Trial Discussion Thread #51 - 14.11.9, Day 41 ~announcement of the verdict~

[MeeBee]

Sounds like she believes gunshots first, OP screaming, then cricket striking door. That's just what I've gathered. Or, rather, that's what she believes the evidence shows.

 

[zwiebel]

We are back.

 

[IndianSummer]

Live:
http://new.livestream.com/wildabouttrial/events/2811169

 

[geevee]

So she uses the ear witness bat and gun sounds in the timeline but fully ignores the screams they all heard? Something just seems so wrong with that.

 

[minor4th]

He will never be the same after this no matter what. He will never live it down. Even if he was innocent as he states and it was an accident. (I still can't be 100% certain, although the little I heard of his testimony seemed mostly contrived and not that credible to me).

Is this over until tomorow or just a few minutes?

And if an accident, how does the judge explain away the fighting?

There wasn't any fighting.

 

[Interested Bystander]

IMO opinion all that she has intimated so far is that she is not going for premeditated. There still remain two other options.

 

[Exchange973]

I feel like she used no common sense in assessing this first part, like she couldn't see the forest for the trees.
Someone wrote she may be a Pistorian. There may also have been pressure on her to find him not guilt of dolls directs. That kind of pressure and influence is REAL.

I wrote that she was a pistorian - with dripping sarcasm. There is no power, money or influence here - just an objective judge giving justice. It may not be the conclusion that people here thought she would reach - but looked objectively it was fairly obvious that this would be the only findings that could be made.

 

[ColonelMustard]

If I'm Burger, Johnson, and Stipps I'd be totally pissed. It would not have been worth the time and aggravation of all I went through. Masipa has just used no common sense. Judges tell juries here, yes their are facts but don't leave your common sense at the door going into the jury room.

 

[zoran]

Wonder who will play OP when the movie comes out? looks like he is about to cash in big time

 

[momrids6]

What we have thus far:
It was Oscar who screamed according to Judge.
Ear witnesses unreliable according to Judge.

CNN blog is still running - can see summaries so far + continuing live updates
(my desktop is ancient- so this is better than trying to watch constantly buffering video)

http://cnnworldlive.cnn.com/Event/Oscar_Pistorius_trial_4?hpt=hp_t3

 

[jamdog]

Disappointed she's dismissed the ear witnesses but I'm not panicking. The implausibilities in Oscar's testimony have yet to be picked over.

 

[G.bng]

I feel like she used no common sense in assessing this first part, like she couldn't see the forest for the trees.
Someone wrote she may be a Pistorian. There may also have been pressure on her to find him not guilt of dolls directs. That kind of pressure and influence is REAL.

She IS using common sense, no emotions, just common sense. The timelines banded around based on assumptions, speculation and guesses she is not using that's for sure.

 

[zwiebel]

J: ...screams could not have been deceased, as she was already deceased by then...husband Stipp?) evidence thatit was accused crying is powerful....

Judge is explaining how witness evidence actually supports OP's version that it was him screaming

 

[gitana1]

It's heartbreaking. I can't believe she has been taken in by all this!

I will admit that the history of calls to the home, his temper and antics with gun helped push me closer to the guilt side of the seesaw. I wonder if his constant crying swayed the judge. In certain cultures, showings of extreme remorse are a massive help, more so than in the U.S., even if not as sincere as we would like. He did not sound sincere in the times I hesard him crying while testifying.

 

[minor4th]

Mentions Van der Merwe saying that crying out was OP and that's enough to cast doubt on the ear witness testimony

 

[kaydono]

So the cricket bat and the gun shot sound almost identical? That sounds "off" to me.

 

[leda]

I've just been talking to a friend who knows more about these things than I do - she says that Masipa could be heading for a dolus eventualis conviction (due to the unreasonable shooting of 'the intruder') whilst making sure the grounds for appeal are diminished due to her outright rejection of what could be construed as contestable earwitness evidence. I dunno, feel shocked and depressed by the way this has gone so far...

 

[MeeBee]

I don't think they should feel insulted. The judge did not say they were dishonest or tailored their evidence, simply that they were either mistaken or they had trouble separating what they knew personally and what they'd heard elsewhere. She has simply chosen not to take what they say as fact. With good reason. Nothing personal, just objective findings.

 

[sleuth-d-]

is the judge accepting van der m account of the 2am one-sided argument, or just the bit re: op crying?

 

[G.bng]

He will never be the same after this no matter what. He will never live it down. Even if he was innocent as he states and it was an accident. (I still can't be 100% certain, although the little I heard of his testimony seemed mostly contrived and not that credible to me).

Is this over until tomorow or just a few minutes?

And if an accident, how does the judge explain away the fighting?

She did explain the fighting. She called it what it was, a "one sided argument" which is no argument or if it is it is one person ranting while the other just listens. The question is would Reeva have ranted like that for an hour?