Trial Discussion Thread #48

[Mr Fossil]

Defence has filed heads of argument

http://ewn.co.za/2014/08/04/Oscar-Pistorius-trial-Final-arguments-for-Pistorius-legal-team-ready

 

[vansleuths]

A few pages back, someone was asking about the two safes and it was mentioned that a state witness brought it up.

I'm just going through the bail application as I wait until this Thurs/Fri and it was also brought up during the bail hearing on day 2

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-in-court-day-2-20130220

10:22 - Botha: "[Pistorius]'s lawyer came to the house with a locksmith to open a safe in the kitchen. It had a USB stick with details of offshore accounts."

10:22 - Botha: We asked to have the safes open. There was a specific safe in the kitchen but no key, so they brought a locksmith to open it.

10:21 Botha: "We know that he has offshore accounts and a property in Italy. We know this because we went through his safes."

 

[4MrsB]

A few pages back, someone was asking about the two safes and it was mentioned that a state witness brought it up.

I'm just going through the bail application as I wait until this Thurs/Fri and it was also brought up during the bail hearing on day 2

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-in-court-day-2-20130220

10:22 - Botha: "[Pistorius]'s lawyer came to the house with a locksmith to open a safe in the kitchen. It had a USB stick with details of offshore accounts."

10:22 - Botha: We asked to have the safes open. There was a specific safe in the kitchen but no key, so they brought a locksmith to open it.

10:21 Botha: "We know that he has offshore accounts and a property in Italy. We know this because we went through his safes."

Seems Oscar may have kept the key to this kitchen safe (or it's combination code) in the same place he stored his iPhone password. :liar:

 

[4MrsB]

OSCAR's LEGS LOOK BEAT UP

I was wondering if anyone could provide some clarity. Maybe I missed this testimony (or any dialog concerning this issue).

In the pictures of OP (in shorts while still bloody, taken in garage) it appears his prothesis have some pretty noticeable scratches, dings, gouges showing a white under layer, as if top flesh colored coat scraped off.

Did Oscar's legs commonly show this type of damage on them?
Was this asked of Oscar while on stand or before and I missed it?
And am I seeing it correctly. That is at least what it looked like to me, maybe I mistook glare from the photographers flash as something different.

If so.....Could these marks have been caused by Reeva trying to initially fight back - before escaping to toilet? Perhaps with a cricket bat to his legs. A woman fighting a stronger man would try for a vulnerable spot. On OP, that would include his prothesis, as it would slow him down (temporarily) if one became disconnected or broken.

I know OP says his prothesis not on, but he also said he believed Reeva was in bed. (I don't believe him). If these are true marks/scrapes on his legs that I'm seeing - I think I'd need to see some previously dated photos from DT of same marks to believe OP if he stated they were present prior to Feb 13th.

Just curious if this was discussed with OP (or if I'm just seeing something other than scrapes/damage to legs).

Thanks for any insight regarding this.

(Below is a link a picture, approx 1/3 way down, showing what looks like a closeup of the back of OP's calf. I have seen pictures of front legs as well that were clearer than these & saw additional scuff marks. But can't seem to find those 2 pictures again. Will keep looking. However, the calf pic does show what appears to be scuff marks. Just read comment in court by Roux saying the "scuff marks" and blood on legs show that OP had prothesis on when trying to break down door. Not sure why scuffs would be on back of calf. Also...that statement would confirm that DT is NOT suggesting scuff marks existed prior to Feb. 13th)

Link picture: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-court-shown-horror-bathroom-shot-Reeva.html

 

[4MrsB]

I have question on the issue of OP talking and screaming at Reeva to call the police. He was asked many times what he said, and he only said that he told her to get down and call the police.

If someone told you to call the police, you would say "and tell them what". Reeva would have heard him for sure (since he screamed it, while he says she was in the toilet).

No one would just tell someone to call the police, they would have to say more details, like what the person should do.

That issue has bothered me from the first moment I heard OP's timeline of events that night.

It seems automatic that you would blurt out to the person WHY you wanted them to dial 911 (or SA equivalent), police, etc.
"Reeva, call the police. Someone's in the house!"
"Call the police - there's an intruder in the bathroom!"
"Call the police, I heard an intruder!"

If he just says (first in a low tone): "Reeva, call the police. Get down." Does he not think it odd she doesn't immediately ask, "why?"

If he wants to "protect Reeva" ...then his natural instinct would be to "arm her" with important information. Information that he heard intruder & coming from bathroom. Otherwise she might escape to the wrong direction, not know what she's hiding from, unable to answer the police when the 1st question they ask is "what's the emergency?" Or "why are you calling".

It is just another small point that adds more weight to his unbelievable tale.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Snipped for brevity

Now, I am sorry if this has been pointed out in the 47 other pages on this trial, but this is where another lie is exposed in his version. Reeva had an iPhone, so if his version is true, when he picked it up and tried to unlock it he would have seen something akin to this photo:

View attachment 56249

IPhone users will be familiar with this screen and the button in the bottom left hand corner, which inexplicably OP ignored. Which is surprising as he is also an iPhone user.

Ergo - he could have used Reeva's iPhone to call the Emergency Services. However despite that being the quickest route to summoning assistance, he chose to abandon the phone & fetch his own iPhones, yet didn't make his first call to the Emergency Services anyway.

Does he expect a court to believe this?

Wow. Excellent observation, Hoosen! Thank you.

 

[Val1]

So closing arguments this week - and here is little something I picked up from the person buying OP's house. He clearly is not doing it for Mawkish reasons and he also clearly is not a fan of OP.

Scroll down to where the article mentions the buyer, Louwtjie Lourens. Despite some people thinking this was a 'crime ridden' estate - Louwtjie clearly doesn't

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/839...g-arguments-this-week-verdict-should-be-soon/

bbm - Yes and I wonder how long until he plans to retire? What jumped out for me was:

Mining consultant Louwtjie Lourens told The Times in South Africa that he plans to move in with his family when he retires.

The long fingers of the Pistorius' are very long in SA and there is definitely the possibility that there is a connection, perhaps dear old dad decided to come through in the only way he knew how after being told to basically shut up and keep out of it by his family.:/

 

[kittychi]

Hello everyone, long time lurker here! Just wanted to say a very big THANK YOU to the admin and insightful comments from all the posters. Have been watching this trial since day one, even while on holiday. It's been one wild, fascinating and educational ride.

There's something that's been bothering me re: Reeva's stomach contents. Yoga can speed up the metabolism and as Reeva did her yoga before bed, her stomach would have been empty.

:welcome: surfdiva

I think you make a good point, but one needs to keep in mind that it was OP that claimed she did yoga and that they went to bed. So we would need to believe at least that portion of his story.

I, personally, don't think they ever went to bed. I don't think the lights went out in that house at all that evening.

IMO of course

 

[foxbluff]

So closing arguments this week - and here is little something I picked up from the person buying OP's house. He clearly is not doing it for Mawkish reasons and he also clearly is not a fan of OP.

Scroll down to where the article mentions the buyer, Louwtjie Lourens. Despite some people thinking this was a 'crime ridden' estate - Louwtjie clearly doesn't

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/839...g-arguments-this-week-verdict-should-be-soon/

Thank you, Hoosen_Fenger... yours is the first reference I've seen about the new owner.

BBM - I think it's a very safe community... now that OP has moved out.

I'm remembering that, before OP killed RS, the community had been crime-free since a burglary back in Oct. 2011. Also, look at all the neighbors we know of who were sleeping with their windows and/or sliding glass doors open the night OP killed RS... that doesn't indicate imo that they were living in fear of people breaking into their houses. OP it would seem was of the same opinion.

I don't believe for a minute that OP lived in fear of intruders. Also, I don't believe for a minute that his DT believes that OP and neighbors were overly fearful of intruders. If they thought that, imho, they wouldn't have run tests in the wee hours of the morning, standing in people's gardens while screaming, etc. They could have been shot by a nervous resident!!! i.e., say a female resident's husband is out-of-town and she's alone at home with her children and a gun when she is startled awake by people shooting guns and... screaming in her garden... yikes...

 

[Razz]

It appears OP's brother, was seriously injured in an auto accident the other evening. He is out of danger but will require surgeries. I won't be suprised if they postpone the trial.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

I tell you - if Judge Masipa acquits Oscar, she’s gonna have a helluva lot of major explaining to do. The backlash would be swift and brutal.

The law and facts practically dictate that she convict him of at least culpable homicide.

This will be a landmark case in more ways than one (televised). If she rules wrongly, it will have disastrous legal and social repercussion for decades. The "Oscar Defense" would set horrific precedence; it would essentially allow anyone playing by that same blueprint to murder with absolute impunity.

The facts prove he’s guilty of murder. She MUST show her country and the world that equal justice does exist in South Africa - that literally no one is above any law ... not even “heroes”.

While no one knows the outcome, I have great confidence in the Judge. Given her previous, harsh verdicts on rape and murder, I simply cannot see her allowing Oscar Pistorius to walk out of that courtroom a free man.

The Oscar Defense.

She will not want that hanging over her head or her legacy - nor her countrymen’s heads.

 

[Val1]

It appears OP's brother, was seriously injured in an auto accident the other evening. He is out of danger but will require surgeries. I won't be suprised if they postpone the trial.

I don't see why they would, it's not like he has to be present for final arguments or even the verdict and now that OP has testified all he has left to do is listen to the arguments and then wait for his verdict.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

It has taken me a little time to find the following. It is a court stenographer's record. I think this is why I felt she did not stay with him for Christmas. He says because her arrangement to be with friends failed he flew back to see her. He returned to Cape Town and later she asked if she could go to Cape Town to see him. It doesn't of course give the exact dates so maybe she was there over Christmas. Also this record shows fairly clearly that they had not planned to live together yet. So much hogwash about him buying a house in Jo'berg so they could live together.

Liars need good memories and his memory failure has sealed his fate methinks.

http://live-news.sky.com/Event/Oscar_Pistorius_Trial_Stenographer?Page=0

OP: She then flew overseas to do a TV programme. In December, I went to Cape Town, she said she wanted to spend time with her friends over Christmas.

OP: Her friends then cancelled, I flew up to see her.

OP: Afterwards I flew back to Cape Town. She later phoned me and asked if she could visit me in Cape Town.

OP: In January we started spending more time with each other.

OP: I think we both had things that kept us back in our relationships from getting to know each other. I was very keen in Reeva. We both had come out of difficult relationships.

OP: At times I felt that I was more into her. In January we started making more serious plans.

OP: She spoke about her brother and son and asked if we could visit them in June.

OP: I had started looking at curtains, interior decorating my new house that I was going to buy.

OP: We discussed me moving to Johannesburg, she was also looking for a new place to stay. We spoke about future agreements that she should sign.

Apropos Christmas 2012:

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10463630.print/

The former law student had spent Christmas and New Year alone, whilst Oscar had gone out with friends.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Defence Advocate Barry Roux is likely to focus his arguments on two aspects, the physical and psychological vulnerabilities of his client and the timeline of events that morning. The defence team called several witnesses to show Pistorius’s lifetime of exposure to crime and life as a disabled person heightened his levels of anxiety. In this state of mind, Roux is likely to argue that the athlete’s first response while believing there was an intruder in his house was reasonable.

http://ewn.co.za/2014/08/04/Oscar-Pistorius-trial-Final-arguments-for-Pistorius-legal-team-ready

A gorgeous, intelligent, funny, kind, generous woman is NO MORE because of OP. Her spirit is gracing the beautiful ocean she loved so much.

I’d say that, as last man standing (see smoking gun), “disabled”, “vulnerable”, “anxious”, “suicidal”, “terrified” Oscar Pistorius is way more than capable of defending himself against any “intruder”.

OP’s actions were “reasonable”? omgwtf? A “noise” is not an attack!

OP BROKE every single rule in the Gun Owner’s Bible! He was NEVER attacked, he was NEVER even remotely in danger, hellz, he NEVER even saw the “intruder”! How is shooting four shots through a locked, closed door f##king “reasonable”?!!

What makes OP so freaking special? ALL of South Africa is exposed to crime! The fact that most South Africans are not double amputees* is more than balanced out by the many advantages OP’s status and wealth confer upon him - bodyguards, guarded, gated estates and the best high and low tech security available. In fact, I’d say OP is much safer than 99% of South Africans. No one who sleeps with his freaking bedroom window OPEN is “anxious” about crime!

The laughable, bizarre part of the defense is that OP’s alleged “physical and psychological vulnerabilities” NEVER, EVER came up before he murdered Reeva Steenkamp. Where’s his documented history, the documented treatments, the documented police crime reports? There are NONE!!!

Oh, yeah, and I want to see video of OP “cowering” in fear from fireworks (how many has he seen in world competitions?), as Derman claimed. LOL Geezus, the defense is desperate.

* 100% of South Africans cannot run as fast as Oscar Pistorius (he was not able to easily flee that night? LOL), nor do the vast majority have access to a 9mm with Black Talons, nor bodyguards or a gated security estate.

WHO, really, is “disadvantaged”?
WHO, really, is “vulnerable”?

I say it is not Oscar Pistorius.

 

[foxbluff]

After shooting OP says he first took Reeva's phone to make the calls but it was locked and so he got his own phone. Didn't he call Clarice first ?
How would he ever call Clarice/standers from Reeva's phone in which their phone number wasn't prob recorded.. I don't think their number was in his memory he even can't remember his own password lol .. So wtf was he doing with her phone ? Imo he either checked it whether to see if she called someone/police
or he checked her phone before shooting because of his suspects or jeaolusy.. Tailoring again and again and again..

A couple of media reports on his trial testimony said that OP found her phone in the toilet bowl and pulled it out... yuk... in order to use it to call for help. Why would he do such a repulsive thing when he had several phones of his own to use ???

It makes no sense to me whatsoever... which leaves me suspecting this is just another *advertiser censored* 'n bull story of his to explain something away (like all that nonsense about having to "cover the blue light")... but what was it he hoped to "explain away" by making a big deal out of having tried to use RS's phone!?!

 

[AJ_DS]

A few pages back, someone was asking about the two safes and it was mentioned that a state witness brought it up.

I'm just going through the bail application as I wait until this Thurs/Fri and it was also brought up during the bail hearing on day 2

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-in-court-day-2-20130220

10:22 - Botha: "[Pistorius]'s lawyer came to the house with a locksmith to open a safe in the kitchen. It had a USB stick with details of offshore accounts."

10:22 - Botha: We asked to have the safes open. There was a specific safe in the kitchen but no key, so they brought a locksmith to open it.

10:21 Botha: "We know that he has offshore accounts and a property in Italy. We know this because we went through his safes."

Thanks…

The references mentions safes… i.e. the 2 safes… but the safe in the bedroom was opened on 16 February… NOT on 14 February

I did NOT find ANY reference specifically stating that the kitchen safe was opened on 14 February.

The calling and presence of a locksmith on 14 February at around 4AM to crack open a safe before OP was even formally arrested seems very unlikely to me… I suspect that information got mixed up and misinterpreted along the way and that BOTH safes were opened on 16 February.

- OP called Carl Pistorius at 04:01:38 and the call lasted 34 seconds… can't imagine OP telling his brother : " Hi bro, I killed Reeva by mistake…I thought she was an intruder… please come over and bring a locksmith with you to crack my safe... I can't find the key and I need my USB stick that contains my offshore accounts information… I will probably be arrested and I need money to retain the services of an attorney. "

- Not easy to locate and contact a locksmith at around 4AM that can crack a safe on such short notice.

- Lt. Colonel Van Rensburg arrived at OP's house at 3:55AM… his testimony did NOT mention a locksmith on the premises cracking a safe in OP's kitchen on 14 February… Van Rensburg was specifically asked about who was present in OP's house on 14 February : no locksmith !

- Warrant officer Bennie Van Staden (police photographer) arrived at OP's house at 4:50AM… his testimony did NOT mention a locksmith on the premises cracking a safe in OP's kitchen on 14 February.

- The bedroom safe was opened by Carl Pistorius accompanied by Oldwage on 16 February with Lt. Colonel Marlien Van Der Merwe and Warrant officer Bennie Van Staden witnessing and photographing what it contained. Lt. Colonel Van Rensburg was also present at the scene on 16 February to unlock the front door.

- Absolutely NO reference, testimony or evidence at Trial of the kitchen safe or the locksmith on 14 February… the ONLY source of that information is from reporters during Hilton Botha's testimony at the bail hearing.

Here is what I believed happened :

- Carl and Oldwage were present at OP's house in the early hours of 14 February AND on 16 February to access both safes.

- Lt. Colonel Marlien Van Der Merwe and Warrant officer Bennie Van Staden were present on 16 February for the opening of both safes.

- Warrant officer Hilton Botha was NOT present on 16 February for the opening of both safes.

- A locksmith was called on 16 February to crack the kitchen safe.

- Warrant officer Hilton Botha ONLY received the information about the opening of both safes (kitchen and bedroom), the presence of Carl and Oldwage, the locksmith, the financial papers, the USB stick, etc… which Hilton Botha testified about at the bail hearing.

- Since Hilton Botha testified and the bail hearing about Carl and Oldwage being present on 14 february AND about Carl and Oldwage also being present for the opening of the safes with a locksmith, reporters made the incorrect inference that the locksmith was present in the early hours of 14 February to crack the kitchen safe.

Consequently, the kitchen safe was NOT opened in the early hours of 14 February whilst Reeva's body was lying dead on the floor… BOTH safes were opened on 16 February.

The reason the kitchen safe was NOT mentioned in Court is because it was NOT relevant or probative to either the State's case or the Defence's case.

The reason the bedroom safe WAS mentioned in Court is because it established the existence and location of the illegal .38 bullets which led to a criminal charge.

… I invite and welcome posters to challenge my inferences and/or provide contradictory evidence.

 

[foxbluff]

It appears OP's brother, was seriously injured in an auto accident the other evening. He is out of danger but will require surgeries. I won't be suprised if they postpone the trial.

Ohhh... 'bite your tongue," Razz !! Just seeing those BBM words puts fear in me. If Closing Arguments get postponed, I don't know how we WSers will cope. ):

 

[Cherwell]

That issue has bothered me from the first moment I heard OP's timeline of events that night.

It seems automatic that you would blurt out to the person WHY you wanted them to dial 911 (or SA equivalent), police, etc.
"Reeva, call the police. Someone's in the house!"
"Call the police - there's an intruder in the bathroom!"
"Call the police, I heard an intruder!"

If he just says (first in a low tone): "Reeva, call the police. Get down." Does he not think it odd she doesn't immediately ask, "why?"

If he wants to "protect Reeva" ...then his natural instinct would be to "arm her" with important information. Information that he heard intruder & coming from bathroom. Otherwise she might escape to the wrong direction, not know what she's hiding from, unable to answer the police when the 1st question they ask is "what's the emergency?" Or "why are you calling".

It is just another small point that adds more weight to his unbelievable tale.

It only makes sense if he had spoken to her already.

"Did you hear that? ..... I think there's someone in the bathroom!"

But apparently he didn't.

 

[foxbluff]

I feel sure this link is a "repeat" for WS, but since I didn't happen to see it before... and since there's a lull here, I thought I would post it anyway...

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...double-just-52-days-after-shooting-girlfriend

Partying Oscar Hit on Reeva 'Double' Just 52 Days After Shooting Girlfriend

The disgraced Olympic superstar zoomed in on an FHM cover girl at a party just 52 days after the Valentine's Day killing at his Silver Woods Estate home in Pretoria last year.

Bizarrely, the object of his attention, Kesiah Frank, bears a striking resemblance to the slain woman. Frank is also, like Steenkamp, a beautiful blonde model who holds a law degree.

The details of Pistorius's behaviour in private - along with excessive drinking - are in sharp contrast to his public demeanour since Steenkamp's death. <snipped>

This week, new details emerged about the athlete's behaviour when he astonished guests by showing up at a private party in Illovo, Johannesburg, on April 6 last year.

Dressed casually in jeans and a white T-shirt, he appeared awkward and out of place at first.
But once he had knocked back a few drinks and shooters, Pistorius bounced back, according to guests who watched him. He then targeted Frank.

Pistorius took to the dance floor and kept asking the blonde beauty to accompany him to another party, several guests said this week.

He grabbed her hand to dance and flirted, giving up only after all his advances were rejected. <snipped>

Other guests said Pistorius knocked back one drink after the other, including tequila shots. They were very surprised by his advances towards Frank, they said.

Frank, a lawyer at a firm in Sandton, did not deny the guests' version, but replied to queries with a polite e-mail saying she would "not be making a statement". <snipped>

 

[seattlechiquita]

Bahaha, he got turned down. That's gotta BURN.