Trial Discussion Thread #48

[Lux et Veritas]

Question -

Does anyone know if Judge Masipa will hand down the sentence at the same time as her verdict or is sentencing a separate hearing?

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Plus the head of arguments of the Defence will surely be entertaining and give fodder to our discussions.

Oh, don't you know it?! LOL

Do you think Roux could possibly come up with anything new and outlandish, even at this very late date - a grand, last-ditch effort? LOL

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Poor Justin Divaris. He must be going through his own private torment - he’s the one who introduced Reeva to Oscar.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

A while back ex-girlfriend Jenna Edkins tweeted (apparently in Oscar’s defense) that in all her time with OP, he had never laid a hand on her.

That may very well be true, but people sometimes change, they evolve - and not always for the better.

Look how - at age 17 - OP was suddenly catapulted into global fame, fortune...and power. Such instant celebrity status could arguably do a very bad number on one's already very-healthy ego. (Why did Justin Bieber suddenly pop into my head? LOL)

Every single abuser was at one time a NON-abuser.

They’re ALL seemingly normal, “nice, friendly, sweet guys / gals next door” - till they get arrested or kill someone.

 

[vansleuths]

I wonder how depleted OP's offshore accounts are, and if he still has the property in Italy?

I hope to see OP convicted and go to prison just like us 'common folk' would have to do. No freedom pending appeal.

MOO

The Pistorius family is quite shrewd when it comes to money matters. I read that OP could be liquidating his assets because regardless of the outcome of this trial, he could still be taken to court on a civil trial for the wrongful death of Reeva. If this was to occur and the Steenkamp family was awarded monetary compensation, it would come out of OP's assets. If OP has liquidated his assets, there would be nothing to give to Reeva's parents.

In actuality though, OP would not be broke because he has family money behind him and he could draw on this but the Steenkamps would not be able to.

 

[vansleuths]

I have forgotten how long M'Lady et al will take to reach a verdict after closing arguments? Does anyone know? TIA!

Most believe that deliberations will take several weeks but Masipa and her assessors can take as much time as they need to come to a decision and write up their judgement.

According to Examiner.com ( http://www.examiner.com/article/osc...uments-reeva-steenkamps-haunting-premonitions ), "The L. A. Times reports on August 4 that Judge Thokozile Masipa will hear closing arguments on Thursday of this week, and a verdict could come as early as next week"

Somehow, I can't believe that a verdict could come in a week, but there were several breaks (Easter, 30-day assessment) where the judge could have been reviewing evidence and writing reports on each of the witnesses called to that point.

 

[vansleuths]

I also wonder why this wasn't explored more in during the trial. It does look to me like a hole from the air gun rather than the 9 mm, but I didn't quite understand from the evidence if the hole was from inside the bedroom or in to the bedroom. Maybe this was "old" damage, but why on earth would anyone shoot through a door inside the house?

Oscar did mention about charging in to the door before he unlatched it. I guess this was to explain the damage to the bedroom door, but it doesn't explain the small bullet hole.

The defence seems to be claiming that the first "shots" were the gun shorts and the second ones (at 3:17) were the cricket bat noises. The prosecution is saying that the gun shots were at 3:17, but I haven't heard them say anything about what they think the earlier "shots" were. Do you think this will come out during arguments?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

BIB, maybe it's another example of a gun going off "accidentally" while in OP's hands :happydance:

 

[vansleuths]

LOL… Heck, if it were up to me, M'Lady would render a GUILTY of MURDER verdict immediately after prosecution's arguments… why bother with the Defence's arguments ??… it will be more of the same nonsensical drivel we have already seen and heard at Trial in an desperate attempt at spawning some shred of doubt in Masipa's mind.

BIB

Ohhhh, as much as I want Masipa to bring the hammer down on OP ASAP, I want to hear Roux's defence one last time for the entertainment value. Will he tie together the whole story of OP screaming like a woman, the police tampering, guns going off accidentally, Dr Stipp being incompetent, witnesses colluding against OP, Reeva not saving herself by not saying anything while in the WC. Then lets not forget about the over the top defence witnesses like the sound expert who lulled everyone to sleep or Dixon with his expert tools of his eyes.

 

[808]

BIB

Ohhhh, as much as I want Masipa to bring the hammer down on OP ASAP, I want to hear Roux's defence one last time for the entertainment value. Will he tie together the whole story of OP screaming like a woman, the police tampering, guns going off accidentally, Dr Stipp being incompetent, witnesses colluding against OP, Reeva not saving herself by not saying anything while in the WC. Then lets not forget about the over the top defence witnesses like the sound expert who lulled everyone to sleep or Dixon with his expert tools of his eyes.

Oh I am breaking out the popcorn for that one, in Roux heads of argument for the bail application he relies heavily on Botha's incompetence.
http://oscarpistorius.com/downloads/Oscar-Pistorius-Heads-of-Argument.pdf

It will be awesome to have him paint OP as a poor, shaky victim who screams like a soprano when scared. That the totality of the neighbours ear witness are coloured by prejudice, recall and incompetence. OP never shot a gun out a sunroof or in Tashas ... he just didn't you see everybody has perjured themselves because of ..schadenfreude? :moo:

 

[Greater Than]

Fingerprints & DNA

Police investigators rarely attempt to recover fingerprints or pursue DNA analysis when the people involved the crime share a home… it's pointless to do so.

If OP's fingerprints are found on Reeva's cellphone, it proves nothing...

If OP's fingerprints are NOT found on Reeva's cellphone, it proves nothing as well...

Furthermore, OP's statement about attempting to use Reeva's phone was first heard at Trial during his testimony (IIRC)… this means that OP and the Defence had the benefit of a full evidence discovery and therefore knew if Reeva's phone was printed or not and if OP's fingerprints were found on her phone.

We haven't heard any forensics evidence at Trial that could suggest that Reeva's phone or anything else for that matter was tested for fingerprints.

SBM

Let's be careful not to post opinion as fact. If one does not state "I think, I believe, IIRC, IMO, MOO" etc. it would be helpful if a link was provided as a resource since it implies you're stating a fact.

Fingerprint experts were indeed at the crime scene.

At 1:00:30 Lt Colonel Van Rensburg testified that after he arrived at the scene he called for medical officers, fingerprint experts, police photographers, forensics officers, and the mortuary. http://youtube.com/watch?v=-L668jFUvGY

At 32:00 Officer Van Staden testified that the fingerprint experts are who made OP's gun safe since he left it cocked and ready to fire. http://youtube.com/watch?v=ovA-k3pO3Dk

 

[Suthrnqt]

Oh I am breaking out the popcorn for that one, in Roux heads of argument for the bail application he relies heavily on Botha's incompetence.
http://oscarpistorius.com/downloads/Oscar-Pistorius-Heads-of-Argument.pdf

It will be awesome to have him paint OP as a poor, shaky victim who screams like a soprano when scared. That the totality of the neighbours ear witness are coloured by prejudice, recall and incompetence. OP never shot a gun out a sunroof or in Tashas ... he just didn't you see everybody has perjured themselves because of ..schadenfreude? :moo:

BBM

Someone call ....

 

[Val1]

BIB

Ohhhh, as much as I want Masipa to bring the hammer down on OP ASAP, I want to hear Roux's defence one last time for the entertainment value. Will he tie together the whole story of OP screaming like a woman, the police tampering, guns going off accidentally, Dr Stipp being incompetent, witnesses colluding against OP, Reeva not saving herself by not saying anything while in the WC. Then lets not forget about the over the top defence witnesses like the sound expert who lulled everyone to sleep or Dixon with his expert tools of his eyes.

You forgot the ex-husband of the woman who tried to get OP sent for "help" at least twice(bail hearing and beginning of trial, not sure if she made any other submissions) because OP's mom came to her in a dream. The husband then tried to convince us that OP's "fright" response caused him to race down an "intruder", corner "them" in the toilet room, then pull the trigger a number of times(OP said he only knew it was four bullets because he had read that...) while punching holes with "ranger" bullets through the toilet door in a tight, controlled pattern in the dark and didn't hear a sound the whole time, after the initial window opening and toilet door closing, not even the sound of the gun going off. Then after all that the husband confirmed that OP had fired at the door to neutralize any threat(conscious thought).

 

[vansleuths]

We all recognize that Masipa has a tough job ahead of her.

Has Roux muddied the waters enough because "Legal analysts said it was the first time a South African court has been confronted with a defence of unconscious, involuntary action based on an exaggerated startle response due to disability. "

And while most of us feel this is an open and shut case, Professor Grant says:

Despite the apparent weight of evidence against him, Pistorius' state of mind is "all important," Grant said. "That's why it's so difficult to call."

http://www.latimes.com/world/africa/la-fg-pistorius-trial-20140804-story.html#page=1

 

[Greater Than]

We all recognize that Masipa has a tough job ahead of her.

Has Roux muddied the waters enough because "Legal analysts said it was the first time a South African court has been confronted with a defence of unconscious, involuntary action based on an exaggerated startle response due to disability. "

And while most of us feel this is an open and shut case, Professor Grant says:

Despite the apparent weight of evidence against him, Pistorius' state of mind is "all important," Grant said. "That's why it's so difficult to call."

http://www.latimes.com/world/africa/la-fg-pistorius-trial-20140804-story.html#page=1

Has Prof Grant forgotten that OP was found by a team of psychiatrists to have had the ability to distinguish right from wrong?

And that psych assessment was conducted after he stated:

He seems to be claiming that the discharge of his firearm was an accident or at the very least, that his conduct was not under the control of his mind. This is again a claim that the gun had gone off in his hands, but he had nothing to do with it. This seems to keep happening to Oscar.
A claim to involuntariness is a difficult one because our courts assume that ordinary conduct is voluntary. If you have done something, you need to lay a basis for a claim to have done so involuntarily – because the courts presume voluntariness (S v Henry 1999 SCA). There appears to be no basis for this claim – at least nothing in the evidence that I have seen so far.
http://criminallawza.net/2014/04/13/pistoriuss-new-defence/

Startle/freeze/fight/flight evidence was introduced in an attempt to overshadow the psych eval report since it did not get OP off the hook in the slightest. MOO

 

[Interested Bystander]

Has Prof Grant forgotten that OP was found by a team of psychiatrists to have had the ability to distinguish right from wrong?

And that psych assessment was conducted after he stated:



Startle/freeze/fight/flight evidence was introduced in an attempt to overshadow the psych eval report since it did not get OP off the hook in the slightest. MOO

As you point out, there seems to be something wrong here. It sounds as though Prof G. believes there was an intruder in the first place. We have ear witnesses whose testimonies say anything but. How on earth could Masipa ignore them? Surely Prof G. doesn't think that an excuse may be found, due to OP's "mental state", that would permit him to kill a girlfriend after/during an argument when psychiatrists deem him not to be suffering from any disorder.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Agreed.

The bad financial news could also be many other things than a sponsor dropping OP… bad investments, investment opportunity failed, mortgage denied on the house he was planning to buy, etc… even a combination of things such as bad investments lead to diminished earnings which leads to not being able to secure mortgage to buy the house in Joburg.

I suspect that if the bad financial news was a sponsor dropping OP, we would have heard details about it : which sponsor, why, etc… especially since it was the very next day that OP killed Reeva.

I remember Reeva's mailed words after OP's bad news "you are a nice guy, ....". Therefore I'm thinking, someone told him not to be a nice guy; so it has to be a special sort of "bad (financial?) news". Something like sponsor dropping seems possible. Something that went against OP's honor, not only a thing of money. IMO

 

[Sherbert]

I remember Reeva's mailed words after OP's bad news "you are a nice guy, ....". Therefore I'm thinking, someone told him not to be a nice guy; so it has to be a special sort of "bad (financial?) news". Something like sponsor dropping seems possible. Something that went against OP's honor, not only a thing of money. IMO

Yes, FromGermany, I agree with your interpretation. Or I guess it could be something to do with the lawsuit against him for hurting that girl by slamming the door against her.

 

[Sherbert]

BIB I agree with this. Reading the depositions, whilst Justin Divaris and Samantha Greyvenstein report that Reeva wanted OP to come home, they would have only heard this from OP after he'd had the conversation with Reeva. The WhatsApp messages suggest otherwise. My guess is he didn't want to stay and used Reeva as the excuse.

True. And regarding the depositions, on the one hand, Samantha Greyvenstien swears that Reeva had told her that she would probably marry OP if he proposed, and on the other, goes on to state that Reeva felt he was very intense and moving very fast, the implication being that he was moving too fast.

I guess both statements could be true, but, IMO, they tend to cancel each other out.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

It's 3:30 am for my lake too !!

For these much anticipated Closing Arguments, maybe we should be reserving our seats in advance!!

I hereby reserve a seat into first row (old, short-sighted, half deef you know). My time will be 9.30am as in South Africa. I'm exited!

 

[Sherbert]

I think the meeting must have been to do with the assault case - I've discovered that the case was due to be heard in just one week's time, ie on 20 February 2013.

I imagine Taylor-Memmory had just rejected OP's settlement proposal. IMO, OP must have convinced Reeva that he did nothing wrong - hence, she was sympathising and trying to console him. He probably told her that TM had rejected his offer and that she'd got him over a barrel, as, although he was innocent of any wrongdoing, he'd be forced to increase his offer if he wanted to settle the matter out of Court in order to preserve his reputation and sponsorships. He was painting himself as the victim and TM as a female on the make, trying to take advantage of his celebrity status.

http://mg.co.za/article/2013-02-01-00-prior-assault-claim-stalks-oscar-pistorius