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

[AJ_DS]

Respectfully snipped by me for space.

This is excellent, Please, please lease: could Judge Masipa and assessors be on the same page!



What do Websleuther's think of Roux's placing OP at the time of the shooting, that he was at the corner near the entrance? Roux questions why would OP be so far back if he intended on shooting Reeva. Roux said OP stood fearfully at the corner.

Wasn't the distance OP fired the shots at the door measured approximately 2 metres?
Isn't the entrance a little way further? I have to admit I haven't seen measurements of the whole bathroom.

Thanks !

My belief is OP fired the first shot in furious anger immediately as he entered the bathroom and had a view of the toilet door to shut Reeva up…hence the GSR on the light switch.

Realizing what he had done… in for a penny in for a pound… OP repositioned himself, aimed at Reeva's screams and fired 3 additional shots to silence her and end her.

Note : the position of the empty casings is not a reliable indication of OP's position when he fired the shots… a lot of movement occurred in that bathroom before police arrived… not to mention probable tampering.

 

[Mr Fossil]

I am comforted by the presence of 2 young assessors to will assist Masipa on the facts during deliberations.

I believe that the fact that Roux has tried to discredit Dr Stipp's evidence (well, just the part he doesn't like) and confuse the judge only goes to show how worried he is that this evidence is particularly damning to OP's version. I'm sure the judge and assessors will see this for what it is.

 

[liesbeth]

Respectfully snipped by me for space.

This is excellent, Please, please lease: could Judge Masipa and assessors be on the same page!



What do Websleuther's think of Roux's placing OP at the time of the shooting, that he was at the corner near the entrance? Roux questions why would OP be so far back if he intended on shooting Reeva. Roux said OP stood fearfully at the corner.

Wasn't the distance OP fired the shots at the door measured approximately 2 metres?
Isn't the entrance a little way further? I have to admit I haven't seen measurements of the whole bathroom.

BBM: Roux can't have it both ways. People don't have a flight (fear and terror) AND fight (anger and aggression) response at the same time.

Adrenaline floods your system. You either freeze. Or you flee. Or you fight. But not all of them together. And afterwards the adrenaline needs time to leave your system before you're ready for round two.

It's not physically possible for a fearful, cowering, flight-response Oscar to shoot because he's angry from the fight-response that 'forced' him to move towards the danger. So when Oscar, out of the blue, said the gun just went off accidentally because he was afraid, the defence had to call Derman for a bit of damage control.

This reminds me of something else that bothers me about Oscar's alleged fight response. Oscar never described the normal emotions that go with the fight response - intense anger. Maybe because it was just too close for comfort?

 

[Mr Fossil]

Thanks !

My belief is OP fired the first shot in furious anger immediately as he entered the bathroom and had a view of the toilet door to shut Reeva up…hence the GSR on the light switch.

Realizing what he had done… in for a penny in for a pound… OP repositioned himself, aimed at Reeva's screams and fired 3 additional shots to silence her and end her.

Note : the position of the empty casings is not a reliable indication of OP's position when he fired the shots… a lot of movement occurred in that bathroom before police arrived… not to mention probable tampering.

I have always believed they were arguing, he followed her to the bathroom (toilet) where she locked herself in, he got mad and used the cricket bat to terrorise her (first hit on the frame, then two on the door) and then, when she threatened to call the police (she had her phone with her), he got his gun and shot her. The crack through the bullet hole came when he pulled the panel out. I think this fits with the witness testimony and phone records and the only time OP needs after the shooting is to take the panel out and open the door (e.g. there is enough time). Also, she would have been dead a few minutes on his version (gunshots at 03:12) by the time he was placing calls at 03:19 onwards. The pathologist says this too. OP says she was breathing.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

The whole Pistorius family is toxic with self-righteousness.

Oscar aunt to Nel: Aren't you ashamed?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-aunt-to-Nel-Arent-you-ashamed-20140809

Wonder if they'd have the same attitude if Oscar had been murdered?

They would be baying for BLOOD.

 

[steveml]

I agree but defence lawyers specialise and if Roux has no expertise in the defence of murder he surely will not have been as good as one who does. If I had been accused of murder I would not be too happy employing a Defence Lawyer if his speciality was corporate/company law or divorce. I hope the Pistorius's were totally aware of his abilities or Roux might be thrown under a bus yet again. However, he did do his best to defend an almost indefensible felon. Did he do it for the money and prestige - who knows - but IMO the odds are stacked that way. The few lawyers I know most definitely are very aware what they will make from defending their cases and the "juicier the better". In fact I would say it is uppermost on their minds - LOL. I don't see much evidence of ultruism.

Roux has defended clients before on murder charges, including high profile, and is certainly no stranger to this. He was also a prosecutor for nine years and this was how he plied his trade, latterly moving to defense. There's a whole legal team involved on both sides. The delivery of factual and circumstantial evidence is made via both key advocates in the courtroom, but the ascertainment of such information is absolutely a team effort.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

BBM: Roux can't have it both ways. People don't have a flight (fear and terror) AND fight (anger and aggression) response at the same time.

Adrenaline floods your system. You either freeze. Or you flee. Or you fight. But not all of them together. And afterwards the adrenaline needs time to leave your system before you're ready for round two.

It's not physically possible for a fearful, cowering, flight-response Oscar to shoot because he's angry from the fight-response that 'forced' him to move towards the danger. So when Oscar, out of the blue, said the gun just went off accidentally because he was afraid, the defence had to call Derman for a bit of damage control.

This reminds me of something else that bothers me about Oscar's alleged fight response. Oscar never described the normal emotions that go with the fight response - intense anger. Maybe because it was just too close for comfort?

I wholeheartedly agree, Roux wasn't making any sense. OP was scared but purposefully went to bathroom to KILL the intruder, Roux can dress it up any way he likes, still comes out the same.

 

[buntspecht]

bbm - Hmm, how much is a soul going for these days?

ok, Hmm is correct. What you bolded was superfluous. Sorry.

Is correct, because only when all is over we can make the calculation.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

The whole Pistorius family is toxic with self-righteousness.

Oscar aunt to Nel: Aren't you ashamed?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-aunt-to-Nel-Arent-you-ashamed-20140809

Wonder if they'd have the same attitude if Oscar had been murdered?

They would be baying for BLOOD.

Ikr? This family is unbelievable! OP telling Reeva's friend "How do you sleep at night?", Arnold comparing Nel to a Fiat against Roux the Mercedes???!!! Then his 'truth triumphs over evil'???!!! Like it was OP who was killed!!! Arnold fantasizing that OP will be in the next Olympics!!
Now Lois Pistorius and her pearls of wisdom??!! That family hasn't the slightest idea of shame.

Sorry for all the exclamation marks but that whole family make me so furious. It is no longer a mystery why OP turned out to be a bad egg. :gaah:

 

[Greater Than]

Thank you so much for finding that for me. I instinctively knew I would have remembered if he had actually said the word "liar". Nel several times said that OP was lying about the facts; that I accept. I suppose it is splitting hairs but such a lot has been made in the press of Nel actually calling OP a liar. I have a feeling that Roux did the same to the State's early witnesses but was not reprimanded. If I can find the time I will try to find an instance. I think Roux actually said "that is a lie". I don't see a difference (if I am remembering correctly). I wonder why the Judge only intervened when it was Nel? Maybe I am misremembering, in which case I will happily own up - lol! If Nel had said OP was 'untruthful', I wonder whether so much would have been made of it, given both words have the same meaning. I really do think way too much was made of this issue. In court in the UK people do get called liars (and are told they are lying) whilst they are in the witness box. I wonder why Masipa was so prissy (fussy) about this issue especially as fairly obviously he was prevaricating much of his time on the stand.

http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistorius-trial/2014/08/never-called-oscar-pistorius-liar-nel/

“I never called Oscar Pistorius a liar: Nel”

BIB - I may be alone in this, but I really believe every time she seemed to show sympathy for OP it was strictly to ensure a fair trial and to lessen the success of an appeal. When she told Nel to mind his language, he had been grilling OP like any good prosecutor would. Because OP was especially emotional, whether genuinely or theatrically, I just feel like Masipa wanted to remind Nel to not push it too far for Roux to later have the advantage of saying Nel was badgering the witness. MOO

 

[liesbeth]

The whole Pistorius family is toxic with self-righteousness.

Oscar aunt to Nel: Aren't you ashamed?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-aunt-to-Nel-Arent-you-ashamed-20140809

Wonder if they'd have the same attitude if Oscar had been murdered?

They would be baying for BLOOD.

The article says that at one time, I think it was during Nel's closing, she turned toward the journalists behind her. Arnold elbowed her and she turned back. If you watch the trial footage for that day you often see her smiling. I found that quite odd at the time.

 

[lithgow1]

The whole Pistorius family is toxic with self-righteousness.

Oscar aunt to Nel: Aren't you ashamed?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-aunt-to-Nel-Arent-you-ashamed-20140809

Wonder if they'd have the same attitude if Oscar had been murdered?

They would be baying for BLOOD.

The vocal ones do come off as very unpleasant and self-centred people to say the least. But it is heartening to read the comments following your link and see the ratio of likes versus dislikes to gauge public sentiment (primarilly in SA I think) towards both Pistorius and the comment made by his aunt: 163 vs 18; 157:13, 148:11 etc. For all their thumbs-downing the Pistorians are overwhelmingly in a minority.

 

[lithgow1]

BIB - I may be alone in this, but I really believe every time she seemed to show sympathy for OP it was strictly to ensure a fair trial and to lessen the success of an appeal. When she told Nel to mind his language, he had been grilling OP like any good prosecutor would. Because OP was especially emotional, whether genuinely or theatrically, I just feel like Masipa wanted to remind Nel to not push it too far for Roux to later have the advantage of saying Nel was badgering the witness. MOO

I agree. Similar thing happened during Nel's cross of Mr Dixon IMO. At a point when he was particularly pulling Dixon's expertise to pieces Nel said 'I don't want to be rude ...' and M'lady interjected with a 'No Mr Nel, do not be rude' or similar. Some pro-Pistorius people took this as some sort of good sign but she had the slightest of smiles as she said it and to me the implication was much more 'I know you could demolish this man but you don't need to. You've already made his lack of expertise crystal clear'. That was my take anyway.

 

[liesbeth]

I wholeheartedly agree, Roux wasn't making any sense. OP was scared but purposefully went to bathroom to KILL the intruder, Roux can dress it up any way he likes, still comes out the same.

Didn't Roux also say that Oscar doesn't have a physiological flight response because he can't run because he doesn't have legs? Was he serious or was he ironic? I'm sarcastic. Sorry. I just can't help myself.

Does Mr Roux think Judge Masipa is stupid? Does he expect her to ignore the inconsistencies in his own argument which, by the way, is that there were no inconsistencies in Oscar's version?

 

[Interested Bystander]

BIB - I may be alone in this, but I really believe every time she seemed to show sympathy for OP it was strictly to ensure a fair trial and to lessen the success of an appeal. When she told Nel to mind his language, he had been grilling OP like any good prosecutor would. Because OP was especially emotional, whether genuinely or theatrically, I just feel like Masipa wanted to remind Nel to not push it too far for Roux to later have the advantage of saying Nel was badgering the witness. MOO

Yep, that makes sense.

 

[Greater Than]

Ikr? This family is unbelievable! OP telling Reeva's friend "How do you sleep at night?", Arnold comparing Nel to a Fiat against Roux the Mercedes???!!! Then his 'truth triumphs over evil'???!!! Like it was OP who was killed!!! Arnold fantasizing that OP will be in the next Olympics!!
Now Lois Pistorius and her pearls of wisdom??!! That family hasn't the slightest idea of shame.

Sorry for all the exclamation marks but that whole family make me so furious. It is no longer a mystery why OP turned out to be a bad egg. :gaah:

His entire family is acting as though this is some reality TV show competition, like The Amazing Race or something.

Can there really be a winner at the end of this? After all, an innocent woman is dead.

 

[buntspecht]

Ikr? This family is unbelievable! OP telling Reeva's friend "How do you sleep at night?", Arnold comparing Nel to a Fiat against Roux the Mercedes???!!! Then his 'truth triumphs over evil'???!!! Like it was OP who was killed!!! Arnold fantasizing that OP will be in the next Olympics!!
Now Lois Pistorius and her pearls of wisdom??!! That family hasn't the slightest idea of shame.

Sorry for all the exclamation marks but that whole family make me so furious. It is no longer a mystery why OP turned out to be a bad egg. :gaah:

I definitely support prison-sport! Dont forget OP could be a big inspiration to his inmates.
But I doubt if OPs prison-team may join the Olympics.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Roux has defended clients before on murder charges, including high profile, and is certainly no stranger to this. He was also a prosecutor for nine years and this was how he plied his trade, latterly moving to defense. There's a whole legal team involved on both sides. The delivery of factual and circumstantial evidence is made via both key advocates in the courtroom, but the ascertainment of such information is absolutely a team effort.

Thank you Steveml. Long time no see . I admit to knowing little about Roux but was posting off the comment that someone left upthread and who had not found any evidence that he had been involved with Criminal Law Defence. I would be interested for some links about him if you have any to hand. Yes, I know there is quite a large team involved, quite a few of them were in court, but it is always the barrister who takes the limelight and receives the accolades (and the BIG salary LOL). Normally a barrister has developed very good arguing skills but I didn't find Roux very impressive at all. It was all so bitty and snide but, thereagain, I thought Nel should have been more lucid during his HoA presentation. Nel's HoA was good to read but, as I have been told English is not his first language and I need to make allowances for that. I assume Roux too speaks Africaans or am I wrong?

 

[sjtw12]

Latest commentary from the BBC's Andrew Harding:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-28724230

 

[Exchange973]

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.