Trial Discussion Thread #50 - 14.08.8, Day 40 ~final arguments continue~

[Laf]

Forgive me if my interpretation of the law in this case is incorrect. If the Judge and the assessors find that the accused testimony is unbelievable, then don't they throw out everything that he has testified to? That would mean all his supposed actions ie..legs on ...balcony yelling...these actions are no longer part of the case. Then they rely on the State's witnesses and the phone timeline?

 

[Exchange973]

I do find odd to say the least that someone would be a self-proclaimed long time lurker decided to create an account the very next day after closing arguments concluded… especially when the content of the posts could have been made long ago AND they seem quite familiar somehow…

You caught me In all seriousness, I wanted to wait till closing to read my overall opinion. I couldn't then keep it to myself when I saw everyone rubbishing Roux's closing. I thought it was a masterpiece, utterly convincing and will have swayed the Judge. All just my opinion - but thought I would like to provide some balance.

 

[liesbeth]

Yes, the baker's dozen isn't the states' whole case. But at the same time the states' case relies heavily on showing OP lied.

OP will be found guilty at least of CH (and rightly so).

But for those who think he deliberately killed Reeva, and that those screams were her screams, let me ask this question, because everyone seems to be ignoring it: how on earth could OP have done everything that it is not in dispute that he did (run back and forth between bathroom and bedroom, go to balcony, call out for help, put on legs, smash down the door etc etc) in the space of 2 minutes?

Everyone from Nel onwards has ignored this question. The judge won't.

You say that the judge expects Mr Nel to explain the first shots? With all due respect, that is not true.

Nel, like the rest of us, can only speculate about what happened with those shots. Because only Oscar knows what really happened with the first shots and he has proven himself a liar by adapting his version.

In paragraph 43, page 20 of the state's HoA Nel lists the objective facts that are common cause. Common cause means that both parties accept these facts as true.

And then Nel says that these common cause objective facts form a gruesome mosaic that will prove that Oscar's a murderer.

What happened during the first set of sounds is not common cause. It's not part of Nel's case. It's speculation.

 

[liesbeth]

Forgive me if my interpretation of the law in this case is incorrect. If the Judge and the assessors find that the accused testimony is unbelievable, then don't they throw out everything that he has testified to? That would mean all his supposed actions ie..legs on ...balcony yelling...these actions are no longer part of the case. Then they rely on the State's witnesses and the phone timeline?

I think they throw it all out, Laf. Everything. Even the testimony of people who based their testimony on what Oscar told them.

 

[BritsKate]

Couple of important points...the only options are not premeditated murder OR CH. It's murder - with or without premeditation - directus or eventualis; and if those are rejected, CH is looked at. SA doesn't even have a premeditated murder charge...premeditation, if proven, simply factors into sentencing. And...from everything I've read following this case, premeditation is still a very murky area I don't feel I'm anywhere near knowledgeable about to even hazard a guess at. Some say it's seconds before the crime or multiple wounds while others state it is a cohesive design to commit murder.

Also, another tidbit of SA law many overlook could drastically alter any determination. Killing an intruder while fleeing or attempting to flee cannot be remedied through a putative or physical self-defence claim. Oscar open-fired immediately after screaming at the 'intruder' to get out. But, by the mere fact he shot without a visual assessment and through a closed door, there was no way to ascertain the 'intruder' wasn't in fact fleeing.

JMO and FWIW

 

[Laf]

Thanks Liesbeth! Then that would appear to be the end of it. If the Judge determines the ear witnesses are credible, then Oscar knew it was Reeva in the toilet and her screams will decide his fate.

 

[liesbeth]

1. What exactly did OP have to do between the gunshots at 3:16AM (according to detailed billing of security phone) and his first call (Stander) at 3:19AM… in that 3 minutes ?

2. Why would Nel have to explain the cricket bat shots ??… the one who tried to do so and failed miserably is Roux : in his timeline, the Nhlengethwa’s never heard the cricket bat shots even though they were awake, alert and 9 meters away from the open bathroom window !!!… plus they heard much softer sounds during that time such as OP braying.

3. Don't see why this would be unusual for someone trying to create the illusion of the mistaken identity story.

4. As for the cover-up fabricated story… you heard all the evidence… the events happened more than a year ago… what better story can you come up with having the benefit of hindsight ?… or even different story can you provide ?

5. The reason Nel stayed away from a chronology/timeline is because he would have had to enter much speculation into his closing arguments which were unnecessary for a murder conviction. Example : why would Nel speculate on the broken bedroom door and try and try to fit it into a scenario… not necessary.

Yes. This.

 

[IndianSummer]

I find it absolutely gob-smacking that people are still talking about not guilty verdicts as if they think a reasonable outcome would be for OP to walk free from court.

At the very, very least he is going to be found guilty of culpable homicide. That means guilty of killing someone carelessly, as if their life meant nothing. Even if that was all he had done, he would be worthy of nothing but contempt. I believe he did so much more.

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I thought we had established that if OP acted in a way which he knew was lethal knowing that a human being (any human being) was in the toilet stall, then that is murder. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he was under threat at the time he fired the gun four times. Nothing.

Precisely what are people expecting him to be found not guilty of?

Whether it turns out to be premeditated or CH, he is still guilty of murder. He took someone else's life.

Absolutely agree!!!

 

[AJ_DS]

It is common ground that the door was knocked down after the shots. People must have heard this. Anyway, the way you are putting it is not how the state put it (and what the judge is bound to make her judgement on)

BiB… unfortunately for you, Masipa will not do so.

Masipa will NOT reconstruct a timeline of events step by step… she will address OP's version in broad strokes only…

1. She will state which elements of OP's version are critically irreconcilable with other evidence

2. She will state her assessment of the credibility and reliability of said evidence… taking into account corroborating factors

3. She will state her assessment of OP's credibility and reliability… on all matters, i.e. all the 4 charges and things like the zombie stopper.

4. Considering these 3 points, she will conclude whether OP's version is credible or not… if deemed not credible, all of his version of events goes down the toilet.

5. What remains is the State's version

 

[AJ_DS]

You caught me In all seriousness, I wanted to wait till closing to read my overall opinion. I couldn't then keep it to myself when I saw everyone rubbishing Roux's closing. I thought it was a masterpiece, utterly convincing and will have swayed the Judge. All just my opinion - but thought I would like to provide some balance.

Sure, sure… I fully understand.



:notgood:

 

[liesbeth]

Thanks Liesbeth! Then that would appear to be the end of it. If the Judge determines the ear witnesses are credible, then Oscar knew it was Reeva in the toilet and her screams will decide his fate.

Well put. That's how I understand it too. In order to accept Oscar's version, the judge will have to reject the testimony of Burger, Johnson, Stipp, Stipp, Van der Merwe, Saayman, Van Rensburg and Van Staden. Not just a few of them, all of them. Because all of them directly contradicted Oscar's version.

Can't see this happening.

 

[Suthrnqt]

You caught me In all seriousness, I wanted to wait till closing to read my overall opinion. I couldn't then keep it to myself when I saw everyone rubbishing Roux's closing. I thought it was a masterpiece, utterly convincing and will have swayed the Judge. All just my opinion - but thought I would like to provide some balance.

Roux, is that you?
:nono:

 

[BritsKate]

You caught me In all seriousness, I wanted to wait till closing to read my overall opinion. I couldn't then keep it to myself when I saw everyone rubbishing Roux's closing. I thought it was a masterpiece, utterly convincing and will have swayed the Judge. All just my opinion - but thought I would like to provide some balance.

Respectfully, I don't consider directly comparing a man who killed a woman to an intimate partner violence victim in any way masterful.

 

[AJ_DS]

Well put. That's how I understand it too. In order to accept Oscar's version, the judge will have to reject the testimony of Burger, Johnson, Stipp, Stipp, Van der Merwe, Saayman, Van Rensburg and Van Staden. Not just a few of them, all of them. Because all of them directly contradicted Oscar's version.

Can't see this happening.

… and when you factor in the quality of the Defence's expert witnesses…

… and when you factor in the absence of promised Defence's expert witnesses...

… and when you factor in the extreme lateness of some of Defence's experts involvement…

… and when you factor in OP's testimony.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Dr Stipp testifies that he was woken by 3 loud bangs. He then heard a female screaming. He tried to call security and 10111 but neither call got through. He then heard a second set of shots. His next attempt to call security gets through and was placed at 03:15:51 and lasted 16 seconds. This is common cause. This places the shots at about 03:15. Roux says his wife states the time is 03:17 on the clock but Roux omits to add that she also said their clock is about 3 minutes fast. Anyway, this would imply OP had a little longer to pull the panel out of the toilet door, get the key and open the door. Stipp hears a man's voice shouting 'help, help, help' before security arrive at his house, then sees someone moving from right to left in the bathroom after they leave.

 

[mister happy]

You caught me In all seriousness, I wanted to wait till closing to read my overall opinion. I couldn't then keep it to myself when I saw everyone rubbishing Roux's closing. I thought it was a masterpiece, utterly convincing and will have swayed the Judge. All just my opinion - but thought I would like to provide some balance.

Okay, I'm starting to get it. Roux is a finely tuned Mercedes. Nel is a Fix It Again Tony (Fiat).

ETA: Hmmm

 

[AJ_DS]

Dr Stipp testifies that he was woken by 3 loud bangs. He then heard a female screaming. He tried to call security and 10111 but neither call got through. He then heard a second set of shots. His next attempt to call security gets through and was placed at 03:15:51 and lasted 16 seconds. This is common cause. This places the shots at about 03:15. Roux says his wife states the time is 03:17 on the clock but Roux omits to add that she also said their clock is about 3 minutes fast. Anyway, this would imply OP had a little longer to pull the panel out of the toilet door, get the key and open the door. Stipp hears a man's voice shouting 'help, help, help' before security arrive at his house, then sees someone moving from right to left in the bathroom after they leave.

You are correct about : call security gets through and was placed at 03:15:51 and lasted 16 seconds

Roux's attempt at trickery is when he applies this time to DrStipp's chronology of actions and events : see post http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?252572-Trial-Discussion-Thread-50-14-08-8-Day-40-final-arguments-continue&p=10840010#post10840010


Oops… Just saw that you had already seen that post… my bad

 

[Angela Carr]

This is my first post. I'm a long time lurker, and have watched the trial throughout.

At the beginning, I was certain that OP was guilty of pre-meditated murder. Surely his account of what had happened was implausible.

I have to say though, that having followed the evidence I do not think that he is guilty of pre-med. That is not to say that he hasn't acted unreasonably/unlawfully and is (in my view) guilty of culpable homicide. But I do not think that he believed Reeva was behind that door and intended to kill her.

I also have to say that, as a barrister with some knowledge of how criminal trials work, I am 95% sure that the Judge will not find him guilty.

The key to this case is the state pinning the shots at 3:17 and the first phone call being 2 minutes later. There simply is not enough time for OP to have done everything that (it is not in dispute) that he did do in those 2 minutes.

It was this reason that the Judge asked if the phone records are common cause (IMO). She will use them, and Roux's analysis of the implausibility of the Prosecution's timeline, to find OP not guilty.

There is also the question of the completely unexplained 1st shots. It is correct that the prosecution do not need to explain every detail - but this is an absolutely crucial detail. This is because the defence say that these were the shots. The failure to Nel to explain what they were provides more than ample reasonable doubt. And what about the "help help help" heard by the earwitnesses - why on earth would OP say that before killing Reeva. It is entirely consistent with his account that this happened after the shots and the witnesses heard him screaming for help at this point.

All of this amounts in my view to reasonable doubt. In fact considerably more than reasonable doubt; there isn't enough to convict even of the balance of probabilities. The burden and level of proof is important. The Judge will not forget it, and I'm afraid it will lead to a not guilty verdict.

And, for me, in the background, I struggle to believe that OP could have been so level headed to make up the intruder defence within 5 minutes of shooting Reeva, and then to provide a detailed account at the bail hearing which has not been contradicted in any material sense by the numerous earwitnesses.

I was curious to read that everyone thinks Roux's closing was poor. I thought it was a masterpiece and very convincing. The reality is that it was Nel's closing that was poor. His bakers dozen were not even his strongest points. The Zombie stopper - who on earth will find that OP lied on that, it was so out of left field that of course he was initially confused. As for the difference between talking softly and whispering - there is no material difference.

Nel should have focussed on the screams and how certain Burger et al were that it was a women, and that they heard a woman and a man together. I'm surprised that he didn't. Nel needed to provide a chronology in his closing - he needed to pull everything together, and he didn't.

I suspect (having read other similar posts on this forum) that this post won't be popular. I am not a Roux/OP apologist. I think OP is a nasty piece of work, and should go to prison for his reckless shooting. However, I do not think he is guilty of pre-med murder, and I am sure that he will not be found guilty by the Judge.

You make some very good points. I agree that Nels closing should have focused on the screams heard by the witnesses, because after all, the screams/fight by a woman excludes the intruder theory, and everything said about the intruder is all then BS.
But then, the judge has heard and seen every bit of evidence in this case, far more than websleuthers have, and she is used to all these defence tactics, she will be able to see the wood from the trees. Personally, I do not believe she accepts the intruder theory.

 

[BritsKate]

Apart from what happened after the shooting, how does one rectify a man and woman screaming at the very same time anyway?

Her screams alone are enough for me to convict...his too are just frosting on a cake of lies.

JMO

 

[AJ_DS]

Okay, I'm starting to get it. Roux is a finely tuned Mercedes. Nel is a Fix It Again Tony (Fiat).

ETA: Hmmm

Hehehe…

Roux is a concept car : it's all shiny and exotic… it looks fast just sitting there in a showroom… but when you look under the hood you realize it's an empty shell, there is no engine, no mechanical components… it's just made to look good for photographers and enthusiasts.

Nel might not be the most glamorous or fast car in the garage… but at least it's a real car that can take you places.