BritsKate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 4,834
But crucially they both identified it as a man's cry, it's a fact that Oscar was crying after both set's of sound's had occurred, also Dr Stipp testifed that Oscar was crying whilst he was at Oscar's house.
Agree they need More, they need to show that Oscar is capable of such a scream that was described by the ear witness's.
We're not going to get that, and if we do, it will remain highly subjective. Burger, Johnson, and the Stipps would have been the best witnesses to compare - albeit highly risky too.
Further, the fact that only one defence witness testified to hearing one bang is problematic for the defence. Four gunshots are absolutely not in dispute so clearly they did not hear the entire course of events. Ergo, they do nothing to refute a woman screaming before the bangs at all - they do bolster that Oscar was emotional after shooting Reeva dead, which was never in dispute. I believe the primary motivation of having the Standers, the social worker and neighbours testify was two-pronged. First, to suggest because he was so emotional, it can be inferred he didn't intend to kill Reeva and by extension, didn't premeditate her murder. Second, to sway public sentiment. They don't actually refute the State's evidence, or even bolster reasonable doubt, because the screams occurred before the bangs the defence witnesses never heard.
MOO
Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.