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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ulrich Roux @ulrichroux · 6s
Masipa:"The fact that person in the toilet was Reeva and not an intruder,is irrelevant.The accused had the intention to kill
 
Was it proven that time elapsed between the shots? If, so, would she have cried out after the first shot & he would have immediately realized it was HER behind the door.
 
Is she holding the door to an open season on intimate partner homicide? As long as there is an "OP" defense? We can hold that discussion for now, obviously. But just wonderin...

It seems so, as long as the accused has a "reasonably possibly true" story than most circumstantial evidence may be disregarded...I wonder if Gerard Baden-Clay in the SA courts would have been acquitted. His defense that his wife was suicidal and that the doubts about his untruthful and evasive testimony, taken from the accused best perspective, may have been not pointed to his guilt. Ugh.
 
J:...in oresent case accused is only oerson who can say what his state of mind was...has not admitted he intended to shoot and kill anyone, but court entitled to look...at presence or abscence of intention...
 
would another reasonable person in OP place have acted in the same way?

Good question.
 
No evidence that OP's didn't believe that there was an intruder in the bathroom who threatened his and Reeva's safety
 
J:...in oresent case accused is only oerson who can say what his state of mind was...has not admitted he intended to shoot and kill anyone, but court entitled to look...at presence or abscence of intention...

Or accused testimony.

I will stop heckling...sorry
 
Judge is saying there is no evidence OP did not honestly believe there were intruders. Listing reasons, including bthroom window being open, but.... he acted unlawfully.
 
Oh God I've got to go out soon... Is it my imagination or is this going to wrap up a whole lot sooner than we imagined?!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Evidence doesn't support dolus eventualis.

Now it comes down to culpable homicide
 
Was it proven that time elapsed between the shots? If, so, would she have cried out after the first shot & he would have immediately realized it was HER behind the door.

J Masipa believes that after the first shot in the hip, Reeva was unable to scream or make a sound.
 
She is saying he could be reasonably expected to be fully aware of the consequences of pulling that trigger four times...
 
J: evidence does not support state's contention of Dolus eventualis..saying because OP told ppl straight afterward he did not mean to kill Reeva, it's evidence he did not...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
1,931
Total visitors
2,063

Forum statistics

Threads
601,311
Messages
18,122,512
Members
231,001
Latest member
SBMonsterFighter
Back
Top