Trial Discussion Thread #48

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Greater Than said:
That sounds like a plausible theory, but what makes me think it may be something else is the fact that his meeting was with his financial advisers. If the meeting was regarding the lawsuit and an offer, I would think his meeting would be with his attorney. MOO
Click to expand...

I posted before that OP's message ' just finishing at Ryan' referred to a place maybe and not a person.

I found a Ryan W Viljoen at Ryan W Viljoen Attorneys.... Seems to be a lawyer, possibly financial, based in Sandton. Not a lot of info to be found to be fair.

This could be a total shot in the dark lol
 
Greater Than said:
That sounds like a plausible theory, but what makes me think it may be something else is the fact that his meeting was with his financial advisers. If the meeting was regarding the lawsuit and an offer, I would think his meeting would be with his attorney. MOO
Click to expand...

I take your point, Greater Than, but I feel it is likely that the lawyers and financial advisers were working closely together, especially given that OP had a substantial loss of earnings Counterclaim which would have needed to be supported by evidence from his accountants.

It is possible that the meeting took place at the offices of his financial advisers with lawyers present, particularly if the financial advisers called the meeting because they were concerned about the implications of the imminent hearing on sponsorships, etc.

And, of course, if OP were describing his day to the police, it would have been more pragmatic from his perspective to describe his meeting as a financial meeting, to avoid awkward questions.

It is the timing of the meeting that seems to link with the assault case, but, of course, it could be just coincidence.
 
Hoosen_Fenger said:
Just going back through some of OP's Testimony.

For any Pistorians who still need convincing, show them this. Go to 22:25. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgGuW2XPL5E OP states he cannot walk on his stumps.

In the UK, when we are being polite, we do not call someone a liar. We say that someone is 'being economical with the truth.'
Click to expand...

And when someone is found to have been 'economical with the truth':thinking::crazy: in a Court of law, we sometimes call it 'perjury'; but not always...:thinking:
 
AJ_DS said:
I don't believe it works that way… the possibility of a future, not yet filed, civil suit does not compel the respondent to set aside financial assets in the theoretical, still undetermined, amount of said suit.

The "talks" before Trial were simply an out of Court unsolicited gesture… to demonstrate good faith and avoid future litigation… as that settlement, if accepted, would surely be contingent on a non-disclosure agreement and a blanket immunity for further litigation on that matter.
Click to expand...

In theory, the Steenkamps could have applied for a freezing order in anticipation of issuing a civil suit.

In the UK, a potential litigant would need to show a good arguable case and a risk of dissipation of assets.

The problem is that an applicant for a freezing order also has to give an undertaking to compensate the respondent for any loss sustained as a result of the order, if the claim for damages fails. This requirement would be likely to prove tricky for the Steenkamps, although they do, of course, have a very strong civil claim for damages.
 
Hazy said:
I posted before that OP's message ' just finishing at Ryan' referred to a place maybe and not a person.

I found a Ryan W Viljoen at Ryan W Viljoen Attorneys.... Seems to be a lawyer, possibly financial, based in Sandton. Not a lot of info to be found to be fair.

This could be a total shot in the dark lol
Click to expand...

I think we worked out a few days back that this Ryan person was someone who worked for the estate agents (the name of which has gone right out of my mind .. gahh!) and it was that estate agent's 10th birthday party that day which OP had gone to, presumably meeting up with Ryan there (we found the full name of this Ryan who worked at that estate agents, only I can't remember what that was now, either .. !)
 
The party was held at someone's house, by the way (going by the estate agents facebook photos of it), and may well have been this Ryan's house .. hence why OP would've said 'just finishing up at Ryan's'.
 
vansleuths said:
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
Click to expand...

It’s not a difficult call whatsoever. Masipa and her assessors will absolutely see through the subterfuge and bullsh#t.

Roux’s shameless “Oscar Defense” was not presented till the very END of the trial. This screams desperation.

Had this defense been genuine it would have been established immediately. Not to mention that OP’s official defense was putative self-defense - NOT automatism or disability-based “anxiety” (AFTER Vorster’s “GAD” failure and the psych eval came back clean).

Murder defense is not an all-you-can-eat buffet - whatever looks good, take as much as you want or throw it out and try something else.

His well-documented (including his own now-deleted tweet!), very different past actions in exactly the same circumstances (unknown “noise”) damn him as a profound LIAR.
 
jay-jay said:
The party was held at someone's house, by the way (going by the estate agents facebook photos of it), and may well have been this Ryan's house .. hence why OP would've said 'just finishing up at Ryan's'.
Click to expand...

I read all the previous posts about this where you all think it was the estate agent. It didn't sit right with me.

The exact message was -

'Just finishing at Ryan '

That's why I think it was a place or a company.

I'm not always right .... :blushing:
 
FromGermany said:
View attachment 56411
Proposal for our court watching breakfast time.

OMG, what is this for sale in our German supermarkets? Abnormal! If tasty, then in turn not enough to eat.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm gonna pitch in tonight and help Zwiebel too! .... and call it an international potluck for a late night brunch! Since I'm from the deep south, I'll bring grits, corned beef hash, mimosas etc! Ohhhh, the spread we can have if we all bring in goodies

I must now :sweep: and :lookingitup: other b'fast casserole recipes... this is gonna be :lick:
 
Sherbert said:
In theory, the Steenkamps could have applied for a freezing order in anticipation of issuing a civil suit.

In the UK, a potential litigant would need to show a good arguable case and a risk of dissipation of assets.

The problem is that an applicant for a freezing order also has to give an undertaking to compensate the respondent for any loss sustained as a result of the order, if the claim for damages fails. This requirement would be likely to prove tricky for the Steenkamps, although they do, of course, have a very strong civil claim for damages.
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
Hazy said:
I read all the previous posts about this where you all think it was the estate agent. It didn't sit right with me.

The exact message was -

'Just finishing at Ryan (?)'

That's why I think it was a place or a company.

I'm not always right .... :blushing:
Click to expand...

Minor correction…. the "(?)" was not part of the Whatsapp message… it was put there by juror 13 to indicate that we do not know who/what Ryan is.

No worries, I made the same mistake but I went back to the Court video and read the original message which did not contain the "(?)"
 
Ahh it's all your fault lol

I got it from you old posts on DS, good stuff they were!
 
Hoosen_Fenger said:
I did not snip this because…..

That there AJ - is proper sleuthing! Who knows whether this in fact happened, however, it is very plausible and fits in with what we know to be fact. Top work! :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks Hoosen… but are you implying that this was my first "proper" sleuthing ? :thinking:




:p ;)
 
Bluebell Wood

Crap name buts it's from wayyyy back in 2007 lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 72 more.
Total: 276 (members: 73, guests: 203)

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
203
Total visitors
276
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,899
Messages
18,247,406
Members
234,496
Latest member
Soldownload
Back
Top