Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[GR_Turner]

Okay, but that means you are willing to ignore (or dismiss) Estelle van der Merwe's testimony about hearing a woman with an irritating voice arguing sometime between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m. (Oh, yes... well, of course, she could have simply been mistaken.)

You are also willing to ignore the testimony of four neighbors (the Stipps and Burger/Johnson) who all claim to have heard, distinctly and without doubt, a woman screaming in mortal fear immediately after the first bang/shots between 3:00 and 3:08. (Impossible you say... she could not have screamed after the first bang/shots because as we all know, Oscar had already killed her.)

These screams, however, continued until the final 4 bang/shots were heard at approximately 3:15 after which time the woman's screams ceased. Moments later a man is heard shouting 3X for help and then the next door neighbors report hearing Oscar crying in great anguish.

Yes, timing does matter and the fact that neighbors heard Oscar crying in anguish AFTER the last bang/shots does not in any way discredit the four witnesses who claim to have clearly heard a woman's screams after the first bang/shots, when Oscar claims to have shot and killed Reeva.

That's what's hard for me to ignore.

I haven't ignored Mrs VdM's evidence about hearing a woman talking a long way off in an angry voice as though in an argument. I just don't know that we can really say this was OP and Reeva. She didn't even know which direction the sounds were coming from and the security guards going past both front and back heard nothing. It could be something or nothing.

I'm not ignoring the female screams evidence - I just don't think it was what the witnesses thought it was. I'm not sure where you get 3-3.08 from - Mr Fossil?? The 3 is from several witness' shots at around 3 is it and the 3.08 from a neighbour who heard practically nothing else and didn't give evidence? The 3.15 timing for the shots is contradicted by both Johnson's 3.16 phone call and Stipp's 3.17 10111 call so the second bangs could have been at 3.17 (which would support the defense) and not 3.15.

The 3 helps were heard during the female screaming by Burger/Johnson's evidence, happened after Stipp got through to security (probably around 3.16) and during the male crying according to Mrs Nhlengethwa.

Yes, the evidence that other witnesses heard different things and probably at the same time is of vital importance. Clearly 4 witnesses hearing female screaming prior to shots would lead to anyone to conclude this was Reeva except that other people heard other things that are very similar at the same time and these sounds could have been confused.

 

[Colin de France]

I am sure you know that Masipa was originally a social worker before she took up law. She sees him as a "naughty boy" rather than a violent criminal. How wrong she is. There is every chance he will get into more trouble once he gets out into the big wide world again. His uncontrollable temper will let him down.

.....he may well be out of prison soon .........but he will never be free ..........

 

[Colin de France]

The state's case is that female screaming must be Reeva and the defense case is that high pitched male crying (heard by the close neighbours) was heard as female screaming by other neighbours. If you look at the evidence it shows both that male crying was mistaken for female crying that night, and that female crying was heard at the same time as female screaming. It's not semantics - its the evidence that you said in your earlier post doesn't exist.

.......Er.........there's no proof that Pistorius screamed......there's no proof that all the clocks, watches, telephone services etc, had synchronised timing that night......but i think it's fairly safe to say that Reeva screamed out that night, saying that she didn't opens up a can of worms in that the understanding of which go far beyond the capabilities of GR Turner............

 

[mirage1]

The police appear not to have been honest about who was there and when and yet they claim the photos taken at 6am show the scene at 4am. How do they know this if there were other people coming and going?

Not honest or simply memory lapse like Oscar seems to have throughout his story?

 

[mirage1]

The state's case is that female screaming must be Reeva and the defense case is that high pitched male crying (heard by the close neighbours) was heard as female screaming by other neighbours. If you look at the evidence it shows both that male crying was mistaken for female crying that night, and that female crying was heard at the same time as female screaming. It's not semantics - its the evidence that you said in your earlier post doesn't exist.

When there is two people shouting and screaming together, and multiple witnesses, of course some of the sounds will overlap and there will be a bit of confusion, but the fact remains multiple people are adamant they heard a females voice and screams, and a males, so they could make the distinction. it is ridiculous to throw out this evidence because of some apparent inconsistency between different people. They are not inconsistent that they heard a female. The idea that 4 or 6 people all mistook a male for a female voice is preposterous.

 

[Colin de France]

When there is two people shouting and screaming together, and multiple witnesses, of course some of the sounds will overlap and there will be a bit of confusion, but the fact remains multiple people are adamant they heard a females voice and screams, and a males, so they could make the distinction. it is ridiculous to throw out this evidence because of some apparent inconsistency between different people. They are not inconsistent that they heard a female. The idea that 4 or 6 people all mistook a male for a female voice is preposterous.

.....all faculative of course because there's no proof whatsoever that Pistorius can scream like a woman .......

 

[mirage1]

Reliability of photos compromised as things were moved (see earlier post). Also, key photos were omitted from what pros presented, times on photos showed two photographers not one.

All irrelevant nonsense. No evidence the photos were compromised. Just because some flip flops were moved does not mean anything.

Fans might not have been exactly where pistorius indicated (mentioned in earlier post). Why the expectation of total accuracy as to remembering where something was?

Because his story relies on it.

Yes I can.... what if fan was just outside on the balcony, then he got up to move it in just inside - and not so the cord was stretched out, or where the duvet appears to have fallen, but where it is in some of the photos - in the middle, just inside. He then closed doors, locked doors, sorted curtains etc and during this time reeva went to the bathroom. It gives less time for her to have gone unnoticed but that doesn't mean she couldn't go unnoticed. ... Realising later the trouble he was in, (murder charge) and possibly even as confused and disbelieving that he didn't register she had left the room as many of those who followed the case, it is possible that Pistorius embellished the fan movement to convince those in judgement that he would have been too preoccupied moving fans to see reeva leave, ( and to stretch out the 'leaving the room' time). This is all just speculation and hypothetical of course. If he did exaggerate the fan movement it would be an incredibly stupid thing to do. But it still wouldn't make him guilty of the deliberate murder of reeva steenkamp.

What if?? I don't think you understand how this works. The accused gives his version and if there is any evidence that undermines his story then it cannot be reasonably possibly true. You can't just chop out the lies and go along with the rest of his story, otherwise nobody would ever be found guilty, what a farcical position you have. He also testified he ran out onto the balcony after he shot her to scream for help, yet the fan blocks the doorway. So that's another lie, do we ignore that as well? The curtains were open in photos, he claimed to have closed them when he moved the fans. More lies.

 

[GR_Turner]

Not honest or simply memory lapse like Oscar seems to have throughout his story?

Yes, I thought about that too. Van Rensberg could have just made a mistake but then the state could have easily shown from the times in the police cars who arrived first and when Botha arrived. They could have called the other police witnesses to say what they saw and did. Then we have van Staden the photographer claiming that he was alone while taking photos but the photos from another photographer were taken at the same time. Things were moved between photos but this wasn't noted on all the photos.

 

[aftermath]

.......Er.........there's no proof that Pistorius screamed......there's no proof that all the clocks, watches, telephone services etc, had synchronised timing that night......but i think it's fairly safe to say that Reeva screamed out that night, saying that she didn't opens up a can of worms in that the understanding of which go far beyond the capabilities of GR Turner............

You don't think the times recorded on the phone data can be trusted? Why wouldn't network providers have the same time settings synchronized automatically and electronically with whatever time zone they are in?

 

[GR_Turner]

When there is two people shouting and screaming together, and multiple witnesses, of course some of the sounds will overlap and there will be a bit of confusion, but the fact remains multiple people are adamant they heard a females voice and screams, and a males, so they could make the distinction. it is ridiculous to throw out this evidence because of some apparent inconsistency between different people. They are not inconsistent that they heard a female. The idea that 4 or 6 people all mistook a male for a female voice is preposterous.

Mrs VdM heard a female crying and her husband said it was OP. This shows that one person mistook a male voice for a female voice that night. If she had not been with her husband she would have reported female crying only.

If one person can be wrong, why does it not follow that the others could be wrong too?

 

[Colin de France]

You don't think the times recorded on the phone data can be trusted? Why wouldn't network providers have the same time settings synchronized automatically and electronically with whatever time zone they are in?

......as usual, you're again being very selective with your awnser, to the point where you seem completely off track.....i think you've done this a few times now........ being polite as i am and giving you the benefit of doubt...........in relation to the synchronisation of timing, i did say between clocks + watches + telephone services and not just telephone services as you suggest.............do you have to reply for GR Turner...it's getting very confusing i nearly said.... Er

 

[GR_Turner]

All irrelevant nonsense. No evidence the photos were compromised. Just because some flip flops were moved does not mean anything.



Because his story relies on it.



What if?? I don't think you understand how this works. The accused gives his version and if there is any evidence that undermines his story then it cannot be reasonably possibly true. You can't just chop out the lies and go along with the rest of his story, otherwise nobody would ever be found guilty, what a farcical position you have. He also testified he ran out onto the balcony after he shot her to scream for help, yet the fan blocks the doorway. So that's another lie, do we ignore that as well? The curtains were open in photos, he claimed to have closed them when he moved the fans. More lies.

What if the flip flops had turned out to be key evidence in this case though? The police probably moved them and didn't note it because they thought it couldn't possibly matter. So who's to say that other things that the police didn't think mattered weren't moved?

You can only say that something proves his story a lie if the evidence is reliable. If the police wished to rely on their photo evidence they should have demonstrated that nothing, not even flip flops, were moved without it being properly noted and then recorded in the photos presented at court. They should also have called the first policemen to the scene surely.

 

[aftermath]

......as usual, you're again being very selective with your awnser, to the point where you seem completely off track.....i think you've done this a few times now........ being polite as i am and giving you the benefit of doubt...........in relation to the synchronisation of timing, i did say between clocks + watches + telephone services and not just telephone services as you suggest.............do you have to reply for GR Turner...it's getting very confusing i nearly said.... Er

If the phone data timings are correct then times on clocks, watches etc don't matter as a clear timeline can be put together

Is there some forum etiquette on here that means you can only respond to posts specifically addressed to you? Or is it your responses to GR Turner in particular that you want to preserve for the addressee only?

 

[aftermath]

All irrelevant nonsense. No evidence the photos were compromised. Just because some flip flops were moved does not mean anything.



Because his story relies on it.



What if?? I don't think you understand how this works. The accused gives his version and if there is any evidence that undermines his story then it cannot be reasonably possibly true. You can't just chop out the lies and go along with the rest of his story, otherwise nobody would ever be found guilty, what a farcical position you have. He also testified he ran out onto the balcony after he shot her to scream for help, yet the fan blocks the doorway. So that's another lie, do we ignore that as well? The curtains were open in photos, he claimed to have closed them when he moved the fans. More lies.

I think it's a shame that you find it farcical but if that's your stance, so be it. I was just exploring/speculating (hence the 'what if') how someone could be untruthful in their version and still be innocent of the crime of which they are accused.

 

[Colin de France]

If the phone data timings are correct then times on clocks, watches etc don't matter as a clear timeline can be put together

Is there some forum etiquette on here that means you can only respond to posts specifically addressed to you? Or is it your responses to GR Turner in particular that you want to preserve for the addressee only?

...you know perfectly well what i was referring to when i mentioned the timings it was in relation to when the screams were heard.......

 

[aftermath]

...you know perfectly well what i was referring to when i mentioned the timings it was in relation to when the screams were heard.......

So if the call data times are correct then a timeline of what people heard and when can be pieced together. Clock and watch times are less reliable so can only give more of an approximation.

 

[cottonweaver]

This is Masipa quoting another judgement!! S v Mtsweni 1985 (1) 590 (AD) Other judges have also quoted this judgement for this very same thing.

BIB
You're doing exactly the same as Masipa did, albeit from different motivations.

You can cite the Mtsweni judgment if you feel it justifies your p.o.v but do remember that Mtsweni has been cited countless times by other judges who have actually concluded the opposite based on Mtsweni: decided it DOES infer guilt:
drawing an adverse inference from the appellant’s false denials.
Misapplication and misinterpretation.


We can all quote judgments – there’s a little more to being a judge than that. Hence my emoticon inserts of her furiously looking up precedents to allow her to ignore the other evidence and sweep it under the carpet!
:ignore:
:sweep::lookingitup:

 

[cottonweaver]

This is Masipa quoting another judgement!! S v Mtsweni 1985 (1) 590 (AD) Other judges have also quoted this judgement for this very same thing.

So as you like that sort of thing, as it infers faux objectivity and confers pseudo legitimacy, here’s one commonly cited and which she should have been citing on circumstantial evidence:

‘A number of circumstances, each individually very slight, may so tally with and
confirm each other as to leave no room for doubt of the fact which they tend to
establish. . . . Not to speak of greater numbers, even two articles of circumstantial
evidence, though each taken by itself weigh but as a feather, join them together, you
will find them pressing on a delinquent with the weight of a mill-stone. . . ’. Best on Evidence (Tenth Edition)

 

[cottonweaver]

(To avoid long posts – split reply.)

Here’s another the SCA are fond of quoting- yes an English case- as you like to cite precedence you will know that SCA do quote English case law.

“The law does not demand that you should act upon certainties alone ... In our lives, in our acts, in our thoughts we do not deal with certainties; we ought to act upon just and reasonable convictions founded upon just and reasonable grounds .... The law asks for no more and the law demands no less"
Lord Coleridge, in Rex v Dickman 1910 New Castle,UK.

No, I’m not going to cite anymore as it is pointless as said earlier.

 

[Colin de France]

So if the call data times are correct then a timeline of what people heard and when can be pieced together. Clock and watch times are less reliable so can only give more of an approximation.

..........are you being serious....it's more the reverse if anything, just because someone phones in dosen't mean they heard the screams seconds before.....