Trial Discussion Thread #57 - 14.16.10, Day 46 ~ sentencing~

[Marfa Lights]

Bringing this over from yesterday's thread...points relating to perceptions of the Pistorius family and the data wiping incident on the phone respectfully snipped to focus my response.

The crack in the door has never been successfully argued away or even mitigated either in court or on websleuths. It is critical and definitive and it was rightly critical and definitive in the Culpable Homicide judgement.

Relating to your second point, unless you are referring to another point in the judgement Masipa did NOT claim what you suggest. She used the pathologist's evidence about Reeva's devastating injuries to support the idea that she could not have screamed 'at least in the way the witnesses reported that night'. It was not an opinion on whether Oscar could have heard her scream, it was an opinion that Reeva could not have been the person that the witnesses heard screaming after the shots because her injuries were too devastating.

Let me repeat: BAT - GUN - BAT

 

[jay-jay]

Months ago I said something to the effect that "I just can't seem to care very much about this photo/issue" because the prosecution's case was already lost in my view because of the evidence that put the shots first. That sentiment was effectively repeated in Masipa's judgement when she referred to things that had a lot of focus and debate in the trial but eventually paled in significance to other facts when the evidence is taken as a whole.

~snipped~

BBM - but that was selective 'evidence' .. if you read the threads/posts over the past weeks and months, it has been proven that the way Masipa arrived at her decision on this was faulty (and more than likely, deliberately so, and she 'cherry picked' in order to arrive at that decision).

 

[JuneBug67]

I think it has, many times, on Websleuths. It seems quite plausible to me that the crack through the bullet hole could have been caused by OP breaking the panel out after both the bat strikes and gunshots. Unfortunately, this was not argued in court though.

And why do you think this wasn't argued in court? Don't you think it would have been if it remotely could have been? Nel didn't even ask his own witness if it could have been consistent with some kind of event other than a bat strike, never mind leading actual evidence that it was some kind of other action by Pistorius. The wood fibers almost certainly would have shown microscopic forensic evidence of having been pulled apart rather than split apart from from a single point of force at the origin. Nel's not an idiot. He knew what a weakness this was and he certainly would have done something to mitigate it if the evidence would remotely support another scenario, even a hypothetical one.

 

[jay-jay]

She didn't flip a coin. The evidence supported that the shots came first, and as Masipa pointed out that evidence was not contradicted. It's so simple, and so key.

No, the full evidence did NOT support the shots came first .. you are basing that purely on Masipa's selectiveness, and some definite jiggery pokery by the DT on timelines, which she (for some unknown reason*) accepted.

* correction .. reason is known .. she did not want OP to be accused of murder.

 

[JuneBug67]

~snipped~

BBM - but that was selective 'evidence' .. if you read the threads/posts over the past weeks and months, it has been proven that the way Masipa arrived at her decision on this was faulty (and more than likely, deliberately so, and she 'cherry picked' in order to arrive at that decision).

No it WAS NOT SELECTIVE. It was the product of a chain of logic and reason that left some evidence irrelevant and/or impeached by other facts. She didn't just pick stuff to believe at random. The judgement makes that all very clear.

 

[soozieqtips]

Moleko Zac Modise, the acting national commissioner of Correctional Services, is painting a very different picture of South Africa's prisons to that presented by defence witness Annette Vergeer.

There are sports and recreation facilities, including athletics, as well as anger management, life skills, family counselling, formal education and skills development, he says.

So OP could have anger management, and then afterwards, the whole family could attend family counselling. Win win.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news...enced-for-killing-of-reeva-steenkamp-day-four

 

[JuneBug67]

Let me repeat: BAT - GUN - BAT

It says a lot that to support their beliefs people have to make up scenarios that have absolutely no basis in evidence. While ignoring totally the scenario that does have a basis in evidence that forms a foundation of the judgement they so dislike.

 

[Bobbie Elliott]

I totally agree Lithgow re the inappropriateness of the birthday wishes for Masipa.

Sadly, I think that this might have been Nel getting in first before Roux could. Like 2 people competitively crawling to their boss in the hope of getting special treatment.

 

[jay-jay]

No it WAS NOT SELECTIVE. It was the product of a chain of logic and reason that left some evidence irrelevant and/or impeached by other facts. She didn't just pick stuff to believe at random. The judgement makes that all very clear.

The judgement is flawed. I suggest you read Mr Fossil's offline documents.

 

[Mr Fossil]

She didn't flip a coin. The evidence supported that the shots came first, and as Masipa pointed out that evidence was not contradicted. It's so simple, and so key.

Not strictly true. Nel said quite clearly that the gunshots were at around 03:17. Unfortunately he didn't argue anything else.

 

[Trotterly]

I also asked about 'Photo 55' yesterday. A poster kindly provided a link and accompanying story. Thanks! I didn't know the photo by its number but was of course very familiar with it and it's significance. Many people have found it to be strong proof that Oscar lied about his actions and therefore strong proof of his guilt. This is not very good reasoning in my view. Months ago I said something to the effect that "I just can't seem to care very much about this photo/issue" because the prosecution's case was already lost in my view because of the evidence that put the shots first. That sentiment was effectively repeated in Masipa's judgement when she referred to things that had a lot of focus and debate in the trial but eventually paled in significance to other facts when the evidence is taken as a whole. The photo only proves that by the time the scene was photographed it didn't match Oscar's recollections. It doesn't matter if stuff got moved by the police or if Oscar's recollections were flawed or indeed what the explanation is, because the state case is already destroyed by other information.

How do you explain the blood trail over the duvet?

 

[JuneBug67]

The judgement is flawed. I suggest you read Mr Fossil's offline documents.

Like the state, nobody here can reasonably contest that the shots came first. Still thinking otherwise is what is flawed. I suggest people at least CONSIDER not being so invested in their positions that they refuse to see such simple logic.

 

[LemonMousse]

I also asked about 'Photo 55' yesterday. A poster kindly provided a link and accompanying story. Thanks! I didn't know the photo by its number but was of course very familiar with it and it's significance. Many people have found it to be strong proof that Oscar lied about his actions and therefore strong proof of his guilt. This is not very good reasoning in my view. Months ago I said something to the effect that "I just can't seem to care very much about this photo/issue" because the prosecution's case was already lost in my view because of the evidence that put the shots first. That sentiment was effectively repeated in Masipa's judgement when she referred to things that had a lot of focus and debate in the trial but eventually paled in significance to other facts when the evidence is taken as a whole. The photo only proves that by the time the scene was photographed it didn't match Oscar's recollections. It doesn't matter if stuff got moved by the police or if Oscar's recollections were flawed or indeed what the explanation is, because the state case is already destroyed by other information.

I realise that you won't take any notice of this, but for the last time....

Please go back and listen to Vermuelen's testimony. He did NOT say that the bat was only used on the door after the shots. He sajd the door was broken open after the shots (by prising out a panel) but that the bat could have been used before the shots to scare Reeva.

You are mistaken and lots of people have tried to point this out. It's disappointing that you don't seem interested in facts.

 

[Mr Fossil]

And why do you think this wasn't argued in court? Don't you think it would have been if it remotely could have been? Nel didn't even ask his own witness if it could have been consistent with some kind of event other than a bat strike, never mind leading actual evidence that it was some kind of other action by Pistorius. The wood fibers almost certainly would have shown microscopic forensic evidence of having been pulled apart rather than split apart from from a single point of force at the origin. Nel's not an idiot. He knew what a weakness this was and he certainly would have done something to mitigate it if the evidence would remotely support another scenario, even a hypothetical one.

Unless you're suggesting that the bat strike was on the bullet hole (which it wasn't) the effect of a hit or a push through from the same point would be the same IMO. Unfortunately Vermeulen wasn't asked to be more explicit by Nel, nor did Nel argue anything about this (which I think was a mistake as Masipa clearly needed the alternative spelled out to her).

 

[whiterum]

If you watch the clip on #567 she is the one getting agitated & causing the disruption in the court. She is also too far away from them & blocked by others to have been able to lip read anything. I say she's a drama queen.

I agree, a big drama had to be created out of something trivial, to try take attention away from any sympathy afforded to the victim via Kim's testimony. This family are masters at manipulation and it appears to have worked, as now most media attention is focused on this incident.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Like the state, nobody here can reasonably contest that the shots came first. Still thinking otherwise is what is flawed. I suggest people at least CONSIDER not being so invested in their positions that they refuse to see such simple logic.

Have you thought about considering this point yourself?

 

[PrimeSuspect]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/vi...ppy-birthday-oscar-pistorius-sentencing-video


Listening to this video again, I'm pretty sure Nel was elected to wish Masipa happy birthday. It is very unusual and certainly wouldn't happen in an Australian court.

 

[LemonMousse]

Like the state, nobody here can reasonably contest that the shots came first. Still thinking otherwise is what is flawed. I suggest people at least CONSIDER not being so invested in their positions that they refuse to see such simple logic.

You are simply wrong. 100% wrong.

Refusal to go back and listen to the evidence, which would show you that you are wrong, strongly suggests that it is you who are very heavily invested in your position.

 

[Interested Bystander]

And why do you think this wasn't argued in court? Don't you think it would have been if it remotely could have been? Nel didn't even ask his own witness if it could have been consistent with some kind of event other than a bat strike, never mind leading actual evidence that it was some kind of other action by Pistorius. The wood fibers almost certainly would have shown microscopic forensic evidence of having been pulled apart rather than split apart from from a single point of force at the origin. Nel's not an idiot. He knew what a weakness this was and he certainly would have done something to mitigate it if the evidence would remotely support another scenario, even a hypothetical one.

I don't think he argued it because at that time he endowed Masipa with more intelligence than she appears to have. I am sure he wishes now he had but it was so clear to him and to 90 per cent of this forum that most of us find it difficult to understand why the other 10 per cent cannot listen to the proceedings and work it out for themselves.

 

[LemonMousse]

Unless you're suggesting that the bat strike was on the bullet hole (which it wasn't) the effect of a hit or a push through from the same point would be the same IMO. Unfortunately Vermeulen wasn't asked to be more explicit by Nel, nor did Nel argue anything about this (which I think was a mistake as Masipa clearly needed the alternative spelled out to her).

But Nel did. He clarified with Vermuelen after Roux had finished his cross that the bat could have been used on the door before the shots.

Vermuelen said that there was no scientific way to determine when the majority of the marks were made on the door.