Trial Discussion Thread #10 - 14.03.19, Day 13

[minor4th]

Do you not remember Reeva's own mother saying that Reeva had told her she and OP 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.

Whatever Reeva's mother has said in media reports is not evidence in this trial. I'm talking about what the state has actually presented as evidence. Sure, one can imagine that he was possessive and controlling and could get worked up in a rage and kill his girlfriend - but being able to imagine it is not proof, kwim?

 

[Viper]

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.

If he felt so deeply vulnerable, why didn't he retreat to safety? And why on earth would a vulnerable double amputee go charging toward what he believed was an armed intruder intending on killing him and his girlfriend? :facepalm:

 

[minor4th]

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...

Not sure that they can bring in people to talk about what Reeva said or what Reeva felt - because that would be hearsay and speculation.

Who's Warren? I don't remember that name. Really don't know who next witnesses will be but if I'm guessing, I'd say more info on the ipad history and data -- and I really don't know what else.

 

[soozieqtips]

Not sure that they can bring in people to talk about what Reeva said or what Reeva felt - because that would be hearsay and speculation.

Who's Warren? I don't remember that name. Really don't know who next witnesses will be but if I'm guessing, I'd say more info on the ipad history and data -- and I really don't know what else.

Warren is the ex-boyfriend who Reeva had coffee with the day before she was killed. OP called her twice during this time.

I appreciate what you said about anything said to Mrs Steenkamp by Reeva has not been presented as evidence. I actually edited my post straight after to reflect that. I was just pointing out that not all was as lovey dovey as OP had made out it was.

 

[MeeBee]

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.

My thought minor is that he is so fearful of intruders that this time was different. He didn't just think he heard someone, he did hear someone in there rustling around and just went to full on, irrational panic mode. He zeroed in on the intruder he'd always feared and wasn't thinking rationally and, in his mind, thought Reeva was still in bed because he was just talking to her.

It makes sense that Reeva stirred awake and went to use the bathroom. Whenever I wake in the night I always have to get up to use the restroom because it's been hours since I've used the restroom and my body has been holding it.

 

[minor4th]

Warren is the ex-boyfriend who Reeva had coffee with the day before she was killed. OP called her twice during this time.

I appreciate what you said about anything said to Mrs Steenkamp by Reeva has not been presented as evidence. I actually edited my post straight after to reflect that. I was just pointing out that not all was as lovey dovey as OP had made out it was.

Maybe, and maybe not. Reeva's mother's statements about what Reeva said and thought may or may not be true - it's my understanding Oscar had never met Reeva's parents and even Reeva had not seen them since well before she started dating Oscar. I do not believe they had a very close relationship - but I'm basing this on media reports also.

 

[minor4th]

My thought minor is that he is so fearful of intruders that this time was different. He didn't just think he heard someone, he did hear someone in there rustling around and just went to full on, irrational panic mode. He zeroed in on the intruder he'd always feared and wasn't thinking rationally and, in his mind, thought Reeva was still in bed because he was just talking to her.

It makes sense that Reeva stirred awake and went to use the bathroom. Whenever I wake in the night I always have to get up to use the restroom because it's been hours since I've used the restroom and my body has been holding it.

I agree this is a plausible scenario - which coincides with his version. It's believable only because of his documented history and extreme fear of and hyper-sensitivity to possible intruders

 

[Viper]

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.

Why would you post that there is no proof of her screaming after the first shot? Didn't an expert testify to the first shot hitting her hip and another testify that screaming in this incident would not be entirely voluntary, it would be automatic?

And why are the first set bangs from the gun? I have not heard that evidence at all.

Respectfully I am having a hard time following you on this.

 

[nastasya]

I thought that perhaps he had said to her It's hot in here, I'll bring in the fans to blow directly over us. While he was doing that, she went to the loo. When he shouted, Call the cops, there's someone in here! She, not wanting to call attention to herself, locked the door and remained silent. She heard him shouting, Get out of my house! and didn't realize he was shouting at the 'intruder' in the loo.

You've summarized very well what might be the worst and most ridiculous alibi in the history of murder trials.

• Man wakes up
• Tells woman he's sleeping with it's hot in here
• Goes to get fans
• Man hears somebody in the bathroom
• Man gets gun and goes into the bathroom
• Man sees nobody in the bathroom but hears somebody in the toilet
• Man kills shoots four times killing person in the toilet
• Only then does it "dawn" on the man that person in the toilet is woman he was sharing a bedroom with who got up to use the bathroom

But it gets even more ridiculous...

• Man realizes he killed woman who was sharing the bedroom with him.
• Man doesn't call police.
• Security calls, and man tells security everything is fine.
• Only when security arrives at his house and sees the dead body, does man's friend tell security to call police.
• Man is arrested for murder.
• Witnesses testify to hearing woman screaming.
• Witnesses testify to hearing man and woman's voices.
• Witnesses testify to hearing argument between man and woman.
• Witnesses testify to hearing gunshots, then silence.
• Man's defense is he screamed like a woman.
• Man's defense is that witnesses did not hear gun shots.
• Man's defense is that he felt vulnerable holding a 9 mm gun loaded with black talon ammo

The killing was not accidental or unintentional. OP shot to kill.

OP claiming he did not even think of the possibility that the woman sharing his bed might have gone to the bathroom while he went on the deck is not reasonable.

 

[gajonka]

You've summarized very well what might be the worst and most ridiculous alibi in the history of murder trials.


The killing was not accidental or unintentional. OP shot to kill.


///clipped, (respect)

I'll drink to that... if I drank... (cough)

 

[Val1]

Not sure that they can bring in people to talk about what Reeva said or what Reeva felt - because that would be hearsay and speculation.

Who's Warren? I don't remember that name. Really don't know who next witnesses will be but if I'm guessing, I'd say more info on the ipad history and data -- and I really don't know what else.

Perhaps that is what the cell phone expert will be testifying to, texts between the ex and RS the day before/of the murder?

 

[Viper]

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.

Enjoyed your post very much, thanks!

Lots of murders that now regret their crimes are wasting away in prisons all over the world. Hopefully OP will be meeting some of them very soon!

 

[LemonMousse]

See, I'm torn. If I look at this from a "presumed innocent, prosecution bears burden of proof" court room perspective, then I agree 100% with everything Minor4th is saying because s/he is completely right. What most people do is not evidence of what Reeva or OP did in that particular set of circumstances - whether it's screaming when shot or hitting the panic button. And we can't consider evidence of controlling, nasty, violent behaviour that we've read about in the papers unless it gets put before the court. If hasn't been yet.

But if I take a step back and look at his narrative in the light of my everyday experience if the world, then I really, really don't believe him. Just don't.

So I sort of agree with everybody.

I suspect that he'll be found not guilty of pre-meditation and cop for culpable homicide instead. And I also suspect that M'Lady will sentence him very harshly for what he's done - 10 years plus. And I hope he does every minute of it.

 

[Rumpole]

One thing that I would NOT bet on is Nel finishing early next week as he has undertaken to do. In fact, I may well take a punt on him still being there asking for an early tea break next Friday.
But we'll see......

I have seen before the formality after the Prosecution rests, of the Defense asking the Judge to dismiss the charges because the State has not proven it's case. It has never happened in my experience, but I do wonder if it will this time?

I realize that something BIG could come from Nel's last 5 witnesses, so would not make a firm prediction, but as things stand, I wonder if OP will testify at all? I see little point in that having seen the State case. OP's version of events is in evidence via opening affidavit read to the Court, and prior statements. Roux has plenty to present with experts to refute some points.

 

[minor4th]

Why would you post that there is no proof of her screaming after the first shot? Didn't an expert testify to the first shot hitting her hip and another testify that screaming in this incident would not be entirely voluntary, it would be automatic?

And why are the first set bangs from the gun? I have not heard that evidence at all.

Respectfully I am having a hard time following you on this.

I'll see if I can lay it out more fully:

State and defense both agree that there were 4 gunshots and there was also a cricket bat breaking the door - at least a couple of whacks. There seems to be no dispute that some time elapsed between these two events.

A. Stipp - Dr Stipp heard two sets of bangs - one at ~ 3:10 a.m. (3 or 4), which woke him up. He then heard screaming/yelling, but that did not start until after the bangs at 3:10.

After the first bangs at 3:10, followed by screaming/yelling, Stipp then heard a second set of "2 or 3" bangs at 3:17 a.m.

B. Burger and Johnson - Burger and Johnson were awoken by screaming (some time before 3:17);

They then heard loud bangs at 3:17 (coinciding perfectly with the SECOND set of bangs heard by Stipp.)

C. Vermuelen -State's witness - Forensic evidence shows that the 4 gunshots were before the cricket bat striking the door

D. Ballistics Guy - State's witness - Oscar was on his stumps when he fired the gunshots and was standing more than 60 cm away from the door (consistent with OP's version)

If you consider all of that together, then the only way to reconcile is:


1. The gunshots happened at 3:10

2. The cricket bat breaking the door happened at 3:17 but sounded like gunshots to all who heard them.

3. Screaming was not heard by anyone until after the gunshots at 3:10

4. Reeva was incapacitated by the gunshots at 3:10 and could not have been screaming thereafter

5. Any screaming/crying/yelling heard after 3:10 must have been Oscar, including screaming during and after he was breaking the door with the cricket bat.

I don't see any other way to put these testimonies in context unless you disregard the state's own forensic witnesses and also disregard Stipp's account of hearing 2 sets of bangs.

 

[Cherwell]

Not sure that they can bring in people to talk about what Reeva said or what Reeva felt - because that would be hearsay and speculation.

If it's true that OP made several phone calls during RS's meeting with Warren, he could give evidence regarding her reactions.

 

[Trooper]

there is .. and there has to be, in law, in South Africa, a reason, solid and provable and enough to bring to trial in the expectation of winning the case, that Oscar knew who he was firing at . Which is why he is charged with the premeditated murder of Reeva Steenkamp and not charged with the murder of an unknown and subsequently imaginary intruder.


That is the States case against Oscar.. not that he had an argument with her, was provoked, was mistaken, was in terror and feeling vulnerable., was mistaken, or was defending himself.

The State case Oscar is indicted of is his deliberate arming of himself ( with illegal bullets , an additional charge) with the gun, advancing on Reeva locked , or not locked behind the toilet door, firing the first shot to kill, the second shot to kill , the third shot to kill and the fourth shot to kill while of sound mind and in full possession of his faculties and in a state of deliberation and intent knowing it was Reeva Steenkamp behind that door.

that, in essence is the States case.

Oscars defence is that he mistook her for an intruder..

the judgement, the trial itself is about 4 bullets , the order those bullets were fired in, and the probability and possibiilty of his mistaking her for an intruder. and was that possibility a reasonable conclusion for Oscar to arrive at.

The State says no.. he knew it was Reeva, he fired and fired and fired and fired at Reeva all aware it was no intruder, but the person of Reeva Steenkamp

..Oscar says yes, he fired and fired and fired and fired at an intruder , he kept on firing still believing it was an intruder. and not knowing it was Reeva, up to and including the fourth shot.

 

[Trooper]

Why would you post that there is no proof of her screaming after the first shot? Didn't an expert testify to the first shot hitting her hip and another testify that screaming in this incident would not be entirely voluntary, it would be automatic?

And why are the first set bangs from the gun? I have not heard that evidence at all.

Respectfully I am having a hard time following you on this.

It is hard to follow because it is a distortion of the evidence so far testified to.

the motive for the distortion?? ( shrug) .. beats me!

 

[seattlechiquita]

Money....that is what is on OP's side......money

Nope. What's in OP's mind is himself. First, second, and always.

 

[minor4th]

If it's true that OP made several phone calls during RS's meeting with Warren, he could give evidence regarding her reactions.

He could report what he observed - e.g. Reeva started crying, Reeva slammed the phone down and went silent, etc.