Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
NO! :banghead:
The name of the business is FIRZT. Not "Fritz".
There is nothing and no one called Fritz.
Ahh I missed the 'if' in that sentence, thanks for your reply. What is disturbing is his spontaneous answers to Nel's questions, whether it's a little bit of the truth coming out or to suit the states case. I strongly believe that Reeva was threatening to call the police/security before he killed her. As far as Oscar was concerned whatever happened between them that night could NOT get out to the public, just like the other gun charges against him.
It's like when he said "I retrieved my gun from n... from under the bed". It was pretty obvious he was about to say 'next' to the bed (which is where it normally was) and quickly corrected the word to 'under'. He's made a few slip ups like that, which is natural I guess, when you have to try and remember so many lies.Ahh I missed the 'if' in that sentence, thanks for your reply. What is disturbing is his spontaneous answers to Nel's questions, whether it's a little bit of the truth coming out or to suit the states case. I strongly believe that Reeva was threatening to call the police/security before he killed her. As far as Oscar was concerned whatever happened between them that night could NOT get out to the public, just like the other gun charges against him.
That now makes more sense as to why OP called Stander first.
Going back to the animation video made me think about Reeva's position in the toilet. Somebody had to brief the 'dream team' about OP's version for them to create the scenario that Reeva was cowering in the toilet and as the forensics proved she was closer to the door during the trial, I'm inclined to believe that at some point OP knew she was cowering in the corner.
I'm on to Dr Stipp's testimony now and forgot just how sarcastic Roux was with him - even to the extent of implying that if Reeva was so scared and terrified that she had time to open the toilet window to shout for help. Effectively blaming her for not being able to scream her way out of her own death.
Remember the 'screaming' tests that were also done outside the Stipp's house where OP's DT tried to catch out the Stipps? Shouldn't those tests have been submitted as evidence?
I can't find an agency called 'Equipmodel', either ..
I agree. Disproving PPD does not prove murder. But doesn't it discredit Oscar's testimony? And the testimony of all the witnesses who based their testimony on what Oscar told them?
What's left is the State's witnesses with their facts undisputed by the discredited defense witnesses. So the judge will have to decide if it is murder based on these facts/witnesses.
I'm guessing the judge will consider Oscar's version before (edit: not before, but when!) when she decides on his reliability and credibility. I understand that she will not be considering a conviction on PPD at this time. But surely she must consider his version before she can reject it?
English not my first language either, so just to avoid confusion: to my mind his version is "I shot Reeva. I thought it was an intruder" and this is his defence, a putative private defence.
I'm very open to correction on this because I would like to understand.
:silly: :floorlaugh:
.
Do we know for a fact that he even needs prescription glasses? I did some searching and all I found were pics of him wearing sunglasses from one of his now ex sponsors and only one pic before the court case where he's wearing a pair of what appear to be regular glasses, worn for his apology after being a poor loser... , although they could have been one of those newer sunglasses that change hue depending on the light. If there's no proof he actually needs a prescription, I'm betting he's just wearing reading glasses to make it easier to see his texts and/or notes while he sits in court all day(although I've seen at least one court pic where he appears to be wearing them quite high on his nose and looking under them at whatever it was) and that it makes him look more vulnerable(aka nerdish) certainly doesn't hurt since that's basically his defense...
I have just found this which suggests he does wear contact lenses.
It seems OP does wear contact lenses
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/O...Oscar-Pistorius-trial-day-7-part-1-20140311-2
View attachment 55134
Wow, just went to check something in those two bottom links and it looks like someone has scrubbed them already.... we have a mole!! :/
Gee, maybe they should scrub this one too, just in case Roux decides to use his timid witnesses to appeal...
http://uk.onlinenigeria.com/latest-...lood-spattered-bathroom-could-wreck-case.html
I totally agree that disproving OP's PPD case brick by brick is MUCH easier than constructing the State's case for murder and evaluating if it achieves the standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
However, I'm not sure if that methodology is legally possible.
I agree that logically if one disproves PPD than what remains is murder
The legal conundrum I have is the following :
Is disproving PPD beyond a reasonable doubt equivalent to proving murder beyond a reasonable doubt ?
Is disproving the accused innocence equivalent to proving the accused guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ?
EquipModel https://www.facebook.com/equipmodel?ref=stream
The guy in the photo may be a model or an agent… the photo metadata indicates only EquipModel
I can't see why they couldn't be used as part of the official court record. It seems a waste otherwise. As this is the first televised case in SA, there is no precedent.
<respectfully snipped>Oscar Mystery #9,675 - Fact: OP wears glasses (one must assume he wears contacts when hes without glasses). Fact: Police crime scene photos show OP 1) standing in the garage and 2) being taken away to the police station. In NO photos is he shown wearing glasses. WHY?
I'm re-watching the chaos surrounding OP when he declares he 'deactivated the alarm' and then changed it to 'he must have deactivated the alarm'. Two things:
1. Notice how Masipa says to him 'Are you making all these mistakes because you're tired' he immediately goes into petulance/attack mode to tell Masipa 'he made a misake' (not mistakes) as if he thinks he can manipulate her opinion in the matter. He does it twice actually, acts the feeble tired man but then the minute she says 'all these mistakes' you can here his aggressive demeanour emerging to make sure she knows it was just the mistake, and instead of answering her question about being tired, he consistently ignores it and tries to clarify his 'one' mistake (much to Masipa telling him that's not the issue here).
2. Surely, there must be a central registry of an alarm being activated or deactivated. I'd love it if that was the trump card Nel pulls in closing arguments but sadly I think it would have been admitted by now as evidence to trip OP already.
Thanks Jay[SUP]2[/SUP]
Certainly not ironclad evidence but its a nice coincidence
But the timeline still does not match
Late lunch, Firzt party, Divaris office, call to Reeva something is WAY off to surprising though
Yes, absolutely. I agree. It's all speculation of course because we may never know for sure, but what you say makes so much sense.
I also think Reeva was threatening to phone the police. Oscar later said he'd screamed and shouted:"Get out of my f@$king house!" and "Call the police!" but I suspect it was really Reeva who screamed and shouted that she would call the police. I think Oscar wasn't sure what the witness/es had heard, so he incorporated Reeva's part of the dialogue into his version.
As for those disturbing spontaneous answers? I've heard it too. When he gets emotional his mind spills out of his mouth. Right in the beginning of his cross-examination he gets more and more upset. He says: "I've taken responsibility. By me waiting...pause...and not wanting to live my life, but waiting for my time on this stand to tell my story for the respect of Reeva and for myself. I've taken responsibility." No wonder Roux objected asap.
Welcome to the forum!
MOO.
Link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a64lZAxqzI at about 07:25. Warning: Graphic image on scree.