Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[Trooper]

Oscars problem isn't fundamentally firing one shot, although that is enough under SA law to have him banged into prison for culpable homicide..

What Oscars biggest problem is .. is 3 more shots fired after the first one.

that's where Oscar steps into the premeditated murderer category.

 

[minor4th]

Most murderers don't seem like murderers. But it's a fact that OP was controlling, had a bad temper, no respect for authority and had no qualms about asking his friend to take the rap for the restaurant incident. Add manipulative to that list. However, I don't think for a second he planned to murder her (in the sense of spending days thinking about it) - but I do think an altercation took place that night and he lost it, just like he lost it on previous occasions, but this time he went too far and actually killed someone.

There are countless people walking around who have bad tempers, are manipulative and have asked a buddy to take the rap on a minor infraction - and they are not murderers. Those qualities do not make it any more or less likely that Oscar premeditated the killing of his girlfriend. This is why that testimony would never have been allowed at his murder trial if there were not the additional gun charges brought at the last moment.

There has been no evidence presented that Oscar has ever been violent with anyone in the past. None. There's not been any evidence that he was abusive in his previous relationships. None at all. There has been not one speck of evidence presented that Reeva and Oscar were anything other than happy in their relationship.

So I don't understand how anyone can be so convinced that there was a big fight or that Oscar became violent for the first time in his life with absolutely nothing leading up to it.

 

[Duchy]

And for those who think that Reeva would have automatically screamed when the first bullet entered and broke her hip, that's not necessarily so. I witnessed my husband falling and breaking his left leg. He immediately went into shock and said not a word, although he was in agony. (He's fine now, thanks, after surgery.)

Someone remarked earlier that although OP said he felt vulnerable without his legs, that what he really felt was power with his legs. I've not been legless, but I imagine he felt normal with his legs- and vulnerable without them.

Agree that Reeva would not have automatically screamed when shot in hip. I think the screaming came before when she knew OP was coming after her. I think she locked the door on him and in his temper he used the bat on the door and the bath plate, then went back for his gun. As for the excuse of feeling vulnerable on his stumps, many people would not be as mobile as he is even on his stumps but they don't shoot through a door and kill someone they can't even see - 4 times no less!

 

[MeeBee]

This is also why I believe simple physics explains the blood spurts on the walls etc. ie. folding up a garden hose that still has water in it will cause it to spurt.

This seems like the best explanation, Val. There is no way her arteries were still spraying blood at that point. If her heart was still faintly trying to beat, then there would be blood coming from the wounds, but not spraying. Spraying only occurs for the first few moments and the heart loses pressure very quickly.

 

[Ranchgirl]

But OP's version is he didn't hear the noises coming from the suspected "intruder" until he was up and bringing in fans. That would mean that Reeva got up and went to the toilet while OP was doing this - presumably to use the toilet, so those would be the noises that OP believed to be an intruder, as he claims.



So I don't think that defies logic. What doesn't make much sense to me is if his testimony is going to be that he and Reeva were both awake at or near the time he moved the fans in - or if he thought Reeva was sleeping. This is not clear, even considering both of his statements.

Minor, even if his account of hearing an intruder is dreamed to be true, SA law would still allow the judge to find him guilty of a type of manslaughter. The questionnaire OP filled out to obtain a gun indicated so. Just wondering if the prosecution is heading in that direction?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Trooper]

There are countless people walking around who have bad tempers, are manipulative and have asked a buddy to take the rap on a minor infraction - and they are not murderers. Those qualities do not make it any more or less likely that Oscar premeditated the killing of his girlfriend. This is why that testimony would never have been allowed at his murder trial if there were not the additional gun charges brought at the last moment.

There has been no evidence presented that Oscar has ever been violent with anyone in the past. None. There's not been any evidence that he was abusive in his previous relationships. None at all. There has been not one speck of evidence presented that Reeva and Oscar were anything other than happy in their relationship.

So I don't understand how anyone can be so convinced that there was a big fight or that Oscar became violent for the first time in his life with absolutely nothing leading up to it.

'that testimony' as you put it, was tendered in evidence PRECISELY because it relates to the illegal gun use, and illegal ammo use... Oscar is during this ONE trial facing FOUR charges.. it isn't solely about , (but mainly about ) the Murder of Reeva.. its 4 criminal charges run in conjunction in the same trial.. a simple reading of the reason Oscar is on trial can fix this misperception..

the witnesses who testified re the shooting in the restaurant, (Larena, the owners of Tasha restaurant, Darrin Fresco ) are testifying NOT to Oscars murder charge but to the gun charges he is also on trial for..

Darrin Fresco, Samantha 's testimony is DIRECTLY related to the illegal gun firing charge..

so of course this testimony should be allowed.. its also what he is charged with. its criminal charges in addition to premediated murder.. it would hardly be rational to propose that no evidence be presented against Oscar for criminal charges laid against him. is Oscar THAT special??? don't think so. Every attorney I know would automatically expect evidence relating to the criminal charges Oscar is accused of.

 

[Trooper]

these additional gun charges were not bought at the last moment.. this is a distortion of the facts... the gun charges were laid on Oscar at his arrest, in addition to premeditated murder.

 

[minor4th]

Minor, even if his account of hearing an intruder is dreamed to be true, SA law would still allow the judge to find him guilty of a type of manslaughter. The questionnaire OP filled out to obtain a gun indicated so. Just wondering if the prosecution is heading in that direction?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree, and maybe the prosecution is going to try to gear its remaining evidence in that direction.

 

[minor4th]

Agree that Reeva would not have automatically screamed when shot in hip. I think the screaming came before when she knew OP was coming after her. I think she locked the door on him and in his temper he used the bat on the door and the bath plate, then went back for his gun. As for the excuse of feeling vulnerable on his stumps, many people would not be as mobile as he is even on his stumps but they don't shoot through a door and kill someone they can't even see - 4 times no less!

Maybe that's what happened, but the state has not presented any evidence of this

 

[Really?]

the airconditioning unit was broken.. so was his Jacuzzi but that's beside the point.

annnnnnd.....the window down stairs was broken...and a pair of denims were strewn onto the garden.......what?, why?, who's?

 

[Val1]

Money is a powerful remedy for wagging tongues.

 

[Trooper]

And for those who think that Reeva would have automatically screamed when the first bullet entered and broke her hip, that's not necessarily so. I witnessed my husband falling and breaking his left leg. He immediately went into shock and said not a word, although he was in agony. (He's fine now, thanks, after surgery.)

Someone remarked earlier that although OP said he felt vulnerable without his legs, that what he really felt was power with his legs. I've not been legless, but I imagine he felt normal with his legs- and vulnerable without them.

I take on board your anecdotal reasoning in regard to your husbands stoic appreciation when falling and breaking his leg..

but it would have more impact, had your husband been hiding behind a toilet door and having a Black Talon bullet shatter and completely break his hipbone....

would he have screamed then, do you think??

 

[MeeBee]

It's been confirmed that the recording was Nels own trial notes (hence the automated voice). I guess it must have been his own device. The confusion relating to Nels comment regarding 'an argument', is that he was referring to his own argument (in the legal sense) with defense to adjourn the trial, and not regarding any argument between two people. There goes my theory...:facepalm:

I thought it was funny, lol, especially his reaction. Even the judge got a bit of a chuckle.

 

[soozieqtips]

There are countless people walking around who have bad tempers, are manipulative and have asked a buddy to take the rap on a minor infraction - and they are not murderers. Those qualities do not make it any more or less likely that Oscar premeditated the killing of his girlfriend. This is why that testimony would never have been allowed at his murder trial if there were not the additional gun charges brought at the last moment.

There has been no evidence presented that Oscar has ever been violent with anyone in the past. None. There's not been any evidence that he was abusive in his previous relationships. None at all. There has been not one speck of evidence presented that Reeva and Oscar were anything other than happy in their relationship.

So I don't understand how anyone can be so convinced that there was a big fight or that Oscar became violent for the first time in his life with absolutely nothing leading up to it.

Do you not remember Reeva's own mother saying that Reeva had told her she and OP were fighting a lot?

Although they had only been dating for a few months, the sprinter and his new beau were known as South Africa’s “golden couple”.

But already Ms Steenkamp confided to her mother that she was frequently arguing with the double amputee.

She said, ‘We, we are fighting a lot’. That’s what she said. Which is unusual for Reeva. There were no fights with (ex-boyfriend) Warren ever. Or anybody else. Or, or, even... personal fights maybe with friends and things, she didn’t... wasn’t one for fighting. But she said, they were fighting a lot.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...of-Oscar-Pistorius-claim-her-grieving-parents

I don't know if you think her mother is lying, but I don't believe she is. So assuming she's telling the truth, Reeva was fighting a 'lot' with OP. That doesn't indicate a particularly happy or loving relationship to me. She didn't say what they were fighting about, but having heard Maddie Sims note that OP was often irritated by Reeve just because she had her hair in a pony tail, or asked the waiter too many questions, or was dressed too casually makes me think he was extremely possessive and controlling, and maybe in Reeva he finally found someone who tried to stand up to him, rather than the more submissive teenagers he dated before her. I can totally see someone who is that possessive and controlling killing someone in the heat of the moment. I never said everyone with those character traits is a murderer, but unless you've personally been with someone whose standards are so rigid and exact that you can never live up to them, you wouldn't know what they're capable of when pushed.

I appreciate her mother's comments haven't been presented as evidence, but nevertheless, it shows not all was perfect in loversville, and I'm looking forward to the ex's testimony, the one Reeva had coffee with that was interrupted by OP calling her twice.

 

[Really?]

And for those who think that Reeva would have automatically screamed when the first bullet entered and broke her hip, that's not necessarily so. I witnessed my husband falling and breaking his left leg. He immediately went into shock and said not a word, although he was in agony. (He's fine now, thanks, after surgery.)

Someone remarked earlier that although OP said he felt vulnerable without his legs, that what he really felt was power with his legs. I've not been legless, but I imagine he felt normal with his legs- and vulnerable without them.

He has had those legs...or lack of legs since he was 11 1/2 yrs old....hardly a handicap as far as I am concerned...he is fast on those stumps...that is all he ever knew...moo

In his BH affidavit...if I recall.....first mention of stumps is " I have mobilty".
The second time (I think the next paragraph) he refers to his condition as having "limited mobility"......then....as his story escalates before the killing he refers to his condition as that of being " extremely vulnerable".

Which one is it OP ?.....really.

 

[gajonka]

Very good points. Absolutely, there is no proof that Reeva screamed after the first shot. If the first set of bangs at 3:08 -3:10 were the gunshots (and I dont see how any other scenario is possible), then no one heard screams during the shots. The only witness who heard the actual gunshots was Dr Stipp and he testified that he did not hear voices or screaming until after the shots.

And even if Reeva did scream, it's more than likely that Oscar would not have heard it because he would have been deafened by the loud explosion of the first gunshot in a small enclosed space.

Def a team Roux view, Any clue on the remaining prosecution witnesses? WARREN? DETECTIVE?


They have to bring the EX bf in - this is the time - time to expose (if it exists) if reeva did indeed consider terminating the relationship - or if she was less than pleased abt future plans... hoping they don't drop the ball on this... ugh... we get enough short justice over here in the states... (see raven abaroa debacle).

Hoping...

 

[Really?]

Hi all,

Long time reader, first time poster.

From my very amateur perspective, I agree with posters like minor 4th that none of the evidence yet presented is really inconsistent with OPs version of events. However, I'm not sure that will prevent a murder conviction. On the contrary, I think the case is extraordinarily strong. Let's take a look.

1. OP fired through the door into the bathroom. This is beyond reasonable doubt.

2. OP was aware there was a person on the other side of the door. also beyond doubt.

3. OPs intention was to kill the person on the other side of the door.. This is important for premeditation. I think this is also beyond doubt. He fired 4 times using particularly deadly ammunition.

4. The person on the other side of the door posed absolutely no threat to OP.

5. The person on the other side of the door was killed. OP wanted to kill the person on the other side of the door, and he did so.

That's a pretty strong case for murder right there. The only thing missing is motive, and it's not clear to me that the prosecution needs to prove motive beyond reasonable doubt in order to prove premeditated murder. But let's look at motive.

Prosecution: OP was angry with the person on the other side of the door. evidence for this motive is quite weak. It seems to be based solely on the neighbours hearing screaming and arguing. Much of which can be explained away. Evidence against this is that there is no history of problems in the relationship or any trigger for such anger. That said, establishing such a motive is extremely difficult in the context of a romantic relationship.

Defence: OP was afraid of the person on the other side of the door. evidence for this is pretty weak too. It's based on a history of flipping out about intruders. Evidence against this is the fact that the person on the other side of the door posed absolutely no threat. That said, establishing such a defence is also very difficult, as there is absolutely no evidence to support that it was reasonable to be afraid of the person on the other side of the door, beyond paranoia.

So, I wonder if it is possible that the judge will find OP guilty of premeditated murder, which acknowledging that he may immediately regretted the act when he realised who was on the other side of the door.

wooooo hoooooo...:wagon: thanks for joining in on the discussion here. !!!!

 

[Trooper]

Maybe that's what happened, but the state has not presented any evidence of this

the state has given evidence of a woman screaming.. at exactly the same time as Reeva was shot.. evidence of the location of that scream..

it would be a loooooooong stretch to then conclude that various women all over that estate were screaming for no reason at 3.15 am ..

Even Oscar hasn't propositioned this. his story is, he heard up to the faint sound of a noise in the bathroom.

if , indeed, there were OTHER women screaming. a whole chorus of them. all with the same fear and panic as testified to by Mrs Burger, and Dr Stipp then wouldn't that have woken Oscar up as well?


to claim the State has given no evidence of a woman screaming is a distortion of fact. It has. two witnesses.. not counting the one witness who heard loud argument between a man and a woman an hour before the shots...

 

[Dr Mattus]

Minor, even if his account of hearing an intruder is dreamed to be true, SA law would still allow the judge to find him guilty of a type of manslaughter.

Could it not still be murder if the judge accepts that OP did * not know the intruder was his girlfriend? Culpable homicide (which seems to be the SA equiv of manslaughter) seems to be applicable to cases where someone was driving drunk or something equally as stupid but not actually setting out to kill someone.

Yet here there is no question that OP was trying to kill someone. It's just not established that he knew who he was killing.

 

[MeeBee]

I doubt it. Blood doesn't congeal the moment the heart stops: it will continue to drip from a wound.

Yes I see what you mean, but I think it will go against him. Especially the restaurant incident when he asked someone else to take the blame. Is he going to make his friend and ex girlfriend out to be liars re the charge of shooting out of the sun roof of the car?
I remember reading an article, I think it was by a sports writer, where during an interview OP stated that the only time he feels vulnerable is at night in bed without his prosthetics. I have searched for the article but I can't find it. Then there is the time he heard a noise and drew his gun, and it turned out to be the tumble dryer. Also his ex girlfriend testified that more than once he had wakened her up and went searching with his gun after he heard a noise. This type of evidence could be used by the defence to give credence to OP's feelings of vulnerability at night without legs.

Absolutely. He has a well documented paranoia and intense fear of being robbed or killed. Maybe this does, subconsciously, stem from his not having legs and not being in a position to defend himself of something were to happen to him and he didn't have his legs on. Maybe this paranoia stretches into his personal life and relationships, thus the fits of rage and anger. This is definitely why I am on the fence about his story. He always seemed on edge. This makes his out there story about thinking it was an intruder seem plausible. People in their totally right mind don't wake their SOs up every night asking them if they hear an intruder in the house at every noise.