Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #66~ the appeal~

[Val1]

Whilst I haven't been able to track down the video of this, it was brought up again when the State appealed the sentence in December 2014. Here is a link to the Saffli document.

On page 1, scroll down to 2 paras above the chronological list of events “When I asked State Counsel if the timelines were common cause” you can read what was said. Tabulated below that is Masipa’s peculiar timeline.

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2014/793.html

I think this is what you're looking for.. starts about 1:17:50

[video=youtube;Q2JM01tLsig]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2JM01tLsig[/video]

 

[Deleted member 102539]

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2014/793.html

20. 03:27:14 Dr Stipp attempted to call security. This call did not get through.

Why? Security had already arrived.

 

[Interested Bystander]

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2014/793.html

20. 03:27:14 Dr Stipp attempted to call security. This call did not get through.

Why? Security had already arrived.

I think everyone is a bit confused about that but maybe he just hit the last number or inadvertently touched the screen and it redialled automatically.

 

[Val1]

Whilst I haven't been able to track down the video of this, it was brought up again when the State appealed the sentence in December 2014. Here is a link to the Saffli document.

On page 1, scroll down to 2 paras above the chronological list of events “When I asked State Counsel if the timelines were common cause” you can read what was said. Tabulated below that is Masipa’s peculiar timeline.

http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2014/793.html

Yea... perhaps if the chronological list was written in proper chronological order JM would have gotten it correct.... looks to me like someone interposed 3 and 4 either to confuse or in confusion:

"3. Approximately 03:14-15 accused was heard shouting for help.

4. Approximately between 03:12 and 03:17 screams were heard or screaming was heard."

 

[Trotterly]

The timeline cannot be confirmed because the details of Stipp's 3:17 10111 call were contained in Annexure A which was not for public consumption. It comes from the state anyway and was not contested.

 

[Tortoise]

Thanks for finding that video Val1.

 

[Val1]

The timeline cannot be confirmed because the details of Stipp's 3:17 10111 call were contained in Annexure A which was not for public consumption. It comes from the state anyway and was not contested.

I would think confirmation of Johnson's records would be more revealing for the timeline, since Roux apparently successfully confused JM with the 3:27 security call, you know, the one that was likely made when he was probably talking with Stander about calling an ambulance.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Yea... perhaps if the chronological list was written in proper chronological order JM would have gotten it correct.... looks to me like someone interposed 3 and 4 either to confuse or in confusion:

"3. Approximately 03:14-15 accused was heard shouting for help.

4. Approximately between 03:12 and 03:17 screams were heard or screaming was heard."

I am staggered that JM has chosen to ignore the timing Mrs Stipp gave for the first sounds. Mrs Stipp actually looked at the clock to record the time, as she did for the second shots. The timeline is rubbish.

Not that it makes much difference to the story but there is no way the Standers could have arrived at about 03.22. The Mr Stander finished the call at roughly 03.19.27. Carice went to her parents bedroom and the call was obviously over. They discussed what the call had been about. They had to get dressed and in Carice's evidence she said she had to get the car out of the garage and wait for her father, then drive to OP's. They did all this in 2.5'ish minutes?? What it does throw out is the time OP carried RS downstairs.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Why was Mrs VdM left out of the timeline? She heard shots at 03.00. This is very interesting because if Mrs Stipp's clock was only 2 minutes fast, not 3 or 4, we are looking at two sets of neighbours hearing shots at 03.00. Even more interesting is that it would indicate the second shots Mrs Stipp timed at 03.17 would actually have been at O3.15 which is the time just before Mr Stipps made a call to Security.

BUT why did Mrs VdM not also hear shots at 3.15?

 

[JudgeJudi]

"If the majority of the members of the bench decide that the appeal should be allowed, then that is the order that will be made and will be executed. If the SCA upholds the State’s appeal and replaces the verdict with one of murder, the case will be sent back to Judge Masipa for sentencing. This could take as long as two years".

http://carteblanche.dstv.com/player/955964

President Zuma has appointed Supreme Court of Appeal Judge Nonkosi Zoliswa Mhlantla to the Constitutional Court and she will take up this position on 1 December.

I'm unaware of any article that has been published that has given the date of Masipa's retirement. Assuming it is correct, this leaves two possibilities in relation to sentence. First, the matter could be referred to a different High Court judge. Second, this is also a possible reason why the SCA decided not to deliver their verdict at the conclusion of the appeal as the subject of their court determining sentence was raised and the judges may have wanted to discuss it further.

As Judge Mhlantla will be taking up her new role in the Constitutional Court on 1 December, I'd be surprised if sentencing was left in limbo for two years for such an important appeal which will set precedent in SA.

 

[Val1]

Why was Mrs VdM left out of the timeline? She heard shots at 03.00. This is very interesting because if Mrs Stipp's clock was only 2 minutes fast, not 3 or 4, we are looking at two sets of neighbours hearing shots at 03.00. Even more interesting is that it would indicate the second shots Mrs Stipp timed at 03.17 would actually have been at O3.15 which is the time just before Mr Stipps made a call to Security.

BUT why did Mrs VdM not also hear shots at 3.15?

My suggestion is that the first set were at the bedroom door(nearer the front of the house where Mrs VdM lived) and the second set were at the toilet door on the rear side of the house(nearer where the Stipps lived).



Pics of both doors here:
https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-11/

 

[JudgeJudi]

Wishing you all a very happy Thanksgiving.

 

[LemonMousse]

The timeline cannot be confirmed because the details of Stipp's 3:17 10111 call were contained in Annexure A which was not for public consumption. It comes from the state anyway and was not contested.

I can't figure out where you got this information from. Do you have a link indicating it?

Firstly, are you suggesting that there was some secret evidence regarding this call that Nel &/or Roux didn't want made public? Seriously?

When Roux was questioning Stipp regarding call timings, not once did he even hint that there was contradictory evidence regarding the 10111 call. He talked exclusively about the security log, and Stipp's 2 calls...at 3:15 and 3:27. And the list of objective evidence relied on in the defence heads does not include any "secret" not for public consumption evidence.

There was an Annexure A not released with the heads and the summary of what it contains says nothing whatsoever about 10111. It is all about the 2 calls to security.

And actually, it does show how dishonest Roux actually was.

Annexure A will prove, it says, that Dr Stipp was lying about hearing "help, help, help" after 3:27 and seeing Pistorius in the bathroom at 3:30 as clever Roux can prove he was at OP's house then.

Which is quite unbelievable, actually, as Dr Stipp NEVER gave those times in his evidence....he talked about first and second calls without knowing what times they actually happened.

 

[LemonMousse]

Interesting nugget.....

I was listening to Stipp's evidence again last night, and he said that when he got to OP's house he saw a man standing against a white Mercedes talking on a cell phone. The man motioned him inside.

The man was Stander....who was he talking to on the phone? We know it was neither the ambulance nor the police since they hadn't been called yet (unbelievable when you consider that Stander had just seen Reeva), so who did he call?

 

[LemonMousse]

Why was Mrs VdM left out of the timeline? She heard shots at 03.00. This is very interesting because if Mrs Stipp's clock was only 2 minutes fast, not 3 or 4, we are looking at two sets of neighbours hearing shots at 03.00. Even more interesting is that it would indicate the second shots Mrs Stipp timed at 03.17 would actually have been at O3.15 which is the time just before Mr Stipps made a call to Security.

BUT why did Mrs VdM not also hear shots at 3.15?

Again, this indicates a Roux sleight of hand.

Mrs V der M never said she heard shots at 3.00...it was sometime after, but she couldn't be exact. Which doesn't seem helpful, but there are a few clues that Roux (of course) ignored.

She said she heard 4 bangs, shortly after that she heard the loud crying and her husband went to the window to look out. He then called security and a few minutes later they saw cars pulling up.

Roux decided that because she heard female sounding (to her) cries, she must have been hearing the same things Stipps & Johnson heard.....therefore the bangs she heard were the first.

Which is ridiculous.

We don't know exactly when her husband called security, but we know it must have been after 3.16, since he wasn't one of the first callers. Therefore, the cries they were hearing were the same male ones that Mike et al could hear...making the four bangs the second sounds.

The only people who heard the first bangs were the Stipps.

The only people who heard Reeva screaming were the Stipps and Johnsons.

Everyone else heard the second bangs and then Pistorius caterwaulling.

 

[mrjitty]

There has been discussion on DS over the adjectives Masipa used to describe Pistorius' evidence and how she never actually said 'unreliable'. That's true, but she used some that are just as damning, if not more so.

In the legal appeal, it does not matter whether she used the word.

This is the sort of wormhole that laypeople love to jump down. :-D

Rather the question is whether it was proper for Masipa to rely on his evidence. Is he a "reliable" witness. It's a legal question.

To borrow a phrase from Chess - there is a "main line" of the case that Nel was following.

The "main line" is what you would expect any seasoned prosecutor to focus on.

OP's only defence is the mistake. Therefore the critical question is how did the mistake happen?

All that matters is those crucial seconds when Reeva goes from the bed to the bathroom.

The crime scene photos prove OP was lying about these crucial seconds. The Judge found he was a bad witness and lied.

Therefore according to an orthodox approach, OPs evidence on this point should be rejected "In Toto"

Therefore there is no "reliable" evidence that there was a mistake - and rather the situation speaks for itself.

This is what Nel is getting at with his argument and discussions about what is "reliable"

But instead the Judge essentially held that the mistake must have happened some other - yet unknown - way. Which the accused chose not to tell the court.

This is legally improper - as it effectively amounts to wild speculation

Again this is what I have said many times that I agree with Nel - the timeline was essentially irrelevant to a finding of murder.

The crime scene photos prove guilt because the evidential burden was on the accused and he did not advance reliable evidence.

 

[Val1]

Again, this indicates a Roux sleight of hand.

Mrs V der M never said she heard shots at 3.00...it was sometime after, but she couldn't be exact. Which doesn't seem helpful, but there are a few clues that Roux (of course) ignored.

She said she heard 4 bangs, shortly after that she heard the loud crying and her husband went to the window to look out. He then called security and a few minutes later they saw cars pulling up.

Roux decided that because she heard female sounding (to her) cries, she must have been hearing the same things Stipps & Johnson heard.....therefore the bangs she heard were the first.

Which is ridiculous.

We don't know exactly when her husband called security, but we know it must have been after 3.16, since he wasn't one of the first callers. Therefore, the cries they were hearing were the same male ones that Mike et al could hear...making the four bangs the second sounds.

The only people who heard the first bangs were the Stipps.

The only people who heard Reeva screaming were the Stipps and Johnsons.

Everyone else heard the second bangs and then Pistorius caterwaulling.

Plus, according to what Juror13 recorded, there was actually enough time between the first "shots" and the "commotion" that they'd gone back to bed and it was only after the "commotion" that they had called security.

https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-2/
"Sometime around 3am, she heard 4 banging sounds. After these banging sounds there was total silence. She asked her husband what he thought the sounds were and he said gunshots. Her husband looked out the window but didn’t see anything so went back to bed. Shortly afterwards they heard a commotion so her husband called security. After that call, they heard somebody crying loudly. Mrs. van der Merwe thought it was the lady crying but her husband said it was Oscar crying."

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Interesting nugget.....

I was listening to Stipp's evidence again last night, and he said that when he got to OP's house he saw a man standing against a white Mercedes talking on a cell phone. The man motioned him inside.

The man was Stander....who was he talking to on the phone? We know it was neither the ambulance nor the police since they hadn't been called yet (unbelievable when you consider that Stander had just seen Reeva), so who did he call?

Perhaps he was speaking to his daughter in the house? He "kept cave" outside, she helped inside?

 

[mrjitty]

Thanks for the transcript LemonMousse. It is painful to read it and recall how skillfully Roux manipulated Johnson's testimony while both Nel and Masipa sat by mute.

I think this was when Roux really seized control of the case with his distorted timeline.

I will never understand why Nel agreed to a 3:17 time for the last shot sounds without a thorough investigation of all call logs.

.

As a question of trial practice I don't agree.

The Judge had decided to believe the accused about the mistake and thus Roux's HOA Timeline provided the justifications.

Sometimes the Judge just sets sail for the "right" result and the evidence does not matter.

In order to BELIEVE the judge had to ignore the words out of the witnesses mouths and all the crime scene photos and the obvious lies from the accused!

If the Judge won't believe witnesses hearing a woman screaming nothing about some phone calls is going to change anything.

 

[mrjitty]

Plus, according to what Juror13 recorded, there was actually enough time between the first "shots" and the "commotion" that they'd gone back to bed and it was only after the "commotion" that they had called security.

https://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-2/
"Sometime around 3am, she heard 4 banging sounds. After these banging sounds there was total silence. She asked her husband what he thought the sounds were and he said gunshots. Her husband looked out the window but didn’t see anything so went back to bed. Shortly afterwards they heard a commotion so her husband called security. After that call, they heard somebody crying loudly. Mrs. van der Merwe thought it was the lady crying but her husband said it was Oscar crying."

All of this provides one more circumstantial point

The second bangs were far louder than the first.

The second bangs woke everyone - because they were gunshots

Mrs Stipp' only heard the first bang because she was awake - and had direct line of sight