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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
R: ...what Prof Derman testified, that's the result of disability..

Now comparing OP to an abused woman??
 
Good point - if he wanted to shoot intentionally, why not go closer to the door - why stand as far away from the door as possible?

Because you cannot use the 'intruder' defense if you stand in front of the door. I think he knew wha he was going to say in defense of himself before he shot.
 
Again, Roux has twisted this .. Nel never said OP was standing in the bathroom just the other side of the toilet door to Reeva .. what Nel said was that Reeva was standing up, right behind the toilet door, talking to OP just a few feet away.

Yes Nel did say that OP was in the bathroom and closer to the door
 
Roux has just pointed out something I think may be correct - that Nel said Reeva went downstairs to eat, but also said earlier she couldn't go downstairs because the alarm was on.

Yes, I agree .. I thought that yesterday when I was listening to Nel, that he had contradicted himself .. although it was a bit confusing, I wasn't sure if I had heard him right. Might have to listen to that bit again.
 
R: 'The slow burn effect'...

He is talking about long term domestic violence victims!
 
Roux has just pointed out something I think may be correct - that Nel said Reeva went downstairs to eat, but also said earlier she couldn't go downstairs because the alarm was on.

Nel said Reeva went downstairs to eat and later said the alarm was never on. I too can't remember all of this but if he also said the alarm was on, IMO he was saying that OP had said it was on, because I definitely remember Nel saying it wasn't on.
 
Because you cannot use the 'intruder' defense if you stand in front of the door. I think he knew wha he was going to say in defense of himself before he shot.

You think he thought all that out in advance? I think that is highly improbable
 
That clapping he did made me jump. I really have got a heightened startle response.
 
R:...it happens instantaneously and sometimes simultaneously....blood flow to the brain is restricted...
 
Good point - if he wanted to shoot intentionally, why not go closer to the door - why stand as far away from the door as possible?

Because it's easier to shoot from the distance he shot from .. it would've been much harder to shoot, with an outstretched arm (like as how OP shoots at the shooting range, and how he would be used to shooting) right up close to the door, so he got back as far as he could get .. which was the wall at the entrance to the bathroom.
 
You think he thought all that out in advance? I think that is highly improbable

I think it would be more improbable that he didnt think it through. When he went to go get his weapon, and had the urge to shoot his girlfriend, it had to occur to him that he had to have a story for the cops.
 
primal instincts.....blah blah blah.....his girl went to the loo.......running away from an angered athlete.....

morning from a chilly august morning in new jersey.....still have that upright walking bear in my mind....hoping he gets his foot fixed
 
Roux is saying all Prof Derman's evidence is supported. What judge must do is decide if it was a reflexive shot alone, or reflexive and....

Lost me a bit. Says judge must decide 'on facts' anyhow.
 
So now Oscar shooting Reeva was a COMBINATION of startle reaction and the cognitive process.
 
I am hearing 'lacked capacity' and 'putative self defence' repeated from Roux.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
2,177
Total visitors
2,373

Forum statistics

Threads
604,681
Messages
18,175,405
Members
232,803
Latest member
aceofswords
Back
Top