ColonelMustard
Active Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2014
- Messages
- 1,123
- Reaction score
- 2
Exactly, I'm pretty sure the "bloodcurdling" scream as was described by Burger iirc, was most surely not OP based on his cries in this production, besides the fact that the screams were heard before the last set of "bangs" and then never again. It's like the guy trying to call a 2x4 a bat-like "instrument" to simulate the bat used and then claim that that sound would carry as far as gunshots...
Little from this trial is burned into my mind as deeply as is Burger's description of the woman's bloodcurdling screams she heard.
Putting her on the stand first was Nel's genius. Pressing her on it was the first of Roux's many mistakes. Try as he might - and try he did - she never responded to any of the subsequent questions he was trying to ask her. All she did was repeat the same thing over and over and over again - about five times, if I'm remembering correctly.
Had she said it only once with Roux purposely jumping away from it, realizing the danger in the power of what she was saying and how she was saying it, I might only vaguely recall it. Instead, her emotional and repeated re-telling of it so many times struck me as if it was all she could think about, which, likely, it was.
I've watched those 20 minutes between Roux and Burger any number of times and I am always transfixed. In trying to set an initial tone of forceful cross-examination, Roux failed to miss the essence of what we were hearing over and over and over again, and how critically it would, IMHO, hurt his case.
For me, everything in the trial that followed resonated with that echo of Reeva's soul-gripping cry for Life.