Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[MeeBee]

I do not think that a person who truly believes there is an intruder in their home uses a check list (while in a state of panic) to tick off reasons why it may not be an intruder. I would never think along the lines of "The dogs did not bark so it can't be an intruder". "The ladders are too short so it can't be an intruder". I would have trouble thinking at all in that situation. If he had left Reeva in bed just moments before hand and did not see or hear her getting up, in his mind he did not need to check her whereabouts. Of course he still broke the law even if his version is true.

Exactly.

 

[zwiebel]

I appreciate you are only considering whether he saw the ladder but can you imagine the noise that would have been created putting the ladder together and leaning it against the bathroom wall of the house. If he can hear a window being slid open, he would have thought his "castle" was being stormed. LOL

I was thinking more in terms of if, when he went on the balcony to pull the fans in, he should have been able to see that intruders had not put it up to the bathroom window but it was still laying safely in the garden.

Although of course, wherever it was, OP could say he did not see it, I suppose. I am still not totally convinced OP himself did not use that ladder to climb into the locked bedroom perhaps. I don't suppose it was fingerprinted though.

I just cannot find a picture of the ladder. If anyone finds one, can you please point me in the right direction?

 

[steveml]

BBM - I didn't mean specifically here. The Guardian for example has been portraying OP and Amanda Knox as victims whenever it gets the chance, and I'm pretty sure if the 'victims' weren't well known, that the coverage would be much less and not as biased. With Amanda Knox, the paper even published a defence against their support of Knox when people began to complain that the real victim had been forgotten (not unlike Reeva).

No probs. I know what you mean regarding the the stance taken by many media outlets. We expect news to be information with an unbiased opinion, although many frequently cross the line between providing information and pursuing their own agenda. It's particularly sickening when it's regarding sensitive issues such as the current one and the one you mention above.

 

[steveml]

I have been following the trial only on twitter, so I was not able to see/hear this incident. What was your impression of OP in that moment: was he scared, when the voices from iPad gave out? Perhaps he recognized the dispute because he was involved??

Unfortunately the camera shot at the time was from the side, and then from behind Nel, so I was unable to see OP's reaction. The coverage angle seems to change quite often on the feed that I watch. Some days the camera position has OP in view for most of the days session, and other days it seems to focus more to the left. We do have the odd moment when there's nothing too exciting happening so the cameraman decides to pan very slowly across the faces of the people sat nearer the back.

 

[zwiebel]

Interesting photo of the contents of OP's bedside table, taken in 2010. Watch, keys, phone, TV remote and gun. Also his shoe on the same side of the bed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-The-gun-Blade-Runner-kept-bed-pictured.html

 

[weeeva]

He should have stated what happened immediately, and not been allowed several days to get his rubbish story together. Yep. He needed a reason to be outside so that he didn't see or hear Reeva allegedly go to the toilet. I feel that his celebrity status has thrown some people off guard, and they don't want to believe he's capable of killing someone in a fit of anger. But if he'd been Mr Nobody down the street, he wouldn't be afforded the same support.

I don't know that he is getting a lot of support. I have yet to meet anyone who is supporting him. Why would he walk downstairs with Reeva knowing that she was still alive and may live to tell the tale? According to the blood spatter expert witness the blood on the ground floor level beside the stairs came from a bleeding artery, so Reeva's heart was still beating at that point. I couldn't care less that OP is a celebrity or some kind of sporting hero, I had never heard of him prior to this incident. In fact he seems to be quite obnoxious really, but IMO that does not mean he should not have a fair trial.

 

[steveml]

I am still wondering about that because I am sure it wasn't a human voice - it was one of those strange robotic ones. I don't think he did it on purpose - he looked dumbfounded!

That very fact is the bit that isn't making sense when we look at Nel's response. What I heard was what appeared to be an automated (robotic) voice of an American lady, or similar. Whatever it was it certainly didn't sound anything like an argument.

Why on earth did Nel explain that it was 'a recording of an argument unrelated to the case', I wonder?

If we look back at the situation, the iPad starts chattering, the court laugh, Nel looks flustered...and then his response should be something like 'I'm so sorry M'Lady, that shouldn't have happened, or 'I'm so sorry M'Lady, I don't know how to switch the iPad off. But, he doesn't. Instead he explains out loud 'it was a recording of an argument unrelated to the case'.
Neither the judge, Roux or anybody else asked Nel who the voice on the iPad was, or what the playback was about. Nel volunteered this statement out of the blue.

Attorneys very very rarely volunteer information that hasn't been requested, unless there's a very good reason for them to do so.

 

[Cherwell]

I don't know that he is getting a lot of support. I have yet to meet anyone who is supporting him. Why would he walk downstairs with Reeva knowing that she was still alive and may live to tell the tale? According to the blood spatter expert witness the blood on the ground floor level beside the stairs came from a bleeding artery, so Reeva's heart was still beating at that point.

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

 

[james83]

Guys regarding Nel's ipad malfunction
Nel's says "sorry it was an arguement i wanted to argue now", then talks about wanting the trial adjourned until monday.
The ipad had read out a note he had made about asking for the adjournment.

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

OP's own affidavit describes premeditated murder:

1. OP is standing in front of bedroom door that exits the house onto the deck.
2. OP hears a window open in another room.
3. OP gets a gun.
4. OP moves out of room that has 2 doors from which he could exit.
5. OP moves through hallway towards person in bathroom.
6. OP walks into center of bathroom in vulnerable position.
7. OP does not see intruder. OP hears person making sounds in toilet.
8. OP sprays four black talon bullets through toilet door.

That entire sequence of events is, by law, the definition of premeditated murder.

It wasn't an accident. He didn't accidentally discharge the gun four times. He didn't intentionally discharge the gun four times not knowing there was a person in his line of fire.

OP intentionally left a room where he was safe, and from which he could have exited, entered into a second room, and intentionally fired a gun four times at somebody who wasn't threatening him in any way.

Saying, "I thought the person I killed might threaten me..." is not a valid legal defense. If it were, every husband in the world would have legal grounds to shoot his wife whenever she used the bathroom.

Excellent post! That is why the accused cannot be convicted with culpable homicide which is unlawful negligent killing of a human being. The deceased also deserves a fair trial as well as the accused imo.
A person can be considered negligent in driving a car with alcohol or drugs and causing a death.
Is it fair to say OP was negligent and failed to foresee that death might result with 4 shots to a 1.5 mt toilet cubicle with those killing bullets in that weapon ?
A deliberate attack upon her bodily integrity was intended to harm her and that resulted in inevitable consequence which is murder.

 

[soozieqtips]

I don't know that he is getting a lot of support. I have yet to meet anyone who is supporting him. Why would he walk downstairs with Reeva knowing that she was still alive and may live to tell the tale? According to the blood spatter expert witness the blood on the ground floor level beside the stairs came from a bleeding artery, so Reeva's heart was still beating at that point. I couldn't care less that OP is a celebrity or some kind of sporting hero, I had never heard of him prior to this incident. In fact he seems to be quite obnoxious really, but IMO that does not mean he should not have a fair trial.

Her brain tissue was mingled with her hair and she was shot with bullets designed to kill, so the odds on her surviving to tell anything at all were extremely remote. As for why he was taking her downstairs in the first place, he said it was because Netcare told him to bring her to hospital. What we don't know at this time is exactly what he told Netcare about her injuries. If we find out what he said, things might start to become a little clearer.

 

[Val1]

Her brain tissue was mingled with her hair and she was shot with bullets designed to kill, so the odds on her surviving to tell anything at all were extremely remote. As for why he was taking her downstairs in the first place, he said it was because Netcare told him to bring her to hospital. What we don't know at this time is exactly what he told Netcare about her injuries. If we find out what he said, things might start to become a little clearer.

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.

 

[james83]

I actually think the most damaging and damning Testimony for Pistorius so far is one that hasn't been mentioned much, the gun licenser Sean Rens.

 

[steveml]

I know it is not an exact science but given they went to bed at 10pm, if I am to believe OP's story they would have needed to have eaten by around 9.30pm at the latest. That would give a time of around 5.5 hours post ingestion. The pathologist would know whether or not she was taking any of the drugs associated with shortened or extended emptying and I assume she was known not to have had diabetes or another illness that would shorten/extend the emptying time or we would have heard about it in the pathologist's report. To extend gastric emptying to 5.5 hours she would have to have eaten either a large meal or a very highly calorific meal. It will be interesting to hear from OP what, in fact, they did eat. I am talking here of total gastric emptying. RS still had food in her stomach.

You're probably right, however we can be fairly certain that Roux will call up his defense expert with the literature that points out all the possible anomalies, and once again we'll have probable doubt. The judge will probably have to take the word of the one with the nicest smile. Nel knows this isn't a deal-breaker, as even the experts disagree on digestion times (and certainly digestion times with an unknown quantity of food as the starting point).

 

[steveml]

Guys regarding Nel's ipad malfunction
Nel's says "sorry it was an arguement i wanted to argue now", then talks about wanting the trial adjourned until monday.
The ipad had read out a note he had made about asking for the adjournment.

Thanks for that, that one was confusing the hell out of me. Aaah...I can move on now. :facepalm:

 

[zwiebel]

He's selling the house to pay his legal costs. His 'mansion' as the press is calling it.

I thought this might happen. I think he has a two million mortgage on it? Those payments must be heavy, what with the loss of sponsorship and all.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ria-mansion-to-cover-legal-costs-9205624.html

 

[zwiebel]

He's blaming the 'unexpected extension' of his murder trial for the sale? But I thought people expected it to last months, and Nel's just said he's closing next week.

 

[steveml]

He's blaming the 'unexpected extension' of his murder trial for the sale? But I thought people expected it to last months, and Nel's just said he's closing next week.

The best thing OP can do is keep his mouth shut at the moment. Does he think the trial's just a mere inconvenience?

 

[zwiebel]

Good gosh any UK posters - they expect to sell the house for no less than £278,000. That seems really inexpensive for such a big house to me. I wonder if that is the going rate for houses like that in SA?

Oscar's lawyer says he 'cannot contemplate' ever living there again.

 

[minor4th]

I read an article yesterday that had an SA lawyer speculating about the State's case and why the adjournment and what it could mean. I will look for the link - but she gave several possibilities but the one that struck me is that it could signal that Nel is reevaluating his case and considering dismissing the charge of premeditated murder now that he's had further opportunity to evaluate his witnesses' testimony and the defense's case.

She also said it could be just as Nel said - that he would like additional time with witnesses before concluding his case.

ETA: Link

Another possibility is that Nel has found surprise evidence that he needs to evaluate!