Trial Discussion Thread #5 - 14.03.11-12, Day 7-8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmmm, The Today Show just aired a bit on the trial. Said OP's friends will stick up for him because the crime is so bad there. The stats for crime were indeed shocking and extremely sad. I just don't think that is the reason they would stick up for him though.

At any rate, a video clip of it should be up within a half hour to an hour if anyone is interested.

http://www.today.com/news
 
Once more because I guess it's important:


Fresco has been given immunity by the court from possible prosecution in return for his honesty testimony.
.
.
 
In all likelihood, Pistorius will have to take the witness stand.

He is the only living person who truly knows what happened that night.

It is going to be suggested to him


that it is improbable that he would not first have verified Steenkamp’s whereabouts before going after an intruder;

that given his disability it is improbable that he would have gone forward to confront an intruder rather than try and hide from him;

that it is improbable that he would have told the security inspector that things inside his house were “fine”,
unless he had something he wanted to hide
;


that it is improbable that Steenkamp would have locked herself in the toilet unless she was trying to escape from him;
and so on.

The court will attach considerable weight to the probabilities.

The court is likely to follow the English philosopher Hume’s assertion that the “great a priori improbability of some assertions outweighs the force of testimony otherwise reliable”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...689058/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

I noted that the pathologist stood firm on the fact that after the first shots to Reeve (not the head shot) she would still have retained cognitive abilities and would have been able to scream. He said it would be abnormal not to scream, 'flight or fight' I think he said.
 
A talking head on whoop has just said it is unheard of for a medical professional to say that he has ethical issues with his evidence being broadcast, especially where the information is being heard by members of the public/media in court.

He says very graphic evidence has been given in other trials.

Someone else said (legally correctly I believe, but bravely and maybe foolish under the circumstances) that Reeva has 'no right to dignity', because she is dead.

They are also talking about the most terrible, graphic crimes and evidence that have been heard in the past, so I think I have to stop listening now....
 
Before court continues:

Thanks to all of you for your updates (from one who can't follow live stream and can't hear video sounds) :blowkiss: :gthanks:
.
.
 
Once more because I guess it's important:


Fresco has been given immunity by the court from possible prosecution in return for his honesty testimony.
.
.
Yes he did lie in his sworn affidavit and took the blame for shooting his gun in the restaurant. Now he has made a plea bargain with the State provided he tells the truth in his testimony in this murder trial.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...689058/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial-live.html

I noted that the pathologist stood firm on the fact that after the first shots to Reeve (not the head shot) she would still have retained cognitive abilities and would have been able to scream. He said it would be abnormal not to scream, 'flight or fight' I think he said.
The ME actually went a step further and stated that screaming is not tied to cognitive function. In theory, she could have screamed even after the head shot. To my understanding, anyway.

Debora Patta ‏@Debora_Patta 3h
#OscarTrial Recap screaming issue: Saayman says that screaming is not a cognitive function but part of fight or flight response

Debora Patta ‏@Debora_Patta 3h
#OscarTrial Recap: Saayman basically saying screaming is not a cognitive function and is possible amidst a rapid quick fire of shots
https://twitter.com/Debora_Patta

Alex Crawford ‏@AlexCrawfordSky 3h
#OscarPistorius Saayman saying screaming would have been possible after Steenkamp was hit int he head
https://twitter.com/AlexCrawfordSky
 
from a courtroom tweeter :)

Phillip de Wet ‏@phillipdewet 8m
By popular acclaim it seems possible Barry Roux's parrot may *also* repeat "I put it to you. I put it to you. I put it to you." I concede.

https://twitter.com/phillipdewet
 
Back live on cross with Roux using Taylor's testimony in attempt to impeach Fresco. Fresco maintains his version of events is the truth.
 
Roux: OP denied that he fired that shot.
Fresco: That is incorrect, milady.

OP laughed about it after Fresco asked if he was mad. Fresco never mentioned the incident again. He concedes to Roux stating 'You just left it.' - 'I did'.
 
Roux has had his Perry Mason moment. ;) During the break, he and his team put tables together and have (not so scientifically) proven it is impossible for their (OP and DF) heads to be as close as Fresco has testified to.
 
Judge intererupts.. Nel interjects..this waffle to Darrin has to either come to a point or move on
 
Roux has had his Perry Mason moment. ;) During the break, he and his team put tables together and have (not so scientifically) proven it is impossible for their (OP and DF) heads to be as close as Fresco has testified to.

Ugh. What possible reason could have for lying about this. Is it honestly believable that everyone is that dead set against getting OP, even his own friends, that they'd lie about these things?
 
Roux fumbles around a bit... .. the bail application of Oscars...

Darrin made a statement re Oscars bail hearing..

did Darrin forget he was asked to take the blame?? nope .. I have never forgotten it.

wHT wasn't that in your statement re Oscars bail?? I don't know.. ( he hadn't got immunity for the event )

did Oscar say ok?? that you would take the blame??
yes,,says Darrin.. he did .
 
but yu left this OUT of your statement> ?? can you explain that..

I cant, says Darrin.. he isn't going along.

the magazine.. once Oscar had taken the weapon from me, he saw a movement assumed Oscar would have removed the bullet.. but Oscar had in fact , replaced a bullet in the chamber..

What did Oscar say in reference to the magazine.. darrins mistake was in thinking Oscar would have checked the magazine.
 
Roux says, Darrin should have said , Oscar.. the magazine is in the gun..

well. I suppose.. but he didn't.. he thought that Oscar would automatically know

Darrin asks the judge.. why would I walk around with a weapon without a magazine in it??

Roux says, Oscar says he was upset that Darrin didn't tell him the magazine was in the gun.. (??)

now roux does a 1/2 twist with pike and doubles back

so its Oscars position, that its really Darrins fault, Darrin didn't tell him re the magazine.
 
it is Darrins fault he thought Oscar was competent..

Darrin knows nothing about Oscar being upset WITH Darrin for not telling him about the magazine..

Oscar says he was upset.. that bloody Darrin.. not telling him re the magazine

just because Darrin doesn't remember Oscar being upset with Darrin for failing to tell about the magazine, doesn't mean Oscar wasn't upset with Darrin etc..

bullsheeeeyit..

Darrin remembers clearly apologising to the owner...

Roux puts it that Oscar offered to pay for the damages. Darrin says it was him.

Darrin cant remember what they carried on chatting After the shot.

what exactly did Oscar say to you in regard to asking you to take the blame.


Darrin.. he had asked me to take the blame because there is a lot of media hype around me.

Darrin was to take the blame for firing the shot.

and Darrin says. I will.. take the blame..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
186
Guests online
1,855
Total visitors
2,041

Forum statistics

Threads
601,371
Messages
18,123,694
Members
231,031
Latest member
CurlyClue
Back
Top