Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[GR_Turner]

On the contrary. It is precisely because of the context in which it happened that I think he should go to prison for 15 years.

Don't you mean that other people think he should go to prison for 15 years and so now do you?

 

[lithgow1]

It was a one-line statement with no fanfare but the media turned it into a big deal. If the family had invited the media in to take photos I'd have agreed they were trying a PR exercise.

The fanfare was all in the one line statement. I would have thought that was bleeding obvious. If it was private there would have been no statement.

 

[lithgow1]

Don't you mean that other people think he should go to prison for 15 years and so now do you?

Go back and read what I was asked and stop with the insinuations. If you have something to say, then say it.

Under the circumstances of the shooting I believe he is guilty of DE. That carries a minimum penalty of 15 years therefore he should go to prison for at least that length of time.

 

[GR_Turner]

Yes guilty if they just fired blindly through a door at an unknown person who wasn`t an immediate threat which, unless they were a circus knife thrower and able to throw over the top of the cubicle, they clearly weren't.

OK so what if the door was opening? Would that be murder?

 

[GR_Turner]

They have the right to tweet what they want and people have the right to criticise those tweets, such as the `good destroying evil` one. Do you agree with Uncle Arnold that Nel and/or the state is evil, as was the insinuation of the tweet? I don`t follow their tweets either and you are the one who brought up the media, of which the family twitter accounts are a part. I notice you also never addressed the claim that it was a close member of the inner Pistorius circle who leaked the details of the private memorial service to the press. Maybe that is a bit too close to cynicism on their part for comfort.

Where are these huge numbers of biased reports you speak of? It would be slander to now call him a murderer so I really can`t see any mainstream media outlets doing that. But if they are, cough up a few links to prove your point. You say `look how many reports refer to him as a murderer when he wasn`t convicted` so back that up with some verifiable examples, not just your perception. If you won`t or can`t then I suspect you are the one doing the sensationalising.

Look at the media coverage. This is the sort of thing I mean and there are hundreds of articles like this out there:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...ison-terms-for-domestic-violence-9811721.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nsenga-burton/ray-rice-and-oscar-pistorius_b_5803770.html
http://time.com/3345520/denise-brown-o-j-simpson-ray-rice-oscar-pistorius/

They all in effect link this case with domestic violence which is only true if he meant to shoot her, which is murder. They might pay lip service to reporting that he wasn't found guilty but then why are they referencing the state's allegations at all?

I really don't know whether the memorial service was 'leaked' to the media. It doesn't matter. They didn't invite the media in and gave a one line statement as far as I remember which was turned into a huge media storm by people who wanted to find any excuse to write a negative article about OP. The same with everything - his only option is to stay indoors and do nothing because everything he does in public is likely to appear all over the papers with people saying 'how dare he!'. Cue outrage. Watch what happens when he is released next month. The papers will be full of stories of him lounging around in his uncles' expensive house (how dare he!) and if he tries to do any work they'll insist that it be as demeaning as possible (or, OP gets special treatment!). If he isn't in prison again next year and tries to do anything at all to rebuild his life, the media and some sections of the public will be there insisting he shouldn't be allowed to make money or do anything he wants to do because 'he's a killer' and 'we all know he's guilty anyway'. You really can't see the problem with this?

 

[GR_Turner]

The fanfare was all in the one line statement. I would have thought that was bleeding obvious. If it was private there would have been no statement.

Once the media get hold of something like this and start reporting it they will say whatever they want. So OP's PR are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Either they ignore it and hope it goes away (some hope) or they put out a small press release to try to make the reporting more accurate.

 

[Marfa Lights]

BIB1: but you realise that what's important in the timeline debate is how you interpret the evidence. Some people say we can move Johnson's phone call to earlier on the basis of no evidence at all but they ignore Stipp's 10111 call which also places the second bangs at 3.17 on the basis that we only know that time from Roux (who couldn't have lied about it though). And that's the source of people posting that the shots were at 3.15 - decision to move Johnson's call earlier to make it fit with the state's case. Similarly if you go on to, say, Juror 13's website, you'll find lots of information and opinions but you won't find all the evidence or any balance in the opinions. So by trusting other people's evidence you are taking on their viewpoint and may have come to other conclusions if you had looked at the evidence dispassionately.

Yes, there are things that don't make sense about his story but not as many as some wish to make out. I'm amazed how often people claim that something makes no sense when in fact they just don't understand what OP's version actually was.

If you want to argue that OP must be guilty because his story seems suss then you must also think that the state's case isn't. Yet we have a one sided argument only heard by one person 100m away, OP shooting on his stumps (probably), two sets of shot sounds but only one set of shots - the defense can explain this but the state can't, a man who commits murder without any reason or any history or violence against any of his girlfriends, someone who chooses to shoot through a door to kill when he could just have easily broken the door down if he really did want to attack his girlfriend. It all just seems so farfetched to me. I don't doubt that things like this do happen but I'd expect to see some previous evidence of violence against a girlfriend before a full-blown shooting, particularly when there was absolutely no reason to do it.

Finally, the only way to say that you are sure he's guilty seems to me to ignore evidence that indicates otherwise. Take the screams evidence for example. Why do people keep saying there's no evidence that his cries could have been mistaken for screams when there seems to me to be rather a lot of evidence?

But G.R., don't tell me it escaped your attention how adept and skillful Roux was in distorting and misrepresenting evidence, particularly the timeline evidence, during his cross examination of the state's witnesses! He would "put" something to the witness as if it were an absolute fact, and then badger the witness (for days, in Michelle Burger's case) trying to get them to agree with his version of Oscar's story. Nel had to call him up on it several times, and even complained to Masipa that he could not keep popping up out of his seat like that with objections for the course of the trial.

I have never seen Johnson's notes or any actual phone records entered into evidence for his calls that night (please share a link if you have one, but I don't believe the Annexures were ever made public, were they?) IMO Roux had both Johnson and Nel (inexplicably) admitting to the 3:17 time for the final shots much as he had tricked Masipa into discrediting Dr. Stipp's testimony by confusing the court about Stipp's attempted call to "security" as being at 3:27 a.m. (what record was this supposedly based on??). Dr. Stipp spoke with Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51 (after hearing the second "shots") which is an established time. It was Stander who called 911 at 3:27 while standing there with Dr. Stipp. Roux seemed to thoroughly muddle this up to his benefit with Masipa later discrediting Dr. Stipp (except for his testimony about Oscar's apparent sincerity in weeping over Reeva's dead body.)

G.R., where are you getting your evidence of the call times (other than the Defence's HOA)? Does anyone have a link to the State Police Phone Chart Exhibit ZZ5? Could you (or anyone here) please let us know where you find any factual contradictions (official phone records entered into evidence) with the phone times listed in Mr. Fossil's WTA2 timeline (he shows the call times that are certain or substantiated by phone records submitted in evidence in BOLD, those submitted by the defense and accepted by Masipa in BLUE, while times presented by the State are in BLACK, and where he has theorized or filled in any gaps, Mr. Fossil shows his own time entries in RED.)

It would be wonderful if Mr. Fossil would come back on here and help us out again, but for instance, how is it you are apparently willing to accept Roux's timeline (HOA, Page 61, Line 19) that Dr Stipp's attempted call to 10111 (SAPS) was at 3:17 which is AFTER the next door neighbor Michael Nhlengthewa made his second call to security, (this one went through) which was firmly recorded at 3:16:36-- well after the final bang/shots were heard and Oscar was heard shouting 3X for help and crying. This was not Dr. Stipp's testimony as I heard it. He first attempted to call their neighborhood security after hearing the initial sounds followed by a woman screaming. He then attempted to call 10111 and it did not go through. He then hears what he describes as the second sound of gunshots and attempts to call another 082 neighborhood security number but fails again before he finally reaches Silverwoods Security at at the established time of 3:15:51 (Defence HOA, Page 61, Line 188) I hope I am not incorrect, but I do not believe Stipp's testimony stated that he tried again to call 10111 AFTER he spoke with neighborhood security. It was my understanding that he then went to his balcony and waited for security to arrive so he could re-direct them to Oscar's house. Where is the testimony or evidence that Stipp attempted to call 10111 (SAPS) after he spoke to Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51?

It would be safe to assume that one failed call to 082# and a second successful call to Silverwoods Security would take as much as 20 to possibly 51 seconds. That's where I get my time for the second (actual) shots at around 3:15.


So, yes, I agree with you-- the timeline debate depends on how you interpret the call records, and it's not easy given the actual evidence and testimony available to us. I think much could be resolved if we knew whether or not there is an actual call data record of Johnson's call to Strubenkop Security at 3:13 (as Mr. Fossil places it) or if it indeed occurred 3:16 as Roux placed it in his timeline.

if you look at Mr. Fossil's "Chronology" sheet (tab at the bottom of his Witness Testimony Analysis 2) then it is not hard to imagine how a clever defense attorney like Roux would see the opportunity to simply shift the timeline downward and say the (actual) shots heard at around 3:14 were the first sounds heard that night-- this suits his version that Oscar fired the gun and shot Reeva first and if you distort the timeline it also coincides with the final shots the neighbors reported hearing.

To achieve this time shift, Roux had to confuse the court about Stipp's call time for his failed call to 10111 (no phone record of a failed attempted call I imagine) and Johnson's call times which were reportedly taken from his notes. It would work perfectly for Roux-- all he needed to do was have Masipa discredit Burger/Johnson and the Stipp's testimony by claiming they all heard Oscar screaming blood curdling screams like a woman as he sneaked up on the imaginary intruders and convince her that the second shots the neighbors reported were actually the first.

My apologies for such a long post, apparently I am incapable of brevity!

 

[GR_Turner]

J

But G.R., don't tell me it escaped your attention how adept and skillful Roux was in distorting and misrepresenting evidence, particularly the timeline evidence, during his cross examination of the state's witnesses! He would "put" something to the witness as if it were an absolute fact, and then badger the witness (for days, in Michelle Burger's case) trying to get them to agree with his version of Oscar's story. Nel had to call him up on it several times, and even complained to Masipa that he could not keep popping up out of his seat like that with objections for the course of the trial.

I have never seen Johnson's notes or any actual phone records entered into evidence for his calls that night (please share a link if you have one, but I don't believe the Annexures were ever made public, were they?) IMO Roux had both Johnson and Nel (inexplicably) admitting to the 3:17 time for the final shots much as he had tricked Masipa into discrediting Dr. Stipp's testimony by confusing the court about Stipp's attempted call to "security" as being at 3:27 a.m. (what record was this supposedly based on??). Dr. Stipp spoke with Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51 (after hearing the second "shots") which is an established time. It was Stander who called 911 at 3:27 while standing there with Dr. Stipp. Roux seemed to thoroughly muddle this up to his benefit with Masipa later discrediting Dr. Stipp (except for his testimony about Oscar's apparent sincerity in weeping over Reeva's dead body.)

G.R., where are you getting your evidence of the call times (other than the Defence's HOA)? Does anyone have a link to the State Police Phone Chart Exhibit ZZ5? Could you (or anyone here) please let us know where you find any factual contradictions (official phone records entered into evidence) with the phone times listed in Mr. Fossil's WTA2 timeline (he shows the call times that are certain or substantiated by phone records submitted in evidence in BOLD, those submitted by the defense and accepted by Masipa in BLUE, while times presented by the State are in BLACK, and where he has theorized or filled in any gaps, Mr. Fossil shows his own time entries in RED.)

It would be wonderful if Mr. Fossil would come back on here and help us out again, but for instance, how is it you are apparently willing to accept Roux's timeline (HOA, Page 61, Line 19) that Dr Stipp's attempted call to 10111 (SAPS) was at 3:17 which is AFTER the next door neighbor Michael Nhlengthewa made his second call to security, (this one went through) which was firmly recorded at 3:16:36-- well after the final bang/shots were heard and Oscar was heard shouting 3X for help and crying. This was not Dr. Stipp's testimony as I heard it. He first attempted to call their neighborhood security after hearing the initial sounds followed by a woman screaming. He then attempted to call 10111 and it did not go through. He then hears what he describes as the second sound of gunshots and attempts to call another 082 neighborhood security number but fails again before he finally reaches Silverwoods Security at at the established time of 3:15:51 (Defence HOA, Page 61, Line 188) I hope I am not incorrect, but I do not believe Stipp's testimony stated that he tried again to call 10111 AFTER he spoke with neighborhood security. It was my understanding that he then went to his balcony and waited for security to arrive so he could re-direct them to Oscar's house. Where is the testimony or evidence that Stipp attempted to call 10111 (SAPS) after he spoke to Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51?

It would be safe to assume that one failed call to 082# and a second successful call to Silverwoods Security would take as much as 20 to possibly 51 seconds. That's where I get my time for the second (actual) shots at around 3:15.[/B]


So, yes, I agree with you-- the timeline debate depends on how you interpret the call records, and it's not easy given the actual evidence and testimony available to us. I think much could be resolved if we knew whether or not there is an actual call data record of Johnson's call to Strubenkop Security at 3:13 (as Mr. Fossil places it) or if it indeed occurred 3:16 as Roux placed it in his timeline.

if you look at Mr. Fossil's "Chronology" sheet (tab at the bottom of his Witness Testimony Analysis 2) then it is not hard to imagine how a clever defense attorney like Roux would see the opportunity to simply shift the timeline downward and say the (actual) shots heard at around 3:14 were the first sounds heard that night-- this suits his version that Oscar fired the gun and shot Reeva first and if you distort the timeline it also coincides with the final shots the neighbors reported hearing.

To achieve this time shift, Roux had to confuse the court about Stipp's call time for his failed call to 10111 (no phone record of a failed attempted call I imagine) and Johnson's call times which were reportedly taken from his notes. It would work perfectly for Roux-- all he needed to do was have Masipa discredit Burger/Johnson and the Stipp's testimony by claiming they all heard Oscar screaming blood curdling screams like a woman as he sneaked up on the imaginary intruders and convince her that the second shots the neighbors reported were actually the first.

My apologies for such a long post, apparently I am incapable of brevity!

Yes, I seem to be struggling with brevity too of late

BIB1: Yes this is the whole problem with Stipp's evidence. It doesn't match the phone records. His evidence is 1. failed call to security 2. call to 10111 3. successful call to security. We have no record of the first call (though we do know that Mr N failed to get through the first time he called at 3.16), Roux said the 10111 call was at 3.17 and the successful call to security was at 3.15. So it makes no sense in terms of creating a timeline. We don't have all the records of all the phone calls but we do have what was claimed in court and not corrected. I don't believe for a second that Roux would make these times up or that Nel would let him and that this would then be repeated unchallenged in the Heads.

There are two possible versions depending on how you interpret the evidence and Dr Stipp's in particular. For the state to be right about the screams (and they didn't in fact argue this in court at all) we must have Stipp misdialling the failed security number attempt, and then either Stipp misremembered that the 10111 call was after the successful call to security or that call time is wrong. We must also have Johnson's 3.16 call time wrong. And in particular both the 10111 call and Johnson's call would have to be wrong by 3 minutes in the same direction. There would also have to be 2 sets of male 'help's one during the screaming and one during the crying but none heard by both sets of neighbours (and indeed not a single witness heard both female screaming and male crying.)

If we take the defense timeline the only thing that's missing is the close neighbours hearing the second bangs. Everything else fits, given that we can't really be sure about what Stipp's evidence means in the timeline. Even the 3 male helps are in the right place in both Johnson/Burger's evidence and in the Nhlengethwas' evidence.

BIB2 - this isn't the defense version at all though. It's that he cried out after the shooting and before he knocked the door down.

 

[Marfa Lights]

But do you not think then that being afraid makes a difference to your perception? At the heart of a self-defense case is the understanding that a person in fear of their life may act to defend themselves even if this results in the death of the other person. However, they can't go too far or their defense is perceived as an attack. In this case I think he clearly did think he was being attacked and I'd give him the benefit of the doubt given the way things are in SA and how the law is applied there too.
I
Now if there was evidence that he had stopped and started again (but the evidence indicates it was 4 shots in a row, not 1-3) then that would be worse. Or if he had shot multiple times higher up and then several times lower down indicating that he was intent on finishing off the intruder, that might be different. But in this case we have 4 shots below waist height probably fired in a row.

BIB above- From my limited understanding of S.A. law as it applies to OP's claims of Putative Private Defense, he was well outside the bounds of a legal use of deadly force in response to a perceived threat that was no more than the normal sounds of a houseguest opening a bathroom window on a hot night and entering the toilet.

This kind of claim has gotten completely out of hand in the U.S. where everyone from George Zimmerman to punk racist cops claims self-defense to murder because they merely "felt" threatened or perceived a threat. Never mind who initiated the confrontation. It just goes to show you that when this type of defense is allowed in just about any situation where the victim can no longer speak for themselves, then this makes society less safe and less just.

I strongly disagree with your choice to give him the "benefit of the doubt" beyond what a strict interpretation of the law allows. Even allowing for high crime rates in South Africa, he lived in an exceptionally secure estate, and as many have pointed out, he was comfortable enough to sleep with his bedroom balcony doors open.

It's hard not to believe so many supporters are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because of his carefully crafted public persona as the handsome, humble, soft-spoken hero athlete-- and oh, yes, because he showed remorse after killing Reeva! (Does it not bother these people that while out on bail he was out drinking in clubs with Reeva look-alikes sitting on his lap?)

Honestly, I don't think Oscar is a cold-blooded calculated murderer-- just an impulsive, over-caffeinated, stressed-out, insomniac, emotionally immature, insecure, hot-headed, jealous, selfish, spoiled brat, arrogant, lying, reckless gun-toting maniac, world-class jerk of a jock. I have no doubt he would be capable of regret, remorse and anguish even immediately after shooting Reeva.

Re: your comment above-- Now if there was evidence that he had stopped and started again (but the evidence indicates it was 4 shots in a row, not 1-3) then that would be worse.

Are you quoting Dixon's ballistics testimony?? What did Mangena say about the firing sequence? (Not to be confused with Roux's short-lived "double tap theory.)

 

[cottonweaver]

J

But G.R., don't tell me it escaped your attention how adept and skillful Roux was in distorting and misrepresenting evidence, particularly the timeline evidence, during his cross examination of the state's witnesses! ........

It would be wonderful if Mr. Fossil would come back on here and help us out again, ...........

RSBM

In the absence of Mr Fossil let me quote him here on the other matter - the falsification of the guard track records, in so far as it underlines Masipa etc lack of rigor in appraising the facts, records, in this case a different exhibit.

Mr F
"Further to my post #3199 about Roux's confusion regarding the 02:18 and 02:20 guard track activations.

I think it's appalling that Masipa has used this same incorrect time (02:20) in her chronology. Given that she wished to state her own timeline, I think it was imperative that she and her assessors verified their facts against the available evidence (e.g. looked at Exhibit TTT) rather than simply taking Roux's word for it. Even reading the HoA properly would have thrown up that Roux contradicts himself.

If this is representative of the level of follow-up of the references to the record made in both HoA it's a sad day for justice."

And a reply to him by another class act bookcover

"Precisely, but the Judge in her wisdom chose to ignore that fact...and used the 02.20 timeslot in her Judgment to demonstrate everything was just fine.

I mean what is two minutes after all, if we shifted everything by a mere two minutes what sort of story would we have then?"

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2010453&page=129

 

[Trotterly]

J

But G.R., don't tell me it escaped your attention how adept and skillful Roux was in distorting and misrepresenting evidence, particularly the timeline evidence, during his cross examination of the state's witnesses! He would "put" something to the witness as if it were an absolute fact, and then badger the witness (for days, in Michelle Burger's case) trying to get them to agree with his version of Oscar's story. Nel had to call him up on it several times, and even complained to Masipa that he could not keep popping up out of his seat like that with objections for the course of the trial.

I have never seen Johnson's notes or any actual phone records entered into evidence for his calls that night (please share a link if you have one, but I don't believe the Annexures were ever made public, were they?) IMO Roux had both Johnson and Nel (inexplicably) admitting to the 3:17 time for the final shots much as he had tricked Masipa into discrediting Dr. Stipp's testimony by confusing the court about Stipp's attempted call to "security" as being at 3:27 a.m. (what record was this supposedly based on??). Dr. Stipp spoke with Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51 (after hearing the second "shots") which is an established time. It was Stander who called 911 at 3:27 while standing there with Dr. Stipp. Roux seemed to thoroughly muddle this up to his benefit with Masipa later discrediting Dr. Stipp (except for his testimony about Oscar's apparent sincerity in weeping over Reeva's dead body.)

G.R., where are you getting your evidence of the call times (other than the Defence's HOA)? Does anyone have a link to the State Police Phone Chart Exhibit ZZ5? Could you (or anyone here) please let us know where you find any factual contradictions (official phone records entered into evidence) with the phone times listed in Mr. Fossil's WTA2 timeline (he shows the call times that are certain or substantiated by phone records submitted in evidence in BOLD, those submitted by the defense and accepted by Masipa in BLUE, while times presented by the State are in BLACK, and where he has theorized or filled in any gaps, Mr. Fossil shows his own time entries in RED.)

It would be wonderful if Mr. Fossil would come back on here and help us out again, but for instance, how is it you are apparently willing to accept Roux's timeline (HOA, Page 61, Line 19) that Dr Stipp's attempted call to 10111 (SAPS) was at 3:17 which is AFTER the next door neighbor Michael Nhlengthewa made his second call to security, (this one went through) which was firmly recorded at 3:16:36-- well after the final bang/shots were heard and Oscar was heard shouting 3X for help and crying. This was not Dr. Stipp's testimony as I heard it. He first attempted to call their neighborhood security after hearing the initial sounds followed by a woman screaming. He then attempted to call 10111 and it did not go through. He then hears what he describes as the second sound of gunshots and attempts to call another 082 neighborhood security number but fails again before he finally reaches Silverwoods Security at at the established time of 3:15:51 (Defence HOA, Page 61, Line 188) I hope I am not incorrect, but I do not believe Stipp's testimony stated that he tried again to call 10111 AFTER he spoke with neighborhood security. It was my understanding that he then went to his balcony and waited for security to arrive so he could re-direct them to Oscar's house. Where is the testimony or evidence that Stipp attempted to call 10111 (SAPS) after he spoke to Silverwoods Security at 3:15:51?

It would be safe to assume that one failed call to 082# and a second successful call to Silverwoods Security would take as much as 20 to possibly 51 seconds. That's where I get my time for the second (actual) shots at around 3:15.


So, yes, I agree with you-- the timeline debate depends on how you interpret the call records, and it's not easy given the actual evidence and testimony available to us. I think much could be resolved if we knew whether or not there is an actual call data record of Johnson's call to Strubenkop Security at 3:13 (as Mr. Fossil places it) or if it indeed occurred 3:16 as Roux placed it in his timeline.

if you look at Mr. Fossil's "Chronology" sheet (tab at the bottom of his Witness Testimony Analysis 2) then it is not hard to imagine how a clever defense attorney like Roux would see the opportunity to simply shift the timeline downward and say the (actual) shots heard at around 3:14 were the first sounds heard that night-- this suits his version that Oscar fired the gun and shot Reeva first and if you distort the timeline it also coincides with the final shots the neighbors reported hearing.

To achieve this time shift, Roux had to confuse the court about Stipp's call time for his failed call to 10111 (no phone record of a failed attempted call I imagine) and Johnson's call times which were reportedly taken from his notes. It would work perfectly for Roux-- all he needed to do was have Masipa discredit Burger/Johnson and the Stipp's testimony by claiming they all heard Oscar screaming blood curdling screams like a woman as he sneaked up on the imaginary intruders and convince her that the second shots the neighbors reported were actually the first.

My apologies for such a long post, apparently I am incapable of brevity!

I agree.

 

[Marfa Lights]

<Snipped>We don't have all the records of all the phone calls but we do have what was claimed in court and not corrected. I don't believe for a second that Roux would make these times up or that Nel would let him and that this would then be repeated unchallenged in the Heads.
<Snipped>

And here is where we differ... I think Roux got away with numerous false assertions and Nel somehow just let them slide on by-- perhaps he could not immediately object because Roux always claimed he would substantiate them later with the next witness or the next expert testimony. "As the defense will prove later, Milady."

I definitely believe the State lost this case by not correcting the many unsubstantiated claims of the defense and by not providing their own timeline that showed it could be just as possible for Oscar to have kicked and bashed the toilet door first to frighten and threaten Reeva, become enraged at her screaming, and gone after his gun, firing four rounds through the locked door. To open the door he then picked up the nearby cricket bat off the floor, and pried open the splintered or fragmented panels, including the panel with bullet hole D.

Is this scenario not just as plausible?

 

[Trotterly]

And here is where we differ... I think Roux got away with numerous false assertions and Nel somehow just let them slide on by-- perhaps he could not immediately object because Roux always claimed he would substantiate them later with the next witness or the next expert testimony. "As the defense will prove later, Milady."

I definitely believe the State lost this case by not correcting the many unsubstantiated claims of the defense and by not providing their own timeline that showed it could be just as possible for Oscar to have kicked and bashed the toilet door first to frighten and threaten Reeva, become enraged at her screaming, and gone after his gun, firing four rounds through the locked door. To open the door he then picked up the nearby cricket bat off the floor, and pried open the splintered or fragmented panels, including the panel with bullet hole D.

Is this scenario not just as plausible?

BIB But that's the crux, the prosecution version has to be the only reasonably possible one not just an also ran.

 

[Marfa Lights]

BIB But that's the crux, the prosecution version has to be the only reasonably possible one not just an also ran.

Yes, but I just wish they had started with a clear and plausible timeline and proceeded from there to disprove the defense's version of events. By not providing an alternative account, they let the defense win by default.

 

[lithgow1]

OK so what if the door was opening? Would that be murder?

Yes IMO. An opening door does not qualify as an immediate threat to life. Now if the door opened and someone was standing there with a knife we might have something to discuss. But since in this case it would have been Reeva Steenkamp with a cell phone then we don`t.

 

[cottonweaver]

moving away from the timeline's distortions

I do think this one is worth quoting for a different perspective as it is not all based on missing phone data, faulty records:

"The problem in this case is that OP's version was demonstrably false.

1. He said they were asleep from 10pm to 3am. False. Reeva at least was awake and eating.

2. He said they didn't argue. False. Their argument was heard at around 2am.

3. He said Reeva didn't scream. False. 4 separate witnesses heard her screaming for her life, stopping only when the fatal shot hit her.

4. He said that Reeva was still alive when he carried her downstairs. False. She died within a few seconds of the fatal shot.

5. He said he brought the fans inside and ran to the balcony later. False. The picture shows the position of the fans. They were in his way.

6. He says the room was so dark he could see nothing. False. The balcony light was on.

7. He says that he saw Reeva's shape under the duvet when he awoke. False. The duvet is on the floor, Reeva's jeans on top, blood spatter on both.

It is only by doing as Masipa did, discarding the entirety of the physical and witness testimony that his story can be reasonably possible. This is quite apart from the utterly preposterous central assumption which is that: a) he didn't check where Reeva was, b) he didn't realise that she wasn't in bed when he got his gun and c) it didn't cross his mind that it was her in the toilet

So not only is his story beyond reasonable belief in its inception, but it is contradicted at almost every key point by the evidence."

Repeat - standard is "beyond reasonable doubt" not beyond doubt" nor beyond theoretical possibility.

But it's really worth looking at the whole link for context

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?p=75692199

 

[GR_Turner]

And here is where we differ... I think Roux got away with numerous false assertions and Nel somehow just let them slide on by-- perhaps he could not immediately object because Roux always claimed he would substantiate them later with the next witness or the next expert testimony. "As the defense will prove later, Milady."

I definitely believe the State lost this case by not correcting the many unsubstantiated claims of the defense and by not providing their own timeline that showed it could be just as possible for Oscar to have kicked and bashed the toilet door first to frighten and threaten Reeva, become enraged at her screaming, and gone after his gun, firing four rounds through the locked door. To open the door he then picked up the nearby cricket bat off the floor, and pried open the splintered or fragmented panels, including the panel with bullet hole D.

Is this scenario not just as plausible?

If you regard both scenarios as plausible then you can't say he's guilty. The state's version must be the only one that's possible on the evidence. I disagree that roux made up phone times. Where did the defense even get them from if not the state's evidence? There's just no way Nel would have said nothing if roux had made phone times up.

 

[GR_Turner]

BIB above- From my limited understanding of S.A. law as it applies to OP's claims of Putative Private Defense, he was well outside the bounds of a legal use of deadly force in response to a perceived threat that was no more than the normal sounds of a houseguest opening a bathroom window on a hot night and entering the toilet.

This kind of claim has gotten completely out of hand in the U.S. where everyone from George Zimmerman to punk racist cops claims self-defense to murder because they merely "felt" threatened or perceived a threat. Never mind who initiated the confrontation. It just goes to show you that when this type of defense is allowed in just about any situation where the victim can no longer speak for themselves, then this makes society less safe and less just.

I strongly disagree with your choice to give him the "benefit of the doubt" beyond what a strict interpretation of the law allows. Even allowing for high crime rates in South Africa, he lived in an exceptionally secure estate, and as many have pointed out, he was comfortable enough to sleep with his bedroom balcony doors open.

It's hard not to believe so many supporters are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because of his carefully crafted public persona as the handsome, humble, soft-spoken hero athlete-- and oh, yes, because he showed remorse after killing Reeva! (Does it not bother these people that while out on bail he was out drinking in clubs with Reeva look-alikes sitting on his lap?)

Honestly, I don't think Oscar is a cold-blooded calculated murderer-- just an impulsive, over-caffeinated, stressed-out, insomniac, emotionally immature, insecure, hot-headed, jealous, selfish, spoiled brat, arrogant, lying, reckless gun-toting maniac, world-class jerk of a jock. I have no doubt he would be capable of regret, remorse and anguish even immediately after shooting Reeva.

Re: your comment above-- Now if there was evidence that he had stopped and started again (but the evidence indicates it was 4 shots in a row, not 1-3) then that would be worse.

Are you quoting Dixon's ballistics testimony?? What did Mangena say about the firing sequence? (Not to be confused with Roux's short-lived "double tap theory.)

Why are you comparing this case with completely different scenarios in other countries? We're talking about SA.

I've never said I'd give him the benefit of the doubt because he seems nice. I base it on similar scenarios and how sa law has treated those people.

Who mentioned Dixon? Mrs Vdm is the only witness to hear the four shots for sure and she heard four in a row. The ballistics experts disagreed with each other so I don't think we can really say from their evidence who is right.

 

[GR_Turner]

RSBM

In the absence of Mr Fossil let me quote him here on the other matter - the falsification of the guard track records, in so far as it underlines Masipa etc lack of rigor in appraising the facts, records, in this case a different exhibit.

Mr F
"Further to my post #3199 about Roux's confusion regarding the 02:18 and 02:20 guard track activations.

I think it's appalling that Masipa has used this same incorrect time (02:20) in her chronology. Given that she wished to state her own timeline, I think it was imperative that she and her assessors verified their facts against the available evidence (e.g. looked at Exhibit TTT) rather than simply taking Roux's word for it. Even reading the HoA properly would have thrown up that Roux contradicts himself.

If this is representative of the level of follow-up of the references to the record made in both HoA it's a sad day for justice."

And a reply to him by another class act bookcover

"Precisely, but the Judge in her wisdom chose to ignore that fact...and used the 02.20 timeslot in her Judgment to demonstrate everything was just fine.

I mean what is two minutes after all, if we shifted everything by a mere two minutes what sort of story would we have then?"

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2010453&page=129

But that 2 minutes doesn't matter. It's the 2 minutes later on that count and she just followed the evidence.

 

[GR_Turner]

Yes IMO. An opening door does not qualify as an immediate threat to life. Now if the door opened and someone was standing there with a knife we might have something to discuss. But since in this case it would have been Reeva Steenkamp with a cell phone then we don`t.

OK so then you think that all the cases in SA where people have shot through opening doors at 'intruders' should also be murder?