Trial Discussion Thread #47 - 14.07.8, Day 38

[soozieqtips]

3. He also could have asked if the court would allow them to be called without cameras or voice recording if these "witnesses" were so vital to his case.

~snipped~

Good point. If he didn't actually request having certain witnesses called without cameras or audio, then I fail to see how he can use that as a reason for appeal. If he'd asked, and been turned down, that would be a different matter. But I can't see the judge refusing if he'd asked, considering she's been extremely accommodating of OP since day one.

 

[vansleuths]

The judge will also take a month or two before coming up with a verdict so this could now roll in to October/November.

And then it will be another 18 months before an appeal so lets say 2016 before OP is in prison, if at all.

 

[foxbluff]

Yep.

I was responding to the post criticizing people for posting pic of the Stipps going to dinner.

BBM - Hi Paysee. Please forgive me for popping in here if I'm not the poster you're making reference to. If I am that poster, then you've misinterpreted the intent of my post. I was replying to a poster who said he/she had not seen any examples of people trying to find pics, etc. of witnesses. I simply gave an example of one I had seen making the rounds.


Actually, I'm in total agreement w/soozie and many other true crime followers who have a curiosity about people and things in any way connected to the murder suspect... whether or not I should. :scared:

Here's my post (in case link doesn't open, it's on pg. 9, post#225):

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ial-Discussion-Thread-47-14-07-8-Day-38/page9

 

[Viper]

This famous and wealthy man was convicted of murder. The trial judge revoked his bail upon conviction. An appeal of the revokation failed. His appeal of his trial and sentencing also failed.

Quote: Families relieved as Jub Jub loses appeal.

"Now we are happy. They deserve to be in jail. They are just wasting money because they have it - we cannot afford to come to court every time, but will if we have to."

<Snipped>

"The court should consider the accumulative effect of all the evidence... There is no full bench that will ever take the application of the accused seriously... This case is costing revenue for the department of justice and clogging the court roll of appeal."

http://m.news24.com/news24/SouthAfrica/News/Families-relieved-as-Jub-Jub-loses-appeal-20130207

Interesting. AFAIK all OP has is a person or persons that did not want to testify for him, his BFF Davaris I've heard, and a missing extention cord. LOL!

ETA: If you would like to quickly see how the conviction, revokation of bail, and appeal process works in real life South Africa, all of that is played out in the articles at this link. It is much different than many people would lead others to believe, here:

http://www.news24.com/Tags/Topics/jub_jub_case

 

[Val1]

Misleading comment in the Telegraph, listing GAD as one of the reasons why Pistorius might be acquitted.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-10-reasons-why-he-is-guilty-or-innocent.html

I actually found a lot of the reasons for innocent flawed... imo:

1. No evidence, only what OP had claimed and told his witnesses which they repeated.
2. No evidence that he was unable to flee, other than his claim of it being his nature to confront.
3. False, was negated by court mandated psych observation.
4. False, he admitted he knew she was already dead, "she wasn't breathing" "I don't have to look"(something about how he was there, he knew her head was demolished like the watermelon)... he merely demonstrated remorse after the fact, which the witnesses then assumed the reason must have been him trying to "save her life", of course he was distraught, look at the mess he'd made.
5. Scant, perhaps, what was the rest of the data not shown to us from the I-pads/phones? As is, the PT had a witness that testified to having heard arguing, they had RS's own words that she wasn't happy and that perhaps they weren't meant to be together, and they have her bruised and dead body at OP's hands. As for RS saying she was in love? All I read on the card was "I love you", something I have and do tell close friends and family members that I love but am most certainly not "in" love with... besides, what else would you put on a Valentine's card... Plus in that text where she said she was going to tell him she loved him, it was in past tense, not a good sign imo.
6. What sound tests? Only references to one from what I recall...
7. Umm, wrong, the PT do not agree that the two sounds, bat and gun, sound similar, or that the bat bangs could have been heard by the witnesses who claimed to hear gunshots but not the gunshots.
8. False, in fact the timeline of the calls of those witnesses pretty much proves it was the gunshots they heard when you relate it to the screams and the later cries.
9. Perhaps somewhat, but certainly no more than the deliberate theft by those in the DT camp of the cell phone and RS's handbag and who knows what else, both of which are most certainly key evidence, unlike a dusty footprint on a board in a crime scene where the suspect had already admitted to being the killer.
10. Really? She thinks that was the only reason they charged him with murder... give me a break!

 

[soozieqtips]

Viper, thanks for the links. From the first one:

"Both men sat in the dock carefully listening to Nemavhidi as he said that both applicants
failed to convince the court that they have prospects of success in another court".

I can't imagine OP will convince the court he'd have a better chance in another court. He's been mollycoddled throughout. I sincerely hope the judge puts him away immediately (if he's convicted) and lets him and his family work out the appeal away from the public. I still can't quite believe that none of the psych team noted any previous anger issues, especially after what we've learned about OP's very short fuse. I find that a bit concerning, to be honest.

 

[Val1]

BBM - If he's free on appeal, what happens if he's startled again? I'm sure he could get his hands on one of Uncle's guns. None of the DT witnesses (that I can think of) have categorically stated that this was a one-off event that could never happen again. On the contrary, they've implied he's someone who has an inherent trait that makes him react differently to 'startles' than a less hyper-vigilant person, so what's to stop him killing out of 'fear' while out on appeal? Why should innocent people be put at risk from him? If OP is convicted of murder, the public's right to safety should outweigh his rights to live a normal life indefinitely while waiting for an appeal.

What's truly scary is how he was starting to build an arsenal... for what, the next fireworks display, or just to defend himself the next time he couldn't sleep and needed to go out in the middle of the night to the firing range?

 

[Val1]

I believe he believes it was an accident. And I believe there has only been one story with much nitpicking to make them sound vastly different.

That raises a question for me... If OP were to admit, yes we had an argument but I only meant to scare her, I didn't think the bullets would penetrate the door and I certainly didn't mean to blow her head up like a watermelon, would that make a difference as far as sentencing options?

 

[Val1]

I have just been reading some articles about witnesses who refused to testify. No names of course. What still baffles me (and many of us) is that the one witness, who was IN the house at the time, has claimed he heard nothing and so was not called. This, to me, is the most dishonest action anyone can take. He has to know what happened as he obviously was awake and was outside before almost anyone else. If his neighbours heard something, IMO, so did he. There was only a door between him and the rest of the house. This trial could have been over in a week if he had testified. I think absolutely the only reason why he didn't is because he was corrupted by someone. If there was no story to tell, he could have taken the stand and proved it. I know he would have lost his job but who would want to live with a dreadful secret like that forever on their conscience. I hope one day he will come good and tell all but I guess money talks.

We no longer have the double jeopardy rule in the UK. Is it still functioning in SA?

There should be a law designed specifically for the "Kato" Kaelin's of the world....

 

[Val1]

Did we ever find out whether his *advertiser censored* panic button was working and if so why he didn't use it? I can't remember.

The most logical thing for someone in his position to do would have been to get his gun then hide in the bedroom so he could pick off the non-intruder advancing into the bedroom. He might even at that stage have noticed RS wasn't there with him.

Iirc, Baba had asked why he hadn't used it, which leads me to think that it must've been working, unless he had disabled it for some reason...

 

[soozieqtips]

What's truly scary is how he was starting to build an arsenal... for what, the next fireworks display, or just to defend himself the next time he couldn't sleep and needed to go out in the middle of the night to the firing range?

BBM - Didn't Wayne Derman say OP needed or wanted to have 'a' gun because of his vulnerability? 'Singular? Nothing about the huge collection he was building up, which was certainly nothing to do with any vulnerability and everything to do with the fact he loved guns and wanted a horde of them.

 

[Val1]

BBM - Didn't Wayne Derman say OP needed or wanted to have 'a' gun because of his vulnerability? 'Singular? Nothing about the huge collection he was building up, which was certainly nothing to do with any vulnerability and everything to do with the fact he loved guns and wanted a horde of them.

Oh but not just "a" gun, but a smaller one that he could obviously keep hidden and pull out at will should he be "startled" into his "fight" response. Scary indeed. Yes, there were lots of questions we would have loved to have asked... I'm trying to trust Nel's judgement, after all he's taken on Roux before and won and is familiar with the law in SA so would know what could "prejudice" the DT and cause grounds for appeal, or open the door to perhaps other "character" type testimony that only serves to distract the judge from the real facts of the case. Who cares what a "nice" guy OP was or even is now... he admitted he killed RS and the evidence imo points to a deliberate act, whether she was the intended target or not and I think she was. I don't know anyone that would run into a dangerous situation(cornered intruders) like he claimed he thought he was in, screaming get the *advertiser censored** out of my house like he displayed in court. That was a very personal directed scream of outrage imo and also goes towards his intent to shoot, he left no other choice.

 

[soozieqtips]

Oh but not just "a" gun, but a smaller one that he could obviously keep hidden and pull out at will should he be "startled" into his "fight" response. Scary indeed. Yes, there were lots of questions we would have loved to have asked... I'm trying to trust Nel's judgement, after all he's taken on Roux before and won and is familiar with the law in SA so would know what could "prejudice" the DT and cause grounds for appeal, or open the door to perhaps other "character" type testimony that only serves to distract the judge from the real facts of the case. Who cares what a "nice" guy OP was or even is now... he admitted he killed RS and the evidence imo points to a deliberate act, whether she was the intended target or not and I think she was. I don't know anyone that would run into a dangerous situation(cornered intruders) like he claimed he thought he was in, screaming get the *advertiser censored** out of my house like he displayed in court. That was a very personal directed scream of outrage imo and also goes towards his intent to shoot, he left no other choice.

I remember watching that and he paused for quite a while after Nel asked what he'd said to the invisible intruder. Then when he finally repeated the words, there was a lot of emotion in his voice like he was going over what he'd screamed at Reeva just before he killed her. Also, who yells at an intruder to 'get the f*ck out of my house' and then shoots them before they've had a chance to 'get the f*ck' out of the house? Oh, and that mega long 30-second pause when Nel asked if he'd heard Reeva scream after the first shot. That was the point I really thought he was going to break down and confess... or that the video feed had broken down! Both of those long pauses really stood out for me as signs he was lying.

As for Nel, we have to hope he knows exactly what he's doing. He's been up against Roux before, and won, and I think he's done a great job of demolishing almost all of the DT's 'experts'. Roux is the one who put non experts up on the stand so he must have known this would happen. With OP as a client, one has to feel some sympathy for him!

And yeah, OP just needed to have a teeny weeny little gun to ward off predators who made loud noises. I wish they'd flashed up a giant sized pic of his collection at that point, and then listed all the other guns he had on order!!!

 

[vansleuths]

1. Agreed… but an Appeal is not a sniper precision shot it's a sawed off double barreled shotgun shot… you throw a bunch of stuff at the Judges in hopes something is to their liking… why do you believe Roux asked for the extension cord so late in the Trial ??

2. That's an interesting point… Roux did not say anything yesterday about his psychiatrist being unable to consult because of heart attack… Roux just said he wanted to consult with the PT's psychiatrist.

3. Yes and no… dragging witnesses against their will, will not produce a favorable or even a fair result… did Roux object to the Trial being televised at the very beginning ?

4. All of them… every ruling against the DT will be scrutinized and an angle will be found and pleaded in the Appeal.

… why do you believe Roux as put all these things into Court record this morning ?

BiB… Totally agree…. but prepare and brace yourself for bitter disappointment on these issues… as soon as the verdict is read, Roux will ask for a leave to Appeal and it will be granted.

BIB I read this elsewhere, could Milady saw no when asked for a leave to appeal?

 

[Greater Than]

~snipped~

Good point. If he didn't actually request having certain witnesses called without cameras or audio, then I fail to see how he can use that as a reason for appeal. If he'd asked, and been turned down, that would be a different matter. But I can't see the judge refusing if he'd asked, considering she's been extremely accommodating of OP since day one.

Agreed. Judge Mlambo, not Masipa, ruled the trial could be televised, but included this provision:

Mlambo said the presiding judge had the discretion to order that broadcasting be stopped if "it becomes apparent that the presence of cameras ... is impeding a particular witness' right to privacy, dignity or the accused's right to a fair trial".

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/25/us-safrica-pistorius-idUSBREA1O0SJ20140225

If the DT truly had witnesses crucial to their case who were opposed to being recorded, they could have and should have requested media lockdown. If milady denied such a request, then I would understand it being grounds for appeal, but the DT made no such request.

That aside, most seem to think Roux mentioned these camera shy witnesses this morning in open court as a basis for appeal, but I personally don't think that was the reason. I think these so-called witnesses were supposed to be the ones he and OP promised that never appeared -- the scream test showing he screams like a woman, the proof the crimes scene was tampered with, the animation, etc. So I think he said that witnesses didn't want to be recorded as an excuse for not producing evidence he claimed in the beginning he had. It may be included in the appeal, but I really don't think that was the reason he mentioned it.

I do, however, think he mentioned being denied the ability to consult with and possibly examine the state's psychiatrist for appeal purposes. But I don't see how that will get him very far since the evaluation is already submitted as evidence. The only thing examining her on the witnesses stand would do is allow her to verbally explain the findings to the court. Both the PT and DT accepted the results, so having her testify wouldn't change anything.

MOO

 

[AJ_DS]

BIB I read this elsewhere, could Milady saw no when asked for a leave to appeal?

BiB&#8230; can't make sense of what you wrote&#8230;??

 

[Viper]

BIB I read this elsewhere, could Milady saw no when asked for a leave to appeal?

Yes. Roux has to come up with a reason for his appeal that Masipa believes an appellate panel of judges may consider and potentially find a different verdict given those reasons, issues, or facts that Roux alleges in his appeal. If it seems fantastic or frivolous or something that she has already dealt with she can and should reject the application. Right now it seems that the issues may be the missing extension cord and witnesses refusing to testify because their voices would be broadcast, but Roux could have compelled them to testify anyway and he did not.

 

[AJ_DS]

Yes. Roux has to come up with a reason for his appeal that Masipa believes an appellate panel of judges may consider and potentially find a different verdict given those reasons, issues, or facts that Roux alleges in his appeal. If it seems fantastic or frivolous or something that she has already dealt with she can and should reject the application. Right now it seems that the issues may be the missing extension cord and witnesses refusing to testify because their voices would be broadcast, but Roux could have compelled them to testify anyway and he did not.

Agree with the answer but still don't understand the question LOL

Are you mourning as I am ?

 

[Viper]

Agree with the answer but still don't understand the question LOL

Are you mourning as I am ?

No, I've been out all day and have not turned on the television. What was the name of that song that OP liked to blast Reeva with? LOL!!! Oh no, I just did a quick Google and it shows 1-7? Really?

 

[Cherwell]

Quote:

“Ms Fernihough wrote that Pistorius had largely stopped exercising and lost 10kg (22lb)."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...dcast-of-Steenkamp-shooting-re-enactment.html

Just my luck, when I stopped exercising I gained 10kg.:tantrum: