Trial Discussion weekend Thread #24

[minor4th]

If you knew what the card said, would it make a difference in how you perceive OP shooting & killing Reeva?

Depends on what it said.

 

[Rumpole]

It means he wasn't feeling vulnerable or scared.
He didn't retreat, he went on the attack.

<snipped>

"Fight or Flight" Human (an other animal) autonomic reflex reaction to perceived threat.

 

[sorrell skye]

Depends on what it said.

Is that the smoking gun you're pining for? Knowing what a Valentine's card said?

 

[Apollo]

Maybe...

He can not pee standing up in a normal toilet, without his prostheses on. Big disability... it's a GUY thing

Oh sure he can. He can stand on his stumps and without his prosthetic legs, he's a little under 5' tall so he can pee just like the rest of the guys--not to worry.

 

[Viper]

Maybe...

He can not pee standing up in a normal toilet, without his prostheses on. Big disability... it's a GUY thing

That is exactly the response that I expected from you. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!

 

[minor4th]

Is that the smoking gun you're pining for? Knowing what a Valentine's card said?

Depends on what it said.

 

[sorrell skye]

Depends on what it said.

Such as?

 

[Bobbie Elliott]

Without direct evidence/eye witness reports, an argument could certainly be proved by circumstantial evidence, and that is what the State is trying to do.

The problem is, it takes several pieces of circumstantial evidence to really prove something (usually) and the State doesn't seem to have the evidence.

If they had witnesses hearing an argument between a man and woman and could identify it as coming from Oscar's house, or if they had text messages that indicated that an argument was going on, that would go a long way towards proving an argument by circumstantial evidence. All the state has though is one witness who heard a woman's voice talking loudly - maybe arguing - but she couldn't hear the other side and couldn't identify it as coming from Oscar's house.

The other way they could come closer to proving that there was an argument leading up to the shooting is if they can prove that Oscar's version could not have possibly happened. That's what I'm waiting for - to see if they can really undermine his account.

Isn't that what's Nel's working on, and isn't that what the OP supporters on WS are criticising??

 

[minor4th]

Such as?

Like - if it said, "Yes, I'll marry you" then that might indicate that the relationship was not on the rocks and kind of cuts against there being a big argument that led to the shooting.

If it said, "Let's have one more night before we go our separate ways" - that might indicate a troubled relationship that was coming to an end, perhaps against OP's wishes. Goes a little farther towards establishing some kind of motive.

If it said, "I'm really a man, but I enjoy dressing as a woman" then that also could be something that might freak OP out and cause the kind of rage that leads to a violent death.

See what I mean? Since I have no idea what it says, there's no way I can say whether it's meaningful to the case or not.

 

[Val1]

I have seen on twitter where those tweets came from and the correspondence. There is a troll on twitter who claims to be a friend of Oscar who hated reeva. I would hardly make up my mind from them. Its twitter after all.

Is that the one that said something about ---on Valentines, blah blah blah, and if you get the chance shoot your gf 4 times--- the evening of the 13th?

 

[sorrell skye]

Like - if it said, "Yes, I'll marry you" then that might indicate that the relationship was not on the rocks and kind of cuts against there being a big argument that led to the shooting.

If it said, "Let's have one more night before we go our separate ways" - that might indicate a troubled relationship that was coming to an end, perhaps against OP's wishes. Goes a little farther towards establishing some kind of motive.

If it said, "I'm really a man, but I enjoy dressing as a woman" then that also could be something that might freak OP out and cause the kind of rage that leads to a violent death.

See what I mean? Since I have no idea what it says, there's no way I can say whether it's meaningful to the case or not.

Chances are, it simply said "Happy Valentine's Day, Boo *advertiser censored*"

In which case, it's as meaningless as all the *advertiser censored* text messages they exchanged, because Reeva is dead nonetheless.

 

[Val1]

What was the significance of Reeva's jeans on the duvet? Nel really hammered this point for a while.

Thank you

Maybe whether they were in fact RS's? Weren't hers tossed out the toilet room window?

 

[minor4th]

Isn't that what's Nel's working on, and isn't that what the OP supporters on WS are criticising??

I really don't believe there are any "OP supporters" around here. There are people who think the state has not proved premeditated murder, and there are people who believe that OP's account is essentially true. That does not mean that "we" are supporters or want him to escape justice at any cost.

And I also haven't really seen anyone criticizing Nel for trying to poke holes in OP's account, or maybe I've missed it. I, for one, have expressed discomfort over some of his tactics that seem designed to make OP cry or break down (like showing the picture of dead Reeva). Other than that, I find him confusing and his manner a bit irritating, but I understand what he is doing and why he is doing it.

 

[emmavoberry]

I assume the police looked for any footprints or other signs of a burgler having been in that bathtub.
No burglar so they won't need to. Even Oscar admits burglar never existed. He just won't admit that he knew that all along.

 

[minor4th]

Chances are, it simply said "Happy Valentine's Day, Boo *advertiser censored*"

In which case, it's as meaningless as all the *advertiser censored* text messages they exchanged, because Reeva is dead nonetheless.

It's meaningless as far as the outcome for Reeva, but it's not meaningless in the context of the case and proving or disproving motive.

All the lovey dovey *advertiser censored* messages were necessary for Roux to go through - they showed that every single day until the day Reeva died, Oscar and Reeva exchanged loving and affectionate text messages with each other. That tends to show that this was not a tumultuous relationship peppered with big nasty fights. And although I know many disagree, I think it also shows that this was not an abusive relationship.

 

[emmavoberry]

When OP was asked why he advanced towards the danger and not exit through the bedroom door to the rest of the house, his answer was:

"It's my personality not to run away."

I believe he is now claiming that he armed himself and went to where he perceived hearing the intruder enter so as to put himself between the threat and Reeva, to protect her.

So we can add Reeva to the list of people or circumstances who made him to it. If he hadn't been trying to protect her, he wouldn't have killed her.

 

[minor4th]

I don't think Oscar said, "It's my personality not to run away."

 

[James50]

The problem I see is not that OP is lying, but that he has trouble handling Nel's badgering tone at times, and so he doesn't explain himself as well as he could. I believe this is because, like many disabled people, he's more needy of kindness and more highly emotionally strung than most of us.

He's used to receiving love and sympathy because of his disability and when he's scolded instead, he simply collapses. This is what Nel hasn't grasped or is pretending not to. When he says OP is all about himself, Nel has missed the point. Oscar was always made the centre of attention because of his physical challenges and that was not his fault. But it isn't because he's selfish or self-centered. It's rather because OTHERS have always put his needs first. It's just the life he inherited because of his disability through no fault of his own. But if he only ever thought about himself, he would not have stepped in to save a man's life once.

So, for example, he doesn't explain that when he said he deactivated the alarm it was only because that's what he had concluded when it didn't go off as he walked down the stairs. Not because he was conscious that he did so. He doesn't explain this well because his reasoning faculties are somewhat impaired and yet because in other ways he seems so normal, this point is lost on people.

He is a lovely man, at once and adult and a child, and he is not faking his emotional breakdowns. He grew up more naturally sensitive than most, much like a child with Down's Syndrome.


For the same reason, his responses to situations are not the same as those of a typically reasonable man. Sometimes he does odd things. I've always noticed this in people born with disabilities. Even when those disabilities are purely physical, it often carries over to a certain amount of mental dysfuntion as well. So he doesn't wait for Reeva to reply and does odd things like that.

 

[James50]

I don't think Oscar said, "It's my personality not to run away."

He did. Not exactly in those words, but very closely. It was also quoted in the media.

 

[minor4th]

The problem I see is not that OP is lying, but that he has trouble handling Nel's badgering tone at times, and so he doesn't explain himself as well as he could. I believe this is because, like many disabled people, he's more needy of kindness and more highly emotionally strung than most of us.

He's used to receiving love and sympathy because of his disability and when he's scolded instead, he simply collapses. This is what Nel hasn't grasped or is pretending not to. When he says OP is all about himself, Nel has missed the point. Oscar was always made the centre of attention because of his physical challenges and that was not his fault. But it isn't because he's selfish or self-centered. It's rather because OTHERS have always put his needs first. It's just the life he inherited because of his disability through no fault of his own. But if he only ever thought about himself, he would not have stepped in to save a man's life once.

So, for example, he doesn't explain that when he said he deactivated the alarm it was only because that's what he had concluded when it didn't go off as he walked down the stairs. Not because he was conscious that he did so. He doesn't explain this well because his reasoning faculties are somewhat impaired and yet because in other ways he seems so normal, this point is lost on people.

He is a lovely man, at once and adult and a child, and he is not faking his emotional breakdowns. He grew up more naturally sensitive than most, much like a child with Down's Syndrome.

I completely agree with everything you said.