Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #961
I guess it depends on how you look at the jeans. If you are wearing them and you look down, the button will be on the right side of the zipper for woman's jeans. If you are not wearing the jeans and you look at them from the from the front, the button will be on the left.

Here is a shop in South Africa that sells women's jeans: http://www.woolworths.co.za/store/cat/Women/Clothing/Jeans/_/N-1z13s4o

Thank you. I think in SA ladies wear the same format as the UK although I do know a few girls who wear mens' jeans. How ghastly they look too. The 'easing' in the crotch area always looks quite wrong on a girl and male bottoms are quite a different shape, not that I have made a study of them LOL!
 
  • #962
On the subject of whose jeans were on the floor in the bedroom, Mrs F has taken a look and suggests that the sewn pockets are normally to be found in female jeans. I shall stick with them being Reeva's for now.

Ooohhhh!
A little influence from your side would be good perhaps. :D
 
  • #963
If you're suggesting that OP's celebrity has influenced me then you're barking up the wrong tree. I had no idea who he was until the trial other than he was "a famous disabled sprinter." If anything I would say my personal opinion of him is more negative than positive. From what I have seen in the media since the trial I would expect to meet a polite and somewhat reserved man. However his fascination with guns I find repulsive.

I also didn't know him before except having seen the video, when he won a race against a horse.
 
  • #964
Can't "Reply with quote", sorry.

It makes sense to lie about the jeans in bed room:

1. OP didn't want to admit that there was a big fight for ca. 1 hour which escalated to the end.
2. OP didn't want to admit that Reeva wanted to leave him that night whenever the decision was made by her.
3. OP didn't want to admit that he wasn't sleeping at all.
4. OP didn't want to admit that he was wearing prostetics earlier on (vulnerability re burglar not longer given).

Perhaps the jeans was his biggest error without have been recognized in court (prosecutor, judge).
Does somebody remember how Roux's behavior seemed when the jeans in bed room came up?? More nervous than before perhaps? Interjections perhaps to muddle the whole matter?
 
  • #965
Do you mean on the left of the photo or of the actual jeans please? Also the jeans were inside out. If they were his jeans I wonder why OP would lie and say they were Reeva's? I think someone should/would have picked that up at the time and he would have been seen to have been lying which would have greatly hurt his case.

Interestingly, if you Google Reeva's Jeans and hit Images you will see a large number of photos of Reeva in jeans and, unless those photos have been flipped, the zips do look to me in the usual male format. However, I don't know whether SAs differentiate as we do in the UK.

We do have a female SA visiting this thread. ApplesInMyBra may be able to help.

My jeans are button hole left, button right (when wearing), one of my other jeans (other brand) are button hole right, button left (when wearing), one of my non-jeans are also button hole right, button left (when wearing). All is possible in Germany for women like me.
 
  • #966
Can't "Reply with quote", sorry.

It makes sense to lie about the jeans in bed room:

1. OP didn't want to admit that there was a big fight for ca. 1 hour which escalated to the end.
2. OP didn't want to admit that Reeva wanted to leave him that night whenever the decision was made by her.
3. OP didn't want to admit that he wasn't sleeping at all.
4. OP didn't want to admit that he was wearing prostetics earlier on (vulnerability re burglar not longer given).

Perhaps the jeans was his biggest error without have been recognized in court (prosecutor, judge).
Does somebody remember how Roux's behavior seemed when the jeans in bed room came up?? More nervous than before perhaps? Interjections perhaps to muddle the whole matter?

I can see where you are coming from but she had shorts on. I assumed she would not be trying to put jeans on over shorts. I suppose OP could possibly have pulled them off in an attempt to stop her leaving and she then grabbed shorts to wear.

I think it more likely that he needed to block out the blue light because he had to have some excuse for not seeing Reeva (ie face in a different direction) and he also realised it would be noted that it was bright enough to allow him to see something but I have never really believed he pulled the curtains properly and the light from the balcony (which we know was on) would have lit the bedroom enough for him to see what he was doing. Do you remember the story about him arranging the curtains around the fans. He went into such detail and when someone does that it flashes up (to me) that he was attempting to mislead the state with another of his untruths.

Your view could well be right and I know a lot of other posters feel the same but, for me, if there had been a physical fight there would have been other evidence. Sadly, we shall never know what happened.
 
  • #967
I don't have any experience of DV but I do have plenty of experience of the stresses that can build up in a relationship!

But I don't understand what could have driven OP to such extreme lengths with such a new relationship. In your example with co-habiting and child involved the opportunity for stress building up is much greater. OP could have walked away at any time. Further OP had no record of violence against persons. Of course it could have just been a personality clash, Reeva being more assertive than his other girlfriends. But the evidence for a prelude to murder is very weak. Of course it could fit into your pattern and OP started off on the record with a murder. I think it more likely that there would be some other rough stuff before that. What fits better is that out of nowhere he just completely lost it on the night. But as has been pointed out before this is unusual where alcohol or drugs are not involved. Not impossible, just unusual.

OP has given the impression that the relationship was very serious and that he was thinking about marriage etc. Again it is difficult to think of a way in which this situation could have caused him to feel that murder was the only way out.

We will never know what was going on in his head and can only speculate on the inconclusive evidence. Taking the holistic/mosaic approach and considering only evidence which has passed the test I cannot allow the relationship/DV evidence to feature in my deliberations.

Hello everyone, I have not posted in ages but glad to see the renewed discussion and hope you don't mind me jumping in here.

Trotterly, although I am not sure what meets your test as evidence, we do know from Reeva's text messages that Oscar had received some devastatingly bad news that day for which she was trying to console him-- even suggesting that he might need to spend the evening in the company of Carl and Amy to help him sort it out (or maybe she just dreaded dealing with him in person.) Reeva indicated it was something very unfair to have happened to such a nice person as Oscar and she further tried to assuage his feelings with the notion that he had plenty of time and potential to recover from this setback.

For the life of me, I do not know why we have not learned the nature of this bad news he received that day, but to my knowledge no one has brought it to light. But it was obviously some kind of serious setback for Oscar-- some have speculated it was related to the personal injury/assault lawsuit the young woman filed for slamming her leg in the door at a party at his house. Or a sponsor dropping him.

We also now know that he was on the phone with his ex-girlfriend, Jenna Edkins (aka "Babyshoes") for some 9 minutes (considered an exceptionally long phone call for Oscar) when he arrived home the evening he killed Reeva.

We are also told that while Reeva was downstairs preparing supper for the two of them, he went upstairs to shower (or was it bathe?) during which time he viewed some 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 on one of the iPads.

And yes, they spent the evening before Valentine's Day doing yoga and looking at cars online, happily in love, but not having any sex that night. Go figure.

You may consider it speculation, but I think you (and others) have too easily dismissed any clues to the underlying tension that Oscar arrived home with that evening and which easily could have escalated into a situation where Oscar snapped. It is not hard to imagine that Reeva might have discovered the 9 minute call to Jenna and asked Oscar about it, triggering hostilities between them.

I also realize this call to Jenna Edkins was not made public until after the verdict, but I don't see how anyone can continue to say that the conditions did not exist for domestic violence that night. Oscar had been to an office party earlier that afternoon, where presumably alcohol was served (although we do not know if he drank at this party and we will also never know if he consumed alcohol later that evening as the samples and/or results of his toxicology report were "lost.") With or without being under the influence of alcohol, however, Oscar always had a hair trigger temper and was capable of unleashing violent and uncontrollable rages when things did not go his way (thinking of several reported mega-tantrums behind the scenes at sporting events.) If Reeva pushed even one of his buttons that evening while he was trying to control any internal rage over this "bad news" then it is easy to imagine the situation escalating to DV.
 
  • #968
I can see where you are coming from but she had shorts on. I assumed she would not be trying to put jeans on over shorts. I suppose OP could possibly have pulled them off in an attempt to stop her leaving and she then grabbed shorts to wear.

I think it more likely that he needed to block out the blue light because he had to have some excuse for not seeing Reeva (ie face in a different direction) and he also realised it would be noted that it was bright enough to allow him to see something but I have never really believed he pulled the curtains properly and the light from the balcony (which we know was on) would have lit the bedroom enough for him to see what he was doing. Do you remember the story about him arranging the curtains around the fans. He went into such detail and when someone does that it flashes up (to me) that he was attempting to mislead the state with another of his untruths.

Your view could well be right and I know a lot of other posters feel the same but, for me, if there had been a physical fight there would have been other evidence. Sadly, we shall never know what happened.

bbm= Maybe. But IF the jeans were his, it would make much more sense.

bbm red= For a physical fight there had been evidence, IMO. A witness heared clearly sounds of battle for an hour. If one hears this sound x meters away, how violent may it have been??
The Pathologist had more results than we know, certainly bruises and other unequivocally marks, IMO. I remember several points on the file with no explanation - we the public shouldn't know and we shall never know.
As said before, the defence Pathologist refused his testimony. What do we need more, what does the judge needs more? Yes, you are sooo right: sadly!
 
  • #969
bbm= Maybe. But IF the jeans were his, it would make much more sense.

bbm red= For a physical fight there had been evidence, IMO. A witness heared clearly sounds of battle for an hour. If one hears this sound x meters away, how violent may it have been??
The Pathologist had more results than we know, certainly bruises and other unequivocally marks, IMO. I remember several points on the file with no explanation - we the public shouldn't know and we shall never know.
As said before, the defence Pathologist refused his testimony. What do we need more, what does the judge needs more? Yes, you are sooo right: sadly!

There was a verbal fight for sure but I am not too sure about anything physical. We will have to differ there. She did have some bruising but as the pathologist made nothing of them, it may well be that they were old bruises. I have bruises and nobody pushes/hits me ever. I just bruise easily.

Yes, very telling Perumal did not testify but I think he probably concurred with the sequence of shots and the food in the stomach which would have been very detrimental to OP’s case.

I wonder whether we will ever hear what the witnesses really thought about the verdict and Perumal (in the link you posted) seemed to suggest that he would not say “yet”. I am hoping one day we will get more information. It is all very frustrating. I would love to know what the witnesses thought about the trial and judgement. Whilst we all find elements of the story to explore and perhaps disagree on some, I think most of us feel he was emotionally abusive, getting worse before Reeva died and knew what he was doing, ie dolus eventualis.
 
  • #970
bbm= Maybe. But IF the jeans were his, it would make much more sense.

bbm red= For a physical fight there had been evidence, IMO. A witness heared clearly sounds of battle for an hour. If one hears this sound x meters away, how violent may it have been??
The Pathologist had more results than we know, certainly bruises and other unequivocally marks, IMO. I remember several points on the file with no explanation - we the public shouldn't know and we shall never know.
As said before, the defence Pathologist refused his testimony. What do we need more, what does the judge needs more? Yes, you are sooo right: sadly!

...was she pregnant.....
 
  • #971
...was she pregnant.....

No reason, not to appoint pregnancy. That's not something "intimate", when it comes to murder. On the contrary, it would have an impact on aggravating the punishment, because the offender would have killed 2 humans in this case. I'm going to search an example.
 
  • #972
  • #973
No reason, not to appoint pregnancy. That's not something "intimate", when it comes to murder. On the contrary, it would have an impact on aggravating the punishment, because the offender would have killed 2 humans in this case. I'm going to search an example.
...is there any mention anywhere if she was pregnant or not ? .....
 
  • #974
  • #975
  • #976

LOL He may well have still been in the pay of OP, giving advice, but not prepared to take the stand. Perumal would have been answerable to the court when giving evidence. He is required to tell the truth, regardless of which side he appears for, and I expect he was not prepared to sully his reputation. Why on earth would the Defence not use one of the best pathologists in SA on the stand and go on to use someone who had holes shot through most of what he said. It doesn't make sense. Only my opinion, of course.
 
  • #977
LOL He may well have still been in the pay of OP, giving advice, but not prepared to take the stand. Perumal would have been answerable to the court when giving evidence. He is required to tell the truth, regardless of which side he appears for, and I expect he was not prepared to sully his reputation. Why on earth would the Defence not use one of the best pathologists in SA on the stand and go on to use someone who had holes shot through virtually everything he said. It doesn't make sense. Only my opinion, of course.

.....sounds a bit fishy all this ...how many examinations were there, anyone know ..
 
  • #978
.....sounds a bit fishy all this ...how many examinations were there, anyone know ..

I think there was only one, which Perumal attended - so why did he not take the stand? Does not make sense.
 
  • #979
This is Professor Botha (the pathologist who gave evidence) on the stand. He was not at the PM. He was more lucid than some of the other DT specialists.

Nel starts his cross examination at ca 38.30.

[video=youtube;vvXVs2zTytc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvXVs2zTytc[/video]
 
  • #980
This is Professor Botha (the pathologist who gave evidence) on the stand. He was not at the PM. He was more lucid than some of the other DT specialists.

Nel starts his cross examination at ca 38.30.

[video=youtube;vvXVs2zTytc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvXVs2zTytc[/video]

...is there anywhere that says in an official manner whether or not she was pregnant .....during the bail hearing "no information was heard by Magistrate Desmond Nair relating to whether Reeva was pregnant".....http://www.ibtimes.com/reeva-steenk...e-her-death-alleges-national-enquirer-1103126 ...in the autopsy it's general practise to check for pregnancy and why was there only one autopsy....even more so why has this part of the affair been so hushed up ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
2,623
Total visitors
2,766

Forum statistics

Threads
632,502
Messages
18,627,738
Members
243,172
Latest member
neckdeepinstories
Back
Top