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

[katydid23]

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.

Why wouldn't he call 'help' before he shot her? He made up his mind to shoot her and he went and grabbed his weapon. It had to cross his mind, AT THAT TIME, PRIOR to the shooting, that he would need a good explanation. So why wouldn't he start setting up the intruder story?

Calling for help is a perfect way to get the ball rolling and make the neighbors suspect a home invasion.

 

[Val1]

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.

Doesn't it then strike you as odd that according to the DT it was then OP who was heard screaming last, if Burger had already identified a man and a woman and that she had thought the man had been killed because she didn't hear him anymore?

 

[Lux et Veritas]

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

At best, attempting to cover her screams for help with his own. (Roux keeps telling us OP screams like a woman, with no proof in sight. LOL).

At worst, the cruel, sadistic mockery of a sociopath, taunting his victim before he kills her.

 

[AJ_DS]

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

Correct me if I'm wrong :

From Burger and Johnson : HHH was heard first from Reeva and then from OP, both before the gunshots… before 3:16

From Stipp and Stipp : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

From Nhlengethwa’s : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

From Carice Stander : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

This means, according to the evidence HHH was shouted/screamed at least 3 times.

We have no idea where in OP's house those HHH were shouted/screamed from.

Why OP screamed HHH is irrelevant… it does not prove nor disprove anything.

I can speculate for your benefit :

- Screaming HHH immediately after Reeva did can be thought as being a good idea to dispel the perception by neighbors that OP is threatening Reeva… and it worked since Burger and Johnson though Reeva and OP were being attacked.

- Screaming HHH immediately after shooting Reeva can be perceived by a guilty mind trying to avoid responsibility as a good idea in attempts to cover-up the murder as a tragic accident.

Interestingly enough… Carice Stander said she heard OP shout HHH… and Defence did NOT question that… but they questioned the credibility and reliability of witnesses who heard Reeva screams of terror from a much closer distance than Carice AND direct line of sight contrary to Carice.

How come Carice did not hear Reeva/OP shout/scream HHH ?

How come Carice did not hear Reeva's blood-curdling screams of terror ?

How come Carice did not hear both the gunshots and the cricket bat strikes ?

 

[Exchange973]

At best, attempting to cover her screams for help with his own. (Roux keeps telling us OP screams like a woman, with no proof in sight. LOL).

At worst, the cruel, sadistic mockery of a sociopath, taunting his victim before he kills her.

Do you really, genuinely, believe either? Both sound entirely far fetched to me. Even Nel didn't argue this - he just ignored it. He ignored it because it is a fundamental problem in the State's case - far far beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[AJ_DS]

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!

Above #984

 

[Val1]

BIB… really ??… how about they were the 3 shots heard at around 3:05AM ?????

Gee, I always thought they were the 3 "thunderclaps" that OP's dear friend and contractor(who also conveniently left ladders laying out that helped with the intruder story) claimed to have been woken by at 3:08am... after which he lay awake for a time waiting for the rain to start, instead just a lot of lights and commotion came from OP's a little while later.:thinking:

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Arnold Pistorius @arnoldpistorius
As LIGHT destroy DARKNESS TRUTH will destroy the EVIL.

Barbara Spence @barbispence 21h
The sun is always the brightest after the storm. God is going to see you through. @arnoldpistorius @loispistorius @OscarPistorius


Answer this, Uncle Arnold -

Why didn’t your God see Reeva through?!

Did she - trapped, alone, terrified - deserve less than the man who brutally killed her?!

Does Oscar deserve mercy when he showed NONE to Reeva?

Where was her “blessing”? - a word your Pistorius clan loves to toss around.

DARKNESS fell upon her life the day she had the great misfortune of meeting Oscar Pistorius - there’s your f##king “EVIL”.

 

[Jake18]

Do you really, genuinely, believe either? Both sound entirely far fetched to me. Even Nel didn't argue this - he just ignored it. He ignored it because it is a fundamental problem in the State's case - far far beyond reasonable doubt.

For me, reasonable doubt would have been introduced if OP's screams were shown to sound like that of a woman, ideally "intermingled" with his own.

 

[Cherwell]

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.

BIB
I'm afraid you misunderstood. It was not specifically the phone times the Judge asked about.
Thanks to Mr Fossil for recording the exchange in post 640 of Thread 50



Judge: On page 60 to 62 of the heads of the defence there’s a chronology of events as well as a timeline. Are those common cause facts or do you disagree with him?

Nel: M’Lady. I would have to go through them. Those that are based on the cell phone data are common cause. Those that are based on what Mrs Nhlengethwa did, she had to move places and therefore we place this as 3:12 or 3:14, those are not common cause.

Judge: Ok. Cell phone data is common cause.

Nel: Yes. Cell phone ... let me not say not only cell phones, all the phone data ...

Judge: All the phone data

Nel: ... is common cause. That’s all that’s common cause

Judge: Thank you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqp502_tS1M from about 1:21:00

 

[Exchange973]

Correct me if I'm wrong :

From Burger and Johnson : HHH was heard first from Reeva and then from OP, both before the gunshots… before 3:16

From Stipp and Stipp : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

From Nhlengethwa’s : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

From Carice Stander : HHH was heard from OP after the gunshots… after 3:16

This means, according to the evidence HHH was shouted/screamed at least 3 times.

We have no idea where in OP's house those HHH were shouted/screamed from.

Why OP screamed HHH is irrelevant… it does not prove nor disprove anything.

I can speculate for your benefit :

- Screaming HHH immediately after Reeva did can be thought as being a good idea to dispel the perception by neighbors that OP is threatening Reeva… and it worked since Burger and Johnson though Reeva and OP were being attacked.

- Screaming HHH immediately after shooting Reeva can be perceived by a guilty mind trying to avoid responsibility as a good idea in attempts to cover-up the murder as a tragic accident.

Interestingly enough… Carice Stander said she heard OP shout HHH… and Defence did NOT question that… but they questioned the credibility and reliability of witnesses who heard Reeva screams of terror from a much closer distance than Carice AND direct line of sight contrary to Carice.

How come Carice did not hear Reeva/OP shout/scream HHH ?

How come Carice did not hear Reeva's blood-curdling screams of terror ?

How come Carice did not hear both the gunshots and the cricket bat strikes ?

Thanks. I disagree that its irrelevant. It calls Burger and Johnson into question. Stipp on screams isn't so damning for the defence, as he said the first sounds were shots - consistent with OP's case. Its burger's blood curdling screams that are the problem for OP - and her hearing help help help before the sounds "in the region of 3:17" suggests that these screams were after Reeva had been shot.

As for why he might have screamed before shooting - the idea that this was a deliberate act by a ruthless criminal mastermind foreseeing a potential trial/defence one and a half years down the line doesn't add up for me.

 

[44ALLAN]

Well ... Roux diminishes his credibility by saying only that. Negligence is the least of it. There is no reasonable possibility that the gun went off by itself at Tasha's. So reasonable doubt is out the window with respect to this incident. OP pulled the trigger. Period. Therefore OP is baldfacedly lying about this incident. Nel did not cause OP to lie this way. OP masterminded this on his own. OP thereby demonstrated callous disrespect for the court and its proceedings: I can get up here on the stand and say white is black, the sun sets in the east, and Glocks with their three-step safety mechanisms go off by themselves. I can get up here and say anything I want. Who is this judge and these small people compared with me? Does anyone think Masipa will ignore this massive snubbing of the court? OP's fraudulent posture here is a stench that no doubt spreads to the other charges. If he engages in this easy bewildering lying on this slam-dunk charge against him, what is anyone with a functioning brain supposed to think about his credibility on the other charges?

judgement day 9/11 ffs.
This trial is surreal at times....................apart from the witnesses hearing a woman's petrified 'life threatening' screams which have never been contradicted by the defence at any point apart from 'talk' without facts.
I feel so sorry for his family etc ( and OP believe it or not I really do) what a fkin mess and tragedy to all involved.
Reeva................well I have 3 kids and 2 of them are daughters................I have no words to explain what her parents are going through I really don't.
When i saw him grinning/laughing in court the other day words failed me....................he should have been given 10year in jail for that at least for all the parents watching fgs!

 

[Jake18]

BIB
I'm afraid you misunderstood. It was not specifically the phone times the Judge asked about.
Thanks to Mr Fossil for recording the exchange in post 640 of Thread 50



Judge: On page 60 to 62 of the heads of the defence there’s a chronology of events as well as a timeline. Are those common cause facts or do you disagree with him?

Nel: M’Lady. I would have to go through them. Those that are based on the cell phone data are common cause. Those that are based on what Mrs Nhlengethwa did, she had to move places and therefore we place this as 3:12 or 3:14, those are not common cause.

Judge: Ok. Cell phone data is common cause.

Nel: Yes. Cell phone ... let me not say not only cell phones, all the phone data ...

Judge: All the phone data

Nel: ... is common cause. That’s all that’s common cause

Judge: Thank you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqp502_tS1M from about 1:21:00

And when they review the phone data themselves it'll be obvious to them, as it is to us, that Roux and co have been somewhat disingenuous with their interpretation.
Smoke, mirrors and a disability is all they have.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

... Mr Roux asked Judge Thokozile Masipa to consider the psychological effects of a lifetime of insecurities due to Pistorius's disability, comparing his anxiety the night he shot Ms Steenkamp to that of a woman who snaps and kills her partner after years of abuse. ... "You have the effect of the slow burn of insecurities over many years. You're an athlete. You're trained to react to a sound, and he stands there now with his finger ready to fire, and then," Mr Roux said, before banging the wooden lectern in front of him to make a startling sound. ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Pistorius-to-learn-fate-on-September-11.html

Fascinating. No one has ever heard of OP’s terrible, crippling “insecurities”, “slow burn” or “abuse” till after Feb. 14 2013. In fact, not until August 8 2014.

Roux’s shameless closing starkly illustrates just how very desperate the defense is.

Comparing OP’s current situation to domestic abuse is flat out loathsome. An arrogant, spoiled, entitled rich boy on a par with legions of broken and battered women? Geezus, Roux must have been up all night scraping the bottom of that barrel.

Not to mention Hero-Daddy Pistorius suddenly takes the rap for the .38 ammo (useless at this very late date lol) ... and OP suddenly has a bout of conscience and admits guilt for the Tasha’s shooting?! Yes, folks, 100% pure DESPERATION. An11th hour Hail Mary pass - defense knows it’s been broadsided by Nel and is now shamelessly throwing itself on the mercies of My Lady.

She - the staunchly anti-violence-against-women judge who recently sentenced a serial rapist to 252 years and a wife-killer to life in prison. My Lady will not be impressed with this VILE deceit. In fact, I believe My Lady will be highly f##king pissed off. She has seen the true faces of domestic violence against women.

So, Roux is tossing out the “abusive” “sounds” that “terrified” the “vulnerable” Big Bad Blade Runner, the same murderous coward who supposedly could not flee out his own bedroom door? ... just, freakin please.

Oscar, you are so screwed.


p.s. Sometimes I wonder whose side Roux is really on. LOL

 

[Jake18]

Thanks. I disagree that its irrelevant. It calls Burger and Johnson into question. Stipp on screams isn't so damning for the defence, as he said the first sounds were shots - consistent with OP's case. Its burger's blood curdling screams that are the problem for OP - and her hearing help help help before the sounds "in the region of 3:17" suggests that these screams were after Reeva had been shot.

As for why he might have screamed before shooting - the idea that this was a deliberate act by a ruthless criminal mastermind foreseeing a potential trial/defence one and a half years down the line doesn't add up for me.

So when OP went to fetch his gun you don't think he MAY have thought that murdering Reeva was wrong? It's the only obvious alibi.

 

[liesbeth]

O/T Alert

@liesbeth...every time I see your nickname/moniker it reminds me of the great film noir actress Lizabeth Scott.
Anyhoo, since you are in Africa (I think I got that right) what is the prevailing opinion there on OP's guilt or innocence? I mean the average Joe's or Jane's take, not the talking heads or any of the countless legal eagles. TIA

It's not too personal, Suthrngt, not at all.

In South Africa the word on the street is that Oscar is guilty. This is the prevailing opinion and there is no difference in gender, colour, religion or age that I can see. Even the few Pistorians I know think he's guilty, but they feel sorry for him and try to excuse/explain his actions.

Many people think Oscar lost his temper and shot Reeva during an argument. Most want him to man up, tell the truth and take his medicine. Some feel he can be forgiven, but only if he tells the truth.

Some people are more inclined to accept a guilty person's apology because in their culture an apology is made not only to the victim's family, but also to the victim herself. And when I say the victim herself it is not a metaphor. There is a belief that as long as a person's name is spoken they will remain here. Literally. So in many African cultures an apology to the family (and by extension the victim) is the first thing a guilty person does.

Of course the family of a victim also has the power to influence the guilty person's fate. The family can influence sentencing. If convicted the family will be consulted before he gets paroled.

I hope this answers your question. If not, please feel free to ask again.

 

[Greater Than]

Reeva screaming before shots = murder
Reeva screaming after 1st shot = murder

Even if Reeva was silent after the first shot hit her, the sound of her body flying across the room and slamming onto the magazine rack indicated that the perceived intruder had been hit. One of the requirements of PD is that the extent of force used must be necessary and reasonable. The three additional shots were excessive force. It was overkill. Another requirement of PD is that the attack (or perceived attack in OP's case) has commenced or is imminent. After hitting his target with the first shot, there was no more imminent threat, so there was no justification for continuing to shoot.

Just for argument's sake, let's say the court rejects all ear witness testimonies and accepts his whole intruder story and finds that he meets the requirements for putative self defense for the first shot, the last three were still unlawful. If he foresaw the possibility of any of the additional three shots killing whoever was behind the door when they were no longer a threat (whether the first shot killed or not), then he is guilty of murder.

 

[Exchange973]

So when OP went to fetch his gun you don't think he MAY have thought that murdering Reeva was wrong? It's the only obvious alibi.

That was after 3:17 - on the state's timeline. Hence after the screams heard by Burger with the help help help. On burger's evidence he screamed out for help before he shot her. That would mean that he created his alibi/excuse before he committed the crime. Totally implausible.

 

[Exchange973]

Reeva screaming before shots = murder
Reeva screaming after 1st shot = murder

Even if Reeva was silent after the first shot hit her, the sound of her body flying across the room and slamming onto the magazine rack indicated that the perceived intruder had been hit. One of the requirements of PD is that the extent of force used must be necessary and reasonable. The three additional shots were excessive force. It was overkill. Another requirement of PD is that the attack (or perceived attack in OP's case) has commenced or is imminent. After hitting his target with the first shot, there was no more imminent threat, so there was no justification for continuing to shoot.

Just for argument's sake, let's say the court rejects all ear witness testimonies and accepts his whole intruder story and finds that he meets the requirements for putative self defense for the first shot, the last three were still unlawful. If he foresaw the possibility of any of the additional three shots killing whoever was behind the door when they were no longer a threat (whether the first shot killed or not), then he is guilty of murder.

I agree. I think he will be found guilty of murder - but I just think that the version that lots of people here sign up to (that there was an argument with Reeva and he killed her because of it) is not right. I think he genuinely thought that there was an intruder, and shot that intruder but not out of self defence. That is murder - but its not how the State's case is primarily put.

 

[liesbeth]

Hehe… common misconception… let me elaborate :

- Johnson stated that he does NOT remember if 3:16 is the beginning of the call or the end of the call

- 3:16 does NOT come from cellular service provider servers (detailed billing)… it comes from the phone itself… so dependent on the time set on the phone itself

- The culminating moment of the night's event for Johnson and burger is the bloodcurdling screams followed by the gunshots… this would be the event which "anal" Johnson would want to pin point the time… since this occurred seconds after Johnson ended his call, it makes sense that he would write in his document the call's end time… the call's start time is not important or relevant because it does not reveal or pin point anything specific.

… considering any of these 3 points separately or as an ensemble, one can see there is no contradiction with the between 3:15 and 3:16 for the gunshots.

It was during cross that Mr Johnson said that he wasn't sure if the 3:16 was the start- or end time of the call. He repeated it at least twice, but Roux ignored him.