Trial Discussion weekend Thread #24

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
TorisMom003 said:
When the accused can not keep his own version straight while on the stand in his own defense, there is a problem. A huge problem. When that same man has changed his version three times now, there is a problem. The lies on the stand, the constant blaming of others, the change in his version/s is being noticed and noted by the judge. If one is innocent of the charges filed against them, there is no need to lie, to blame others, to change their version/s.

MOO
Click to expand...

Indeed, his actions and testimony do not seem like that of an innocent man. There was one thing he said that has opened another possibility in my mind. He said something to the effect that his "personality" was such that he moves towards danger.

If you back off and look at the chaotic pattern of his testimony, you have to wonder if he isn't attempting to create the impression that he is not a "reasonable" person. He is a sensitive flower whose disability has left him scarred and frightened, creating an alternate universe of perception for himself which would allow the judge to excuse him.

He may be hoping that she will conclude that he is rash and impulsive, paranoid and a crybaby, but with good reason (his amputation) and that in HIS mind, it seemed reasonable to shoot a person without determining if that person was an actual threat.
 
Rumpole said:
What you propose is... unlikely... to say the least.

How likely is it that OP would have started calls before he even knew if Reeva had simply paased out, was injured but only superficially etc. He DID NOT just call Stander, he also called security, and Netcare ( and likely described Reevas wounds.. that remains to be verified). He STILL had to do a lot of stuff. As I outlined.. put on legs, bash door etc etc etc etc as well as now carrying body etc before Stander arrived... still impossible.

Interesting that you are prepared to believe that doors can be slammed (not even raised or mentioned in evidence, just a speculation that doors were slammed) in rapid succession and be loud enough to fool the three witnesses (one with military experience) that it sounded exactly like gunshots... yet you wont concede that a bat being swung at a door in a frenzy (testified to and not in question that it did happen) can make a sound anything like a gunshot. I think that makes my point about presumption of guilt effecting perception and analysis of the evidence
Click to expand...

I don't think it would take a rocket scientist for OP to have realised that Reeva was badly hurt after 4 gunshots stopped her screaming.

It would also explain the Netcare call which OP testified that they told him to bring her in. It would make sense that OP couldn't describe the injury if he couldn't see her.

We all await Stander's statement as to when he arrived.

The 3 phone calls had finished by 3:25 a.m.

If they arrived at 3:45 a.m., he had a clear 20 minutes to complete all of the above.

Only 2 (not 3) witnesses (Stipps) claimed they heard the initial banging.

I'm not saying that a cricket bat striking a door cannot sound like gunshots, but I find it as unlikely as OP sounding like a woman when he screams.

This plus the other holes in OP's testimony.

It works both ways as a presumption of innocence (based on OP who has a vested interest in the outcome) can make a story more believable than it actually is. I will take the testimony of 5 independent witnesses over a proven liar.

Edit: Cricket bat - thud, thud, crash. Door slam - bang, bang, bang (two bedroom doors one after the other and a toilet door) :)
 
jilly said:
Very interesting. Thank you. Unfortunately the link doesn't work.

Also, Reeva has a sister.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-horror-smirking-Bladerunner-face-court.html
Click to expand...

Ooops... sorry, yes Reeva has a half sister and a brother too apparently so I should have said parents.

I don't know why the link doesn't work but here's one that hopefully does...

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/1993/62.html

I also spelt the accused's name wrong so the case is called "S v Oliveira" so if the link fails again (I have tested it) google the text in quotes and you should get linked to Saflii, the free online repository of SA reported cases and case law.
 
Val1 said:
Isn't that what the zombie/brains video was all about, that he did know what his gun and ammo was capable of?
Click to expand...

No ....

The whole point of the zombie thing was to introduce highly inflammatory material and get Oscar shaken up so he can't think clearly and will make mistakes
 
K.T said:
Note: That link from Minor are the 13 facts obtained (how?) "from a response to an application by the defence team for further particulars." Published by Barry Bateman 2 months ago:

Here's the link and with a bit more information:
http://ewn.co.za/2014/02/21/State-to-rely-on-13-facts-in-Oscar-Pistorius-trial


- Now that the trial has really started we can presumably add a more POINTS :)

Add: I find it a professional courtesy to continually site the author and source if you use quotes from articles
Click to expand...

I linked it in my post.
 
asanque said:
I don't think it would take a rocket scientist for OP to have realised that Reeva was badly hurt after 4 gunshots stopped her screaming.

It would also explain the Netcare call which OP testified that they told him to bring her in. It would make sense that OP couldn't describe the injury if he couldn't see her.

We all await Stander's statement as to when he arrived.

The 3 phone calls had finished by 3:25 a.m.

If they arrived at 3:45 a.m., he had a clear 20 minutes to complete all of the above.

Only 2 (not 3) witnesses (Stipps) claimed they heard the initial banging.

I'm not saying that a cricket bat striking a door cannot sound like gunshots, but I find it as unlikely as OP sounding like a woman when he screams.

This plus the other holes in OP's testimony.

It works both ways as a presumption of innocence (based on OP who has a vested interest in the outcome) can make a story more believable than it actually is. I will take the

testimony of 5 independent witnesses over a proven liar.
Click to expand...

The couples are each FAR from two "independent" witnesses a piece :)

There are MANY reasons to give the Burger/Johnson account less weight (if any credibility at all)

van der Merwe and Stipps represent two sets of evidence... both quite credible over all (excluding Mrs Stipps flights of fancy and curtain manipulation)

The Stipps are GREAT witnesses for the defence. If I was Roux I would call Dr Stipps as a STAR witness for the defense.. if State had not called him.

Estelle van der Merwe heard the shots at 3:00 too.

I believe Stander was there 3:22

Stipps and Stander all there 3:24.

The shots at 3:17 is STILL impossible :)
 
Closing up here in 5 minutes. Will be opening the fresh trial discussion thread in time for Court.

So, if you're in the process of drafting a post, please "select all, copy" periodically. Don't want to slam the door on anyone.
 
Rumpole said:
No it can't? It was not just one call then time to do a bunch of stuff. It was 3 calls and then going to open door and carrying body etc... as well as all the other stuff... It makes even LESS sense that he phoned before even finding out if the shots had hit Reeva, if she was perhaps only passed out etc.. he OBVIOUSLY bashed his way into the toilet before starting the calls and all that followed.
The twisting and squirming to fit/deny facts and invent complicated explanations for simple facts just to fit "Guilty" in itself indicates a very weak case.

As I have explained before there are certain MINIMUM things that had to be done after the shots and before phone call at 3:19/ Shots at 3:17 makes those things impossible... it's not true.
Shots after 3:17... some time to do that and recover, so likely close to 3:18 when Op had to go to bedroom, put on his prostheses, get the bat, (go on balcony and scream in his version, but I'll put that to one side), go back to bathroom, kick door, bash door with bat 2 or 3 (or more) times. Even though the bat bashing would have been frantic... it made no sound????? Prise open the door, get key and unlock, react to the horror he saw, lift, drag stagger with Reeva's body to bathroom, try and assist, phone call at 3:19
With just over a minute... that is impossible.

And as a bonus... you have 3 loud bangs that Stipps both said were gunshots at 3:00 - 3:10. Estelle van der Merwe heard the same...... not bat, obviously since they were before what the State says were shots... and not explained at all by the State. It seems they are just ignoring those loud bangs?

The shots were at 3:00-3:10... the cricket bat was at 3:17
Click to expand...

You're stating this as if it is fact, Rumpole, which is incorrect. Nothing has been proven... all evidence is circumstantial. It might be that nobody heard the bat sounds, if they occurred after the shots and the screaming had stopped - those who heard the sounds were inside, phoning security, getting ready to go over to the house, etc...
 
molly333 said:
1) Because she is not going to be with him on Valentine's day. [Tell me why not. They are both in town, so it is the choice of one or the other not to be together on V-day]

2)He manipulated her into cooking dinner [has to do with his 'hurdle' and she was trying to comfort him. I think Reeva still considered him a friend, just didn't want him for a boyfriend any more.]

3)Here's the rub. They got into something that night that kept her there past a reasonable hour to go home. That's what she said in her text--it's too late to safely come home. So what was it? What kept her there late into the night, leading to a shouting match at 2am and death at 3am?


Obviously if no one is buying this, it won't work for the prosecution, either. But this is what I think happened. Or, it was an accident.
Click to expand...

.. but she was due to be with him on Valentine's Day .. remember she had sent him a text earlier in the week (not sure exactly what day/date) saying would he like her to cook for him on Thursday (which was Valentine's Day)? .. she actually ended up cooking for him (according to OP) on the Weds 13th but never got to cook him the meal on the 14th (Thurs).
 
Rumpole said:
The couples are each FAR from two "independent" witnesses a piece :)

There are MANY reasons to give the Burger/Johnson account less weight (if any credibility at all)

van der Merwe and Stipps represent two sets of evidence... both quite credible over all (excluding Mrs Stipps flights of fancy and curtain manipulation)

The Stipps are GREAT witnesses for the defence. If I was Roux I would call Dr Stipps as a STAR witness for the defense.. if State had not called him.

Estelle van der Merwe heard the shots at 3:00 too.

I believe Stander was there 3:22

Stipps and Stander all there 3:24.

The shots at 3:17 is STILL impossible :)
Click to expand...

Van der Merwe heard shots after 3:00 a.m. It was not established at what time.

If Stander was there at 3:22 then it makes my theory impossible.

However, could Stander have gotten there with his daughter, exactly 3 minutes after the phone call after being woken in the middle of the night?

Where did you get 3:22 from?
 
jassy writer said:
You're stating this as if it is fact, Rumpole, which is incorrect. Nothing has been proven... all evidence is circumstantial. It might be that nobody heard the bat sounds, if they occurred after the shots and the screaming had stopped - those who heard the sounds were inside, phoning security, getting ready to go over to the house, etc...
Click to expand...
All my posts are my opinion..

I see plenty of WILD speculation posted as fact... its what happens at forums.


I at least post what is a fact as far as I am concerned, based on the evidence,,, both circumstantial and the hard physical evidence.
 
shane13 said:
Good post.
Case right on point. Except assume no possible PM charge, as here.
Minor correction, sorry. Re "only daughter.' Reeva had a sister or half-sister.
Click to expand...

De Oliveira was convicted of one murder and two attempted murders. Premeditation is an aggravate that is relevant to the judge at the time of sentencing. There are only two murder charges under SA law, Murder (intentional) and Culpable Homicide. OP is facing the same murder charge as De Oliveira, and what needs to be proven in OP's case for murder to stick is that he intended to kill even if his story is true and he shot at a perceived burglar. Premedation is a detail of murder.
 
kittychi said:
He was not taken to hospital for toxicology until late morning or early afternoon on the 14th. Many hours after Reeva was killed.

I don't have an explicit link, all I could find was this:http://bigstory.ap.org/article/pistorius-involved-shooting-home-woman-dead-0

'Hours later after undergoing police questioning, Pistorius left a police station accompanied by officers. He looked down as photographers snapped pictures, the hood on his gray workout jacket pulled up, covering most of his face.'

He had come from an afternoon party. I have always thought alcohol was a catalyst in his actions, it is the only thing that makes sense to me that he would so quickly and irrationally go off into a rage.

I would chalk it up again to police ineptness that a blood alcohol test was not done immediately.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it was, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 61 more.
Total: 2,610 (members: 62, guests: 2,548)

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
2,548
Total visitors
2,610
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,471
Messages
18,109,084
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top