about his 'version' of what led to his accidental killing of her. IMO, even if he was 100% sure it was an intruder, all the actions he took suggest a man who was prepared to kill someone. How do you see him 'confronting' the intruder when he didn't know who was in the toilet and shot them before even trying to find out at a point where he was under NO immediate threat. I'd of thought to confront someone you have to SEE them, not shoot them through a door.

Re the 'fair minded' - I have yet to see a post from you JuneBug where you have seriously questioned any of his actions - it's all been justifications, excuses even, so I'm pretty confident we're both as set in our views: they are just polar opposites.