http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2817767/
Not sure whether this has been posted.
My-murdered-daughter-failed-South-African-justice-just-like-Reeva-Steenkamp-says-grieving-British-mother.
The mother alleges that her daughter's murderer has evaded justice in SA due to his family's status and wealth.
Devastated Marilyn and David lacked confidence in the way the police tackled the case and hired private investigator Ettienne Groenewalk to find Khan and bring him to justice.
BIB
Am I missing something? Why couldn't Nel have said the State didn't have OP's phone if they didn't have it? Makes no sense the State couldn't have said exactly that if it were true they didn't have his phone and it makes no sense OP would say it if he knew the State didn't have it since they could pick him up on it. Nope, no sense at all, unless I've missed something.
Bringing over gbng's comment from the last thread (sorry, can't de-bold)
You've missed quite a bit! One of OP's phones was removed from the scene and not handed over to the state until 25 feb. It is most likely that it was with Carl at least part of the time. Someone wiped the history from the phone before it was handed in - possibly Carl. State did a deal with the defence so that, in return for Nel not raising this in court, the defence agreed not to call Botha.
It makes one wonder how much damage Botha could have done. He may have made mistakes, and he certainly got hammered at the bail application, but does anyone know why the state were so reluctant for him to appear? I recall Roux bringing him up during the trial a few times with a sarcastic comment or three, but the defence could hardly have claimed that the methods or testimony of their experts and investigations was above criticism. This also makes me wonder why Masipa slammed Vergeer in the sentencing phase but made no mention of Roger Dixon in her summing up while delivering the verdict when IMO he was just as inept, if not worse. More likeable in a bumbling kind of way but that's beside the point - his evidence was way beyond his field of expertise and bordered on dishonest with such stunts as the 'figure in the window' photos to name just one example.
What Botha did were not mistakes - he was in all probability compromised.
Do you mean by having done something illegal/dodgy in the course of this investigation or by something else?
Nothing personal patCee - but your link contains an article from the daily mail (Capitals intentionally deleted.) This is a hideous excuse for a newspaper and is to be mistrusted at all times.
I wouldn't say `illegal'; but exactly the kind of things I would expect one to do if he was in the Police force but working for the accused so that the case against the accused gets weakened, at the same time without giving the State a clear cut opportunity to charge him (the officer) for his actions. I initially got the feeling from the State's unwillingness to involve him in the trial, and also replacing him in the investigation team on a pretext that I found kind of cooked up just for the purpose of giving an official reason. But as I am going through transcripts of the bail hearing, I am getting more convinced about this. If and when I get hold of the transcripts of the entire bail hearing, I should be in a better position to elaborate.
That's an interesting take.
My impression was that it was more a case of Botha & Pistorius having a history (Botha investigated the slammed door incident) and Botha being biased against him.
But I could obviously be wrong about that.
It does sensationalise with headlines, and promotes women in various states of undress I agree......but is often the first to carry a lot of news that can then be checked out in other papers, and it's free to view. Anyway, especially for you Hoosen_Fenger
http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-afr...-track-suspected-killer-1.412071#.VFaMzjSsVNY
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/british-mum-claims-daughters-killing-4551160 .......this rag could also be questionable.
BIB - it is untrustworthy - but it's not untrustworthy at all times.Nothing personal patCee - but your link contains an article from the daily mail (Capitals intentionally deleted.) This is a hideous excuse for a newspaper and is to be mistrusted at all times.
I think Botha was careless, because he was told it was a straightforward intruder killing, and until he got upstairs, he had no reason to believe otherwise. By then, he'd already trampled over the crime scene without protective footwear, although I think there were other things he did without due care and attention. However, OP himself had already interfered with the crime scene by the time the police arrived.That's how I remember it too - he was reported as both being sloppy and too eager to throw the book at Oscar - not in collusion with him
It makes one wonder how much damage Botha could have done. He may have made mistakes, and he certainly got hammered at the bail application, but does anyone know why the state were so reluctant for him to appear? I recall Roux bringing him up during the trial a few times with a sarcastic comment or three, but the defence could hardly have claimed that the methods or testimony of their experts and investigations was above criticism. This also makes me wonder why Masipa slammed Vergeer in the sentencing phase but made no mention of Roger Dixon in her summing up while delivering the verdict when IMO he was just as inept, if not worse. More likeable in a bumbling kind of way but that's beside the point - his evidence was way beyond his field of expertise and bordered on dishonest with such stunts as the 'figure in the window' photos to name just one example.
I risk being pooh-poohed, again, here, but I have always thought that, at least part of the fight that night (if not a trigger) was related to the fact that he had told her/expected her to turn the fans off? bring them inside? and she didn't do it.
(I find that, when someone drops a piece of info. into a mix, which seems to have no relevance at all, it signals that it has GREAT significance to them, otherwise they wouldn't have thought to say it at all.
I personally find it astonishing that the PT cut a deal re. Carl/Botha .. I simply cannot see that anything Botha had done could match what Carl had done. Carl should've been prosecuted for taking that phone and wiping it, and that whole thing should've contributed towards a 'guilty of murdering Reeva' verdict for OP .. it's just ridiculous that each of these things kept on being dismissed as not being proof enough, like I've said before, you could take any murder case and argue every single thing away but fortunately in this country we have juries who take a case as a whole and come to decision based on that, and that would include someone wiping a phone because the only reason why someone takes a phone from a crime scene and wipes it is because it contained incriminating evidence, it's just basic common sense.