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.
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!?!
Did the cops ever give him an alcohol blood test the night he killed Reeva?
Did the cops ever give him an alcohol blood test the night he killed Reeva?
They did, and both alcohol and steroid tests came back negative (it was read out in court on 3 March).
Saying this though. He could still have had drinks the night before because he must have been tested late morning on 14/2. Not sure how many hours it would take for the alcohol to leave his system.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's interesting though, there were numerous media reports straight after the shooting that there was evidence of 'heavy drinking'. :waitasec:
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..
They did, and both alcohol and steroid tests came back negative (it was read out in court on 3 March).
Saying this though. He could still have had drinks the night before because he must have been tested late morning on 14/2. Not sure how many hours it would take for the alcohol to leave his system.
Without exception your body can only process 1 unit of alcohol/hour...............in layman's terms
eg..................a large glass of red wine containing 4 units would take 4 hours to get out of your system.:toastred:
edit.
It also takes up to an hour for it to enter your bloodstream which has to be taken into consideration as well.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Apparently his first urine test was "lost" and they had to take a second one - the following afternoon
Apparently his first urine test was "lost" and they had to take a second one - the following afternoon
Well an athlete heavy drinker will have a more efficient metabolic rate than the usual mortal so he could be breaking down 2 drinks per hour. So by the afternoon he could have been 0.00 BAC. This could account for his terrible memory on the stand? Just like everything else he could be lying about the booze factor too.
He just lost a major sponsor that day (The bad news he texted her about his meeting at lunch). His boozy party with his mate in the afternoon with his new upwardly mobile friends. He then meets his new upwardly mobile GF and his insecurities start to play on his mood and has a few more before she says something about abuse to women in SA... her speech the next day.
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Oscar-recalls-day-before-shooting-20140408
http://www.heraldlive.co.za/oscar-day-two-of-testimony/
I don't know but given that evidence of blood testing he could have been impaired by energy drinks and booze with a penchant for womanly control, MOO and total speculation but more sense than the bump in the night version.
BiB… LOL :hilarious:
OP was able to proffer a VERY detailed and comprehensive account of what happened : what he did, when he did it, how did it, why he did it and the surrounding circumstances in which he did it …
… EXCEPT for when it specifically and exclusively addressed elements that contradicted his version or made absolutely no sense whatsoever… then it was the classic "I don't remember".
This CANNOT be the result of alcohol intoxication… it's simply the very common and well-known result of an accused lying his arse off and delivering a completely fabricated version of events… which will always result in unexplainable and unresolvable contradictions.
Really apologies I'm just at the end of this trial and clutching at straws. It's all his evidence except for the neighbours etc. MOO
No worries I totally get what you mean it's frustrating that the only story we have is OP's story.
But I believe OP's testimony has contributed GREATLY in proving OP's guilt on the murder charge and the 3 other minor gun charges.