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

[808]

Thanks - but no need, I'm a qualified and practising barrister so I know legal terminology. Please don't forget that they didn't just hear a woman screaming - they heard a a man too. Both (male and female) were in fear of their life. Both (male and female) were anxious screams. Remember, burger's initial reaction was that the man had been killed in front of the woman. It simply isn't consistent with an argument that got out of hand for witnesses to have heard OP screaming in terror and anxiously.

Please provide references for anyone who said "Anxious Screams" , I believe the only one was Barry Roux I put it to you.

 

[Exchange973]

I am more cynical, and I suggest that Pistorius shouted for help to add to the plausibility of his "intruder" story. The whole "I thought she was an intruder" excuse is such an obvious one that he would have needed no time to think it up.

I've never given any weight to the mockery suggestion, I think Ms Burger came up with it in desperation to shut Roux up. It doesn't sound very likely to me.

He came up with the intruder idea before he shot her? Because on Burger's evidence/State's case that's when he shouted "help help help". You're right, its highly unlikely this was a mockery. And it destroys the State case as it shows the screams/shots heard happened after the shots.

 

[AJ_DS]

Defence case is shots were between 3:12-3:14 - have you actually read their Heads of Argument.....? It makes the point clearly e.g. para. 284. I'm not bending the facts at all - just stating the Defence's case.

Have you read my post before replying to it ?

The bending of the facts comment was about the State's case when you stated : " Not enough time to do in one and a half mins as the state has been forced to argue (or at least there is reasonable doubt there). "

It's NOT 1.5 minutes… it's 3-4 minutes in the State's case

 

[44ALLAN]

Roux: .. it takes you to exactly, roughly (whatever time it was he eventually said)

Dear oh dear, he calls that evidence of the time that she heard the 'help, help, help'? She saw Clarice's mini cooper turn up at 'x' time, and she was then asked how long it was prior to that she heard the 'help, help, help' .. "oh, it must've been about 5-10 mins" she says .. so on that basis, the DT deem that an 'exact' time??? .. and yet they dismiss the Stipp's testimonies outright? What a larf this is ..

You know and I know..................the judge and the assessors will not be swayed by this blatant attempt at 'falsifying' the FACTS.
Roux is only doing his job.............as much as it sickens me given the FACTS of the case.
FACTS..............5 independent witnesses heard Reeva screaming/yelling/pleading/yelping................gawd almighty.............for her life and IMO Roux knows that too which makes it even more despicable what he is doing trying to defend this lowlife of a client.

Show me any evidence please that refutes the ear-witnesses so I can maybe change my opinion.

Over to you Mr.Roux......................thought not !

 

[Exchange973]

Have you read my post before replying to it ?

The bending of the facts comment was about the State's case when you stated : " Not enough time to do in one and a half mins as the state has been forced to argue (or at least there is reasonable doubt there). "

It's NOT 1.5 minutes… it's 3-4 minutes in the State's case

State has not said shots at 3:15 - the Judge has to go on the cases presented to her, and State has never said 3:15. When Nel and Roux had their little spat during Stipp's evidence, Nel nailed his colours to 3:17.

 

[Cherwell]

He came up with the intruder idea before he shot her? Because on Burger's evidence/State's case that's when he shouted "help help help". You're right, its highly unlikely this was a mockery. And it destroys the State case as it shows the screams/shots heard happened after the shots.

Why not? as I said, it's a very obvious excuse that had probably crossed his mind before in some way. We have seen that he has the arrogance to think he would get away with something like this.

I don't understand your last sentence. I don't agree that anything has "destroyed the State's case" though.

 

[AJ_DS]

Thanks, that makes sense. I'll listen to his testimony again tomorrow (I like to hear these things first hand for myself). So 03:15 to 03:16 is a better time for the second set of sounds, which I maintain are the gunshots. Why does Nel suggest "in the region of 03:17" in his Heads when it really hasn't taken a lot of work to figure a slightly earlier time? Are we missing something?

Well time is an intangible human concept that is not universally standardized on all things.

The server clock of the service provider, the clock on Johnson's phone, Stipp's bedside clock, Van der Merwe's bedside clock, etc… all these clocks do NOT share the same exact time.

Saying "in the region of 3:17" is a reality that is safe and consistent with the evidence.

Attempting to pinpoint the exact "universal" time of the gunshots in hh:mm:ss is irrelevant to the case and would raise more problems than it would solve.

 

[Exchange973]

Why not? as I said, it's a very obvious excuse that had probably crossed his mind before in some way. We have seen that he has the arrogance to think he would get away with something like this.

I don't understand your last sentence. I don't agree that anything has "destroyed the State's case" though.

The help help help that Burger heard OP scream "before" the shots is a major problem for the state. It simply doesn't make sense that he would scream for help before shooting Reeva. And, with respect, it is highly highly unlikely that he did so to create a defence for a crime he had not yet committed.

It is far more likely that the "help help help" heard was OP after the shooting. Therefore, the screams heard were not Reeva but OP, and everything heard by Burgers post dated the shots.

Certainly, the "help help help" supposedly screamed by OP before he shot Reeva creates reasonable doubt.

 

[AJ_DS]

State has not said shots at 3:15 - the Judge has to go on the cases presented to her, and State has never said 3:15. When Nel and Roux had their little spat during Stipp's evidence, Nel nailed his colours to 3:17.

Incorrect…

"in the region of 3:17" is the State's case… so between 3:15 and 3:16 is in the region of 3:17

And even if you so desperately wish for 3:17… that's still 2 minutes to 3:19… NOT 1.5 minutes as you attempted to argue.

 

[Jake18]

State has not said shots at 3:15 - the Judge has to go on the cases presented to her, and State has never said 3:15. When Nel and Roux had their little spat during Stipp's evidence, Nel nailed his colours to 3:17.

In the region of 3:17 Reeva had stopped screaming so there's no need for OP to scream up and down his house and off balconies. The door's pre damaged so he doesn't need to find the bat. He needs to prise/kick open the previously damaged panels and see Reeva. You do realise that it's one of the other? The State's version can't have OP screaming up and down the house in a strangely-unreproducible although-the-DT-have-tried kind of way after Reeva - who is the one who was actually screaming - is brain dead.

 

[foxbluff]

It kind of blew my mind that Roux stood up there saying that his client was taking full responsibility for the Tasha's incident. He said to the judge that OP was fully admitting his GUILT. And I am scratching my head, because when OP was questioned on the stand, under oath, HE DENIED any responsibility and accused the others of lying and setting him up, and said he accidentally shot but wasn't his fault because his friend handed it over wrong. :waitasec:

It blew my mind, too, because it's always been a mystery to me why he didn't cop to Tasha's and the Sunroof shooting to begin with. I can't see how his admitting guilt on Tasha's, at the 11th hour of trial, is going to help him any. It appears to me that it hurts him... hasn't he now added perjury to his list of sins?? How's that going to help him??

 

[AJ_DS]

Thanks - but no need, I'm a qualified and practising barrister so I know legal terminology. Please don't forget that they didn't just hear a woman screaming - they heard a a man too. Both (male and female) were in fear of their life. Both (male and female) were anxious screams. Remember, burger's initial reaction was that the man had been killed in front of the woman. It simply isn't consistent with an argument that got out of hand for witnesses to have heard OP screaming in terror and anxiously.

BiB… I seriously doubt that… you comments on what constitutes an inference and your interpretation of a reasonable doubt is FAR removed from reality.

Simple… get yourself verified by Websleuths as a barrister… otherwise quit alleging to be what you are not… it does not add credibility to your arguments.

Otherwise I'm a Supreme Court Justice myself…

:laughcry:

 

[Exchange973]

Incorrect…

"in the region of 3:17" is the State's case… so between 3:15 and 3:16 is in the region of 3:17

And even if you so desperately wish for 3:17… that's still 2 minutes to 3:19… NOT 1.5 minutes as you attempted to argue.

Haha, ok - 2 minutes then (although defence timeline puts it at 1 min 45). Either way, not much time.

I'm not desperate to argue anything by the way. I just think this point, and the help help help point is compelling. There is a reason the Judge wanted Nel to confirm the phone times were common cause....I suspect she will hang her judgment on this.

And Nel really really should have addressed it in closing. I think his failure to deal with the defence's two main arguments (the first sounds), the short gap post 3:17 is a major own goal.

 

[Val1]

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.

Umm, because we don't believe his version? You can still have common cause on evidence without interpreting it the same way, especially since it's obvious that he did not go out on the balcony to call for help, there's no proof that he ran back and forth 3? times to the bedroom like a chicken with its head cut off, and we've seen in video just how long it takes for him to don his "legs".

I think he used the bat to scare her, possibly even to hit her(see the bruises unrelated to gunshots from autopsy) whereupon RS ran into the toilet room where OP then proceeded to bash the bathroom up with the bat(toilet door, metal plate, tiles) then after RS refused to come out and perhaps even said she was going to call for help he mocked her then deliberately went and got his gun, yelled at her to "get the *advertiser censored** out of my house", fired at "the door" then realizing he'd actually hit her by her screams and the sound of her falling down and knowing he had to "finish the race", used the hole he'd already made in the door to help him "aim" and stopped her screaming. After that, all he had to do was yell out the window help help help, take the what 20-30 seconds to put on his "legs", grab the bat that was already in the bathroom, pry out the first panel in the door from his previous hole then manually pulled the rest out to get at her to make sure she wouldn't be telling any tales, realized she was still breathing, pulled her out of the toilet where she bled out some more, and made his call to Stander for "help". Why else would garbage bags and tape be there but never used? I firmly believe Dr.Stipps is under fire because he interrupted the "help".

 

[Exchange973]

BiB… I seriously doubt that… you comments on what constitutes an inference and your interpretation of a reasonable doubt is FAR removed from reality.

Simple… get yourself verified by Websleuths as a barrister… otherwise quit pretending to be what you are not.

Please, there's no need to be so aggressive. I will happily get myself verified.

 

[Exchange973]

BiB… I seriously doubt that… you comments on what constitutes an inference and your interpretation of a reasonable doubt is FAR removed from reality.

Simple… get yourself verified by Websleuths as a barrister… otherwise quit pretending to be what you are not.

Otherwise I'm a Supreme Court Justice myself !!

:laughcry:

I'd be very interested to hear your explanation for why OP screamed out "help help help" before he shot Reeva btw...?

 

[Lux et Veritas]

I actually thought sister Aimee looked like she had an epiphany when Nel was wrapping up the ridiculous Op story lines. I reckon she would have to know there was something super fishy about that night by now.
808

Wow, that’s extremely interesting! Was your observation during his closing arguments? What was her reaction? (I haven’t yet watched the entire video.)

I have no doubt Aimee and Carl both know more than they’ll ever tell, but I’m 100% convinced that OP has never told his family the real truth - especially them. He would never risk the loss of respect and love from the two people he cares about most in this world. Must be an exhausting, terrible burden to keep such truth locked inside his head. Then again, I could be totally wrong!

OP may have confessed all to Carl and Aimee and they still protect and defend him. Wouldn’t that somehow make them complicit in the murder - especially as they were both there at the crime scene and removed items?

My, the ties of family blood can indeed be twisted.

 

[AJ_DS]

Please, there's no need to be so aggressive. I will happily get myself verified.

You misunderstand… no aggression at all… don't know where you got that from… it's just a bit of humor

 

[luvmygarden]

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.

Nel is definitely the SMART CAR...

 

[Exchange973]

You misunderstand… no aggression at all… don't know where you got that from… it's just a bit of humor

Ok, no problem. No need to make any of this personal. I personally think OP is a disgrace of a human, and deserves to spend many years in prison. I just disagree with the State's primary case.

But anyway, as I said above, I'd be interested to hear your explanation for OP screaming help help help before he shot reeva - then I'll leave you alone!