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

[lisasalinger]

At what point does "recklessness" turn to "murder?"

Picking up a gun and shooting it out the sunroof of a car, straight-up, is reckless.

Picking up a gun and shooting it at someone known to be in a tiny enclosed loo 4 times, through a door, hitting them 3 times, and fatally (and OP knew someone was in the loo), is more than reckless, IMO.

:goodpost:

And let's suppose that he had killed somebody from shooting out of the sunroof... should we justify that as just a reckless accident and let him walk?

At what point does human life have more value?

 

[MeeBee]

Very much looking forward to Nels "coming to life" as at this point the courtroom belongs to Roux. He even sent the state's witness off to do homework to bring back tomorrow. Roux is a master at what he does and my guess is his "experts" are going to be very sharp. I don't know about MiLady but I would be afraid in US if this was a jury trial because I think he confuses the issues so effectively the jury would have too many doubts to convict.

I agree. I don't care what anyone says. Roux is very intelligent and quick on his feet. He's very good, I can't deny that. If I was a juror I would have a very hard time at this point convicting him of premeditated murder. I have a fair amount of reasonable doubt.

P.S. I have no idea why I put apostrophes in Nels' name twice lol.

 

[lisasalinger]

we have to believe that Reeva said her last words, the last words on this earth spoken by Reeva Steenkamp was before 10pm ... Reeva slept thru the voices Mrs VD Mewre heard arguing.. ( a mystery couple very close to Oscars house, on top of it apparently) slept thru Oscar getting up to faff about bringing not one but now 2 fans in from the balcony, slept thru the blinds being close, curtains ditto, slept thru the 'noise from the bathroom' got up silently and wordless, and even more outstanding, she silently entered the toilet and silently locked the door.. Oscar doesn't hear this sound..

then chose to remain silent as Oscar shouts 'get out, get out' and 'Reeva , ring the police.. '..

and that is odd just by itself.. He tells , he says, Reeva to ring the police...
but when HE has shot to smithereens a stranger behind his toilet door. HE HIMSELF doesn't call the police.. he calls the private security from the estate!..

Brilliant point!

 

[YoureNicked]

I haven't seen today's testimony yet, have only read about it, but it doesn't sound good for the State.

In addition to ballistics, the cell data is huge. If there is nothing on those phones that even remotely gives a hint as to what they may/may not have been fighting about that night... then that's it. I don't know how they will prove premeditation. I know we all say that motive doesn't have to be proven in a case, but if ever it had to be... this is the one.

I'm with those of you who think that jealousy and insecurity on Oscar's part would be the most likely motive.

I think the topic of Reeva's meeting with her ex-boyfriend for coffee the day before (Tuesday 12th Feb) might have come up.

Apparently Oscar phoned her twice during that meeting.

She was a beautiful and well-liked model with a career on the rise and no doubt a zillion men who would love to be her boyfriend - he the disabled guy who knew this.

BBC documentary with ex-boyfriend's interview here: I wonder if he'll be called to the witness stand?

Oscar Pistorius What Really Happened - YouTube

 

[Madeleine74]

By the way, the one new vernacular I've learned from following this trial is the use of "I put it to you..." So, I've been using it on my cat (because well, she's the only other living being in my home). She was neither impressed nor amused.

However, she too thinks Oscar is a murdering but she's willing to forgive him for some tasty treats. I believe that would be considered "bribery!"

 

[MeeBee]

:goodpost:

And let's suppose that he had killed somebody from shooting out of the sunroof... should we justify that as just a reckless accident and let him walk?

At what point does human life have more value?

Wouldn't it still be culpable homicide? Is anyone suggesting Oscar should just walk?

 

[lisasalinger]

I'm not saying it would be an accident in that case. It's an intentional act obviously. I'm talking crime of passion/rage, where you do something dangerous and stupid without thinking of the fatal and potential consequences. If this is what happened with Oscar, he certainly wouldn't be the first person who's done such a thing.

BBM: exactly. We can speculate all day why he's actually crying. My point is it's sincere. It's too easy to say the tears are all for himself or the tears are all for Reeva. We're not in his head. We don't know. And, no, it has nothing to do with his guilt or innocent. I haven't said it did.

I'm just trying to be impartial. I don't think Oscar Pistorius is all good or all bad. That's what I've gathered based on the stories from people that knew him and observing him.

This is getting OTT now. And angry. I will just say that I don't base my decisions on how people act in court. It was just food for thought.

Please don't misunderstand my passion for anger. I love that there are differing points here, that is the whole point of our discussions. I just feel super passionate about my point above. Totally directed only at the situation and nothing else.

I totally get what you're saying about crimes of passion, but that doesn't apply at all here. He claims to have thought he killed an intruder. He wasn't killing that intruder due to passion, it was due to fear.

If he was killing Reeva out of a crime of passion, well then we definitely know it was premeditated now because he shot her while she was hiding and he knew it was her in that bathroom.

 

[sorrell skye]

well.. really. he hasn't been passive.. he has put up to the judge the objections that were salient.. salient to a JUDGE.. there isn't a jury..

don't forget.. these two barristers.. Nels and Roux.. are not playing to a jury.. they are playing, if that's the right term, to a judge, their peer in Law and she is also assisted by 2 assessors... those are the ones sitting on the bench at her left, and her right.. the three of them know the law inside out.. its a lot easier to play a jury than it is a judge...

and its a lot harder on a judge .. a jury doesn't have to give reasons for its verdict, but Judge Mapisa does, and it will have to be detailed.. this is the SA system.

Both Nels and Roux know to the finest degree just how much objection and performance they can expend.. lets see how Roux goes when he is hearing his defence witness x-examined by Nels.. could be an eye opener.

Yes - both Nel and Roux are playing to the Judge, as well as to the 2 assessors.

That was obvious from Day 1. I have no doubt that Judge Mapisa is well aware of it, as I'm sure she has many years of experience.

The thing for me is: if Nel isn't confident enough in his own witnesses to object to Roux's badgering of them and to defend their testimony (many of us watching the trial were aghast that Nel didn't object to certain lines of questioning at times), then I can't help but be skeptical at how vigorously he may or may not attack the testimony of the Defense's witnesses.

I hope he fights for Reeva.

Reeva deserves a champion who will fight tooth and nail to achieve justice for her.

I hope Nel is that champion.

 

[zqtpie]

BBM

I really have to disagree strongly with the bolded points.

We are talking about firing bullets that end lives. It's not like an "oops" type of scenario here.

An accidental shooting is one where a finger slips and you never had any intention of even touching that trigger. I don't think this could be considered an accident or a crime of passion.

He freely admits that he:

1. Went to where his gun was supposedly hidden to get it.
2. It obviously was loaded (which means he has already come to terms with possibly needing to use it someday)
3. He walked down a hallway, was supposedly yelling to Reeva to call the police, which means he anticipated problems of some sort.
4. He looked at the door and clearly aimed at it because he hit his target pretty darn well.

No that is not an accident. And I don't give a rat's you know what if he feels bad about it. He doesn't get to say "oops" I didn't mean to do that. The thought that we would even try to justify that scares the crap out of me. He is an adult who need to take responsibility for his actions.

Whether this was premeditated or not... he willingly ended a human life and based on his bail statement doesn't think that he needs to take any responsibility for it. He can't possibly imagine why he's being charged with murder. That is the most insensitive, insincere load of BS that somebody could possibly write in their statement considering he just darn near blew his girlfriend's head off.

Now, as far as his emotions are concerned in court, I have no clue what is sincere and what isn't. People are far too complex to really know. He's probably crying for 100 different reasons.

If emotions and reactions shouldn't be a judge of somebody's guilt... then they shouldn't be a judge of somebody's innocence either. Just food for thought.

I think this could be considered a crime of passion which would perhaps absolve him of pre-meditation. Who knows what the truth is in his story of that night. (Does anyone know if OP used steroids?) But, the way I understand a crime of passion, it is a sudden escalation of huge rage, where the person kind of gets into a zone of temporary insanity. The crime is committed before the person's reason kicks in. I know the def of pre-meditation, but I just don't see this falling into that category.

By the by, maybe Oscar was retching because he had the flu...

 

[lisasalinger]

Wouldn't it still be culpable homicide? Is anyone suggesting Oscar should just walk?

It would be culpable homicide or manslaughter. And you're right, nobody is suggesting he should just walk. I'll admit I got a bit carried away on that one :blushing:

 

[Trooper]

Very much looking forward to Nels "coming to life" as at this point the courtroom belongs to Roux. He even sent the state's witness off to do homework to bring back tomorrow. Roux is a master at what he does and my guess is his "experts" are going to be very sharp. I don't know about MiLady but I would be afraid in US if this was a jury trial because I think he confuses the issues so effectively the jury would have too many doubts to convict.

Look.. I take your point that from your perspective it looks like the courtroom belongs to Roux, but this is a really short sighted view, if I may be forgiven for saying so.. It really is a matter of .. do the answers Roux extracts from the States witness so far impact on the judge and the assessors in establishing Oscars guilt or innocence?? in each and every particular??

Roux may sound like he is grinding a witness into the ground, but has he managed to extract from each witness so far a case for Oscars innocence?? a lot can be gathered from not only the answers given, but what questions Roux asks ... I find his questions more intriguing than the answers he actually gets,...

The fact is.. this isn't a trial in the US.. it isn't a trial before a jury.. the comparison is meaningless and futile..

I also believe that neither one is better than the other.. that is.. I don't think a jury trial is better than a judge only trial, or vice versa.. each has its own intrinsic value and integrity.. I don't think trials are any better any where else, either, in any other country.. its a matter of appreciation of just how folks ANYWHERE go about their legal system... don't you think??

 

[turaj]

no reason to expect that Oscar, himself, should he not renege on his firm and documented avowal that he will take the stand ( Bail Hearing Aff ) will not come across as a lying murderous and not a confused little fellow with a propensity for shooting first, and a peculiar case of fear of intruders, when he can fall asleep with his large bedroom windows, blinds and curtains open onto a balcony..

I can't get beyond this...sleeping with open windows when intruders are a way of life and OP is obsessed with these thoughts. Just makes no sense to me.

 

[YoureNicked]

Just a trivial observation but I was just interested to note as I was watching that BBC documentary Oscar Pistorius What Really Happened - YouTube that the Head of security at the housing estate that Oscar lived at, also has the surname of 'Roux'.

I wonder if he is related to the defense attorney?

 

[minor4th]

Yes - both Nel and Roux are playing to the Judge, as well as to the 2 assessors.

That was obvious from Day 1. I have no doubt that Judge Mapisa is well aware of it, as I'm sure she has many years of experience.

The thing for me is: if Nel isn't confident enough in his own witnesses to object to Roux's badgering of them and to defend their testimony (many of us watching the trial were aghast that Nel didn't object to certain lines of questioning at times), then I can't help but be skeptical at how vigorously he may or may not attack the testimony of the Defense's witnesses.

I hope he fights for Reeva.

Reeva deserves a champion who will fight tooth and nail to achieve justice for her.

I hope Nel is that champion.

Nel has made a few attempts to object to Roux and get him to back off, but he is usually overruled by the judge. I expect we will see the same kind of behavior from Nel as we see in Roux when it's Nel's turn to cross examine Roux' witnesses

 

[YoureNicked]

I can't get beyond this...sleeping with open windows when intruders are a way of life and OP is obsessed with these thoughts. Just makes no sense to me.

I agree!

Plus, at some point in his official statement didn't Oscar say that he slept with his bedroom door locked - seems very much at odds to then also sleep with your balcony doors open!

 

[Trooper]

Yes - both Nel and Roux are playing to the Judge, as well as to the 2 assessors.

That was obvious from Day 1. I have no doubt that Judge Mapisa is well aware of it, as I'm sure she has many years of experience.

The thing for me is: if Nel isn't confident enough in his own witnesses to object to Roux's badgering of them and to defend their testimony (many of us watching the trial were aghast that Nel didn't object to certain lines of questioning at times), then I can't help but be skeptical at how vigorously he may or may not attack the testimony of the Defense's witnesses.

I hope he fights for Reeva.

Reeva deserves a champion who will fight tooth and nail to achieve justice for her.

I hope Nel is that champion.

I believe he is, Sorrell. It is his job, his career , his chosen career, to be a prosecutor and not a defence lawyer.. it stands to reason he appreciates which side of the fence he sits on. I honestly do not believe the State would charge the great and heroic Oscar with this macabre and bizarre murder without a solid and arguable base..

Nels is confident in his witnesses.. and keep in mind, we get a clue of how much 'leeway', as one could put it, that Roux is getting, that Nels will get..

Nels will get exactly and perfectly the same ( and what people think is extended ) leeway as Roux appears to have so far.. not a jot more, nor a jot less..

 

[lisasalinger]

I think this could be considered a crime of passion which would perhaps absolve him of pre-meditation. Who knows what the truth is in his story of that night. (Does anyone know if OP used steroids?) But, the way I understand a crime of passion, it is a sudden escalation of huge rage, where the person kind of gets into a zone of temporary insanity. The crime is committed before the person's reason kicks in. I know the def of pre-meditation, but I just don't see this falling into that category.

By the by, maybe Oscar was retching because he had the flu...

BBM

I just don't see any type of crime of passion here at all.

According to his version, he willingly shot a person behind a closed door because he was scared... 4 shots. He got the gun, brought it to the bathroom, aimed and shot. No passion there. According to him, it was misguided fear.

No way could it have been a crime of passion against Reeva because she was hiding behind a locked door at the time. If he knows she's in that room, then it's premeditated murder.

 

[sorrell skye]

we have to believe that Reeva said her last words, the last words on this earth spoken by Reeva Steenkamp was before 10pm ... Reeva slept thru the voices Mrs VD Mewre heard arguing.. ( a mystery couple very close to Oscars house, on top of it apparently) slept thru Oscar getting up to faff about bringing not one but now 2 fans in from the balcony, slept thru the blinds being close, curtains ditto, slept thru the 'noise from the bathroom' got up silently and wordless, and even more outstanding, she silently entered the toilet and silently locked the door.. Oscar doesn't hear this sound..

then chose to remain silent as Oscar shouts 'get out, get out' and 'Reeva , ring the police.. '..

and that is odd just by itself.. He tells , he says, Reeva to ring the police...
but when HE has shot to smithereens a stranger behind his toilet door. HE HIMSELF doesn't call the police.. he calls the private security from the estate!..

'He tells Reeva to ring the police'...

Yet, he himself doesn't, even when his own estate lead security guard calls him. He refuses help, but insists that "Everything is Fine" - although Reeva's blood and brains are splattered all over his toilet room.

Who does he call? Mr. Stander (an administrator of the estate and possible friend of OP, whom Stander refers to on the first-name basis of 'Oscar').

 

[Trooper]

Nel has made a few attempts to object to Roux and get him to back off, but he is usually overruled by the judge. I expect we will see the same kind of behavior from Nel as we see in Roux when it's Nel's turn to cross examine Roux' witnesses

no.. if you count the objections and the over rulings you will clearly see that its running slightly more in Nels favour up until now.. it is incorrect to state Nels is usually over ruled.. that just isn't so, going by the count..

it may appear so if the ruling is misunderstood, though.. I can understand that impression, but its an erroneous one.

 

[Madeleine74]

<practicing> I put it to you that...

Perhaps Oscar invites danger into his life. He is a dichotomy for sure. Paranoid to the point of unreasonable recklessness that he feels he needs a pistol loaded with hollow point 100% deadly bullets meant to inflict the worst injuries, but wants to have more lax security when it suits him.

I believe while security is a concern, it is not quite to the level that requires someone on the second floor of their home to forgo opening a window. First floor, yes, absolutely, and I keep my own home properly locked. Second floor when it would be extremely difficult for anyone to get up to that area is fine for an open window, as long as one is reasonable.

Oscar lived in a gated and secure enclosure. He had 2 guard dogs! The worst danger for anyone in that community was likely more from Oscar than from any potential intruder. I mean, who was the one with the always loaded pistol with the trigger-happy finger?