Trial Discussion Thread #36 - 14.05.09 Day 29

[DebinGA]

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2008/13.html

That defendant excused his firing on the deceased "running toward the danger" (i.e. him and his gun)? I wonder if Mr. Mythical Intruder had a right to shoot through the door the screaming, rapidly approaching, cocked gun pointing OP?

 

[jay-jay]

no sorry not buying the RS may have slept in another room story. if she had then she would have no need to use the en suite bathroom as there would have been another accessible bathroom, perhaps in the passage way.

I don't even understand why this theory has been put forward because it doesn't help OP's version any .. if the reason being suggested for Reeva sleeping in the spare room is because of a vicious argument that has ended the relationship (and that Reeva was using the spare room instead of driving home that night because of the dangers on the road to her at that time of night) then it's pretty much backing up the case of it having been an argument that led to OP deliberately shooting Reeva. It would be highly unlikely/coincidental that a woman who had only a short while earlier that night, been involved in an argument with her other half, just so happens to get shot by him later that same night. Sorry, but I'm not buying it either (the bit about her sleeping in the spare room, as an excuse for him perceiving her to be an intruder, I mean).

 

[Viper]

I agree with you jay jay. I understand the horrific and brutal death of Reeva is the most important part of this case. I don’t understand all the :floorlaugh: about Oscar’s not firing the gun. I honestly don’t, how can anyone when they know that Reeva’s body was torn apart, that she was brutally killed when Oscar fired that gun (regardless of what Oscar claims) :floorlaugh: about anything Oscar said about pulling or not pulling the trigger.

Even if you think Oscar is a flat out cold blooded murder who knocked the panel out of the bathroom door so he could take better aim at his prey I still think the :floorlaugh: about the moment the shots were fired is grossly misguided.

It baffles my mind.

:floorlaugh: I did not know that we have floor laugh :floorlaugh: police monitoring this thread. Learn something new everyday! :floorlaugh:

 

[Fuskier]

Agreed. I didn't particularly want to see that image, but I do feel that some people need to keep being reminded of exactly how serious this crime was and it wasn't just some kind of sad accident .. it was *horrific* .. no other words for it, and nobody but *nobody* should have to die in such sheer fear and pain as the way that Reeva did, yet to me it seems as though some are just treating this in the same way you would if someone just tripped over and happened to die as a result of that accident.

:goodpost:

 

[Carmelita]

I enjoy our debating Carmelita but I think once again you are showing a bias towards the accused as shown by the last part of your post - 'to protect himself and Reeva'. That is HIS version and if it is your's as well then you are buying his words without critically examining them in any depth IMO. If you look at his actions that night they suggest that had there been intruders it is quite possible that he would have ended up dead and she would have been in the bedroom still not knowing what the hell was going on and at their mercy. But then again, I think his story is a crock anyway.

Hi lithgow1,

I know that you think his story is a whales tale, I am not convinced that it is, I don't take his word as gospel but I do accept that the judge will have to compare Oscar's words to the actual evidence and the myriad of testimonies and that is what I try to get across in my posts. It doesn't matter what anyone believes, myself included, the judge must weigh Oscar's defense against the prosecutions case. So in discussing the case and possible verdicts it seems to me that we have to use Oscar's words in our discernment process.


My largest problem is that posters seem to draw conclusions and state them as facts so I try to say, hey wait a minute here is another point from which to view your opinion.

 

[jay-jay]

So can you tell me, and others, what evidence (other than OP's words) points to it having been a genuine case of mistaken identity. The evidence (screams, crime scene photos, ballistics, stomach contents) all point towards his guilt so I'm interested in precisely which evidence points you in the other direction. We've now had about ten defence witnesses - which of those have provided evidence about the events before the shooting that make you believe Pistorius' version and why was that? Thanks as always.

I've asked that question before and never got an answer, so don't go holding your breath!

 

[BritsKate]

Happy Mother's Day to our American moms! In the UK, ours is in March. My kiddos apparently are not convinced by my argument as an American living in the UK I'm entitled to two but I have all day to make them regret it.

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

 

[Carmelita]

Have you seen the video of the judge speaking on this issue (or close to it)? I wouldn't expect you to accept the views of South African law posted here, though I happen to think that BritsKate is correct, but perhaps a local judge would be more convincing to you.

Bongani -on inadmissible evidence defence expert - YouTube

Thanks Lithgow1, I don't have time to watch it right now but I will later when I get home

 

[jay-jay]

I've already commented on this, Oscar was deliberate although in terror until he heard a noise in the toilet (when he was very close to the toilet) and he began shooting. I am simply stating what his version of that morning is, which is different than posters on here are claiming his version has been stated as.

I don't know how many times I can restate his version. Folks can listen to it or read a transcript for themselves.

How do you know he heard a noise in the bathroom? Because OP said so?

There were no other witnesses to this crime, only Reeva, and she is dead.

 

[Carmelita]

If I'm mistaken about my interpretation of South African law, I would appreciate a link that refutes what I've posted. What I stated earlier isn't opinion, its the actual law and the way in which reaching a determination for innocence or guilt actually occurs when the charges are what they are.

I never stated Masipa doesn't have any latitude either, by the way, but neither does she have the 'free reign' your post seems to imply. I'd also appreciate a link, if you're able, to show that South African disabled defendants have the law interpreted differently by a judge in order to reach a determination in their cases. Not that judges conceivably can but that they actually have.

TIA for correcting me. I've informally studied law for quite a few years, as its a passion, and greatly appreciate being told when I'm wrong so I can better educate myself..

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

I didn't say that you misinterpreted the law. I don't think an informal study of law over several laws means that anyone can state emphatically that they know what the law of another country is without any caveat. I said I don't agree with your interpretation that the judge cannot render a CH verdict.

 

[Viper]

I've already commented on this, Oscar was deliberate although in terror until he heard a noise in the toilet (when he was very close to the toilet) and he began shooting. I am simply stating what his version of that morning is, which is different than posters on here are claiming his version has been stated as.

I don't know how many times I can restate his version. Folks can listen to it or read a transcript for themselves.

BIB. OP says that he never even entered the bathroom! He stopped at the entryway, where the tiled hallway meets the bathroom, and fired all four bullets while standing in that same spot.

 

[jay-jay]

Yes by his account he was. Again it is only Oscar's claim that after he heard the noise in the toilet which he perceived as an intruder opening the door does Oscar claim that he acted without thinking.

Help me out here, Carmelita .. how is it that you say there that OP claims he perceived an intruder opening the door, and he claims he acted without thinking and yet you are prepared to accept that he actually did hear a noise in the bathroom as gospel truth? We actually don't know this for a fact, that he ever heard a noise (as well as anything else he claims in his version, up until the point where witnesses started arriving on the scene).

 

[Lochlynsmom]

I did say you'd want help and that's what the help would be for. Driving or first aid, if needed. Sure, there are circumstances where it would make more sense to wait. But a gunshot to the head doesn't seem to be one of them if you've got help handy.

Just for example, when my son was little he had very bad asthma. He'd start sucking air and turning blue lipped very quickly. I drove him to the ER in the middle of the night several times. No problems. I never would have waited for an ambulance with my baby turning blue and not being able to breath.

jmo

What I find interesting is the people that support this position(not calling for an ambulance) also believe OP has been mostly truthful and that the shots were not aimed.

 

[lithgow1]

Hi lithgow1,

I know that you think his story is a whales tale, I am not convinced that it is, I don't take his word as gospel but I do accept that the judge will have to compare Oscar's words to the actual evidence and the myriad of testimonies and that is what I try to get across in my posts. It doesn't matter what anyone believes, myself included, the judge must weigh Oscar's defense against the prosecutions case. So in discussing the case and possible verdicts it seems to me that we have to use Oscar's words in our discernment process.


My largest problem is that posters seem to draw conclusions and state them as facts so I try to say, hey wait a minute here is another point from which to view your opinion.

Thanks but I am asking about evidence other than OP's words - that is, the testimonies of witnesses and experts that have moved you in the direction of not guilty. IIRC you brought up the 'all evidence points to the contrary' issue so I'd infer from that you believe there is evidence that points towards not guilty.

Assuming you are not basing your views on OP's and OP's version only there must be evidence that you think backs his story up and it's that I'm mainly interested in. TIA

 

[james83]

It would take too long and I am about off for the day. Oscar was Franks master that is your answer in a nut shell.

So can we therefore say that if Frank didnt hear a argument or a woman screaming he would have a sense of duty to take the stand so that his boss and I presume friend doesnt spend the rest of his life in prison, or does logic suggest Frank wont be taking the stand because he is unwilling to lie under oath?.

 

[DebinGA]

BIB. OP says that he never even entered the bathroom! He stopped at the entryway, where the tiled hallway meets the bathroom, and fired all four bullets while standing in that same spot.

Nel took pity and asked to end the day early Friday with Wollie claiming OP didn't have to move into the room to fire all the shots, perhaps giving him the weekend to summon the courage to be truthful tomorrow and safeguard his well-earned reputation.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Excuse me Carmelita but the quote you attributed to me on p.57 #1412 is not mine. Please look again at my quote on page 53 #1314 where you will see that I quoted Viper and gave a one line response.

 

[turaj]

It would take too long and I am about off for the day. Oscar was Franks master that is your answer in a nut shell.

I assume that prosecution knew "Frank" was in the home so indeed it is a very sad comment on his worth in SA that "Frank" would not be called. I understand that he is still employed by the Pistorius family and I'll bet he knows and heard everything that night. Come on neighbors from far away hearing sounds...it varies as to what they say the sounds were but they all have vivid memories of terrible sounds that night and there is "Frank" sleeping soundly in his room?

Due to these cultural differences which whether one wants to admit it or not are still very behind the way most of us view society...I think anything can happen in terms of a verdict here. I have not even seen a reasonable case by the defense. If "Frank" can remain sort of untouchable in the case then OP could walk...anything can happen.

Also how in the world could this person being right in the house and apparently there as law enforcement arrives etc. remain such a secret and only this past week come out in testimony??? Is this then an agreement on both sides. Maybe this has been discussed but it all seems so strange to me.
What I am understanding is that due to "Frank" being essentially a slave( change this word to personal worker) to the Pistorius family he cannot be expected to recount his activity and memory of that evening when a woman was murdered right in the home he was in? Wow! And both sides are going with this understanding.

 

[DebinGA]

BIB. OP says that he never even entered the bathroom! He stopped at the entryway, where the tiled hallway meets the bathroom, and fired all four bullets while standing in that same spot.

... in the dark, if you believe Dr. and Mrs. Stipp are liars and OP is the truthful one.

 

[Carmelita]

Even if he heard everything they wouldn't call him because what he had to say would be worthless as he's a black servant?
Oscar was Franks master?

I think that says more about you than any cultural differences that may still exist.

No that is not what I said. He is a servant it doesn't matter what color his skin is. People live in shacks behind estates they are not treated very well it is way to complicated for me to explain in a post. If I have time I will see if I can find a thesis or academic article about the movement from "servant" to "worker" that has been trying to take place in SA.