Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[Colin de France]

She shouldn't have been allowed to remove it from the scene and she should have left it there, but there doesn't have to be a sinister motive behind her decision to take it to the police station. Perhaps she didn't trust that someone wouldn't go through it and take something, or perhaps she just wanted to make sure that Reeva's personal handbag reached her mother.

....firstly she shoudn't of even been there in the first place and secondly, which shows on her face, she like her brother think they're a cut above the rest and can do what they please...............no, she's as bent as him..........

 

[Colin de France]

...........anyway going back to the bruises on Reeva which happened before the shooting ...IE...... bruises on her body that were not as a result of the shooting....bruises on the upper part of the right thigh that were not linked to the shooting and behind the left knee and the left shin......another possible indication of an argument or fight beforehand .............did in fact she run into the toilet to phone the police because he had beaten her and that's why things escalated.................. sounds very plausible to me ............

 

[Interested Bystander]

Before we leave this behind, I have something else to say on whether or not it was possible for screams to be heard.

I am sure those of you who think that it was impossible to hear screams from a distance should try to remember what Stander’s daughter said. She said she could hear a man shouting help, help, help. Did you know that Stander’s house is 220 metres from OP’s? That is around 40-50 metres further away than the Johnson’s and with the wind blowing in the wrong direction she still heard shouts. Quite interesting don’t you think? If the PT had employed an acoustics specialist he would have proved without any doubt that those witnesses who heard screams were telling the truth. The PT not calling one was one of the biggest mistakes in the trial. If shouts were heard by Clarice, which was never questioned or doubted at any stage in the trial, one must accept it would have been possible to hear screams from a nearer (by 40-50 metres) position and with the wind in a more favourable direction. Also it must remembered that the Johnsons heard the help, help, help too. For me this shows just how ‘off the ball’ the PT team was. A good acoustics engineer would have been able to completely refute the DT Sound Engineer’s testimony or perhaps it would be better to say would have introduced the evidence that hearing the screams would have been possible. If a shout could be heard from 220 metres away, a scream would definitely have been heard at 170 metres and if screams were heard (as I think they were), OP would have been found guilty of DE without a doubt.

Remember too that at some stage Mrs Stipp clearly stated it sounded as though the screams were coming closer. I think that suggests Reeva was screaming as she came down the passage way towards the bathroom and when she was in the bathroom before entering the toilet cubicle. Sadly this is now "water under the bridge".

I think the PT failed because they thought they had a watertight case and didn't follow up every clue.

[video=youtube;2cW8gWbXjCQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cW8gWbXjCQ[/video]
@ 1.33.58

 

[Trotterly]

....firstly she shoudn't of even been there in the first place and secondly, which shows on her face, she like her brother think they're a cut above the rest and can do what they please...............no, she's as bent as him..........

If Aimee had taken the bag to the police station and crashed and died on the way, I don't think that a friend of Aimee's who turned up would we prosecuted for taking the bag for Aimee's mother.

 

[Colin de France]

Remember too that at some stage Mrs Stipp clearly stated it sounded as though the screams were coming closer. I think that suggests Reeva was screaming as she came down the passage way towards the bathroom and when she was in the bathroom before entering the toilet cubicle.

........woudn't this tie in with idea that she was being beaten beforehand..................?

 

[Colin de France]

If Aimee had taken the bag to the police station and crashed and died on the way, I don't think that a friend of Aimee's who turned up would we prosecuted for taking the bag for Aimee's mother.

......what has this got to do with a murder investigation......a crime scene.........?.............and her brother the main suspect..

 

[aftermath]

....firstly she shoudn't of even been there in the first place and secondly, which shows on her face, she like her brother think they're a cut above the rest and can do what they please...............no, she's as bent as him..........

Her brother was in trouble. She went to him. Hardly suspicious, and who let her in?
The opinions that you can tell a person's character/attitude from the look on their face and that she is 'as bent as him' are just that: opinions being stated in the style of a fact.

 

[Trotterly]

......what has this got to do with a murder investigation......a crime scene.........?.............

That's my point. You only know a crime scene is a crime scene only in hindsight. Aimee could have caused the crash by looking in the handbag whilst driving and killed a pedestrian for instance.

 

[Colin de France]

Her brother was in trouble. She went to him. Hardly suspicious, and who let her in?
The opinions that you can tell a person's character/attitude from the look on their face and that she is 'as bent as him' are just that: opinions being stated in the style of a fact.

.........and...............i'll give myself a slap on the wrist for having an opinion.........!

 

[Colin de France]

That's my point. You only know a crime scene is a crime scene only in hindsight. Aimee could have caused the crash by looking in the handbag whilst driving and killed a pedestrian for instance.

..........give in............a crime scene is a crime scene......hindsight is for the judge...........

 

[Trotterly]

...........anyway going back to the bruises on Reeva which happened before the shooting ...IE...... bruises on her body that were not as a result of the shooting....bruises on the upper part of the right thigh that were not linked to the shooting and behind the left knee and the left shin......another possible indication of an argument or fight beforehand .............did in fact she run into the toilet to phone the police because he had beaten her and that's why things escalated.................. sounds very plausible to me ............

No support from the pathologist side for this and those seem like odd places to receive injuries from a beating but the clincher here is that Reeva would have screamed and been heard by Mrs Stipp.

 

[aftermath]

...........anyway going back to the bruises on Reeva which happened before the shooting ...IE...... bruises on her body that were not as a result of the shooting....bruises on the upper part of the right thigh that were not linked to the shooting and behind the left knee and the left shin......another possible indication of an argument or fight beforehand .............did in fact she run into the toilet to phone the police because he had beaten her and that's why things escalated.................. sounds very plausible to me ............

He beat her on the thigh, back of the knee and the shin? I don't remember the pathologist stating that these bruises were likely to be from being beaten.

 

[Colin de France]

No support from the pathologist side for this

......no support for what...the bruises or the beating .....?

 

[aftermath]

.........and...............i'll give myself a slap on the wrist for having an opinion.........!

Whatever floats your boat!

 

[Trotterly]

..........give in............a crime scene is a crime scene......hindsight is for the judge...........

It's only a crime scene once it has been established that there has been a crime. Otherwise we wouldn't need trials.

I think it illustrates how easy it is to see how Aimee's motives can be misinterpreted if we use hindsight to judge her actions. Remember it is quite possible that Aimee thought and still does think it was an accident.

 

[Trotterly]

......no support for what...the bruises or the beating .....?

The beating. Else it would have been in the prosecution's version.

 

[Colin de France]

He beat her on the thigh, back of the knee and the shin? I don't remember the pathologist stating that these bruises were likely to be from being beaten.

.............he didn't...........but the fact that just after someone had received bruises they were found with their head blown open one can ask the question if the two episodes are related.........even to the point of having an opinion....

 

[cottonweaver]

:facepalm:

accidental dead bodies?
non crime scenes?

 

[Colin de France]

The beating. Else it would have been in the prosecution's version.

..........slipped up there Trotterly................

 

[Colin de France]

:facepalm:

..............i totally agree but i feel obliged to reply being polite as i am ..............please excuse me.