Trial Discussion Thread #11 weekend thread

[sorrell skye]

So then Reeva never screamed at all? She gets shot in the hip that completely destroys her hip and she stays silent during that? I find that completely unreasonable. How also did one of the witnesses hear a male and female voice intermingled? Did OP go from his regular scream/yell to falsetto and then back again?

This seems like doing mental acrobats to make those fit, IMO. OP's story is just that, a story IMO. He is after all on trial and is trying to put forth a defense that will help him walk.

MOO

BBM

Dr. Stipp is the one who testified to hearing a woman & a man's voices intermingled. Dr. Stipp lives very close to OP's house - he can see OP's bathroom & toilet room windows from his bedroom balcony.

I believe Dr. Stipp.

 

[minor4th]

BBM

Okay - thanks. I appreciate your answer.

I was just curious as to why you had posed the question of what Dr. Stipp heard at 3:08 a.m. since Dr. Stipp has never stated that he heard the sound of gunshots & a woman screaming at the specific time of 3:08 a.m.

So the 3:08 a.m. time comes from a media article (gosh - haven't those all been scrupulously accurate - NOT) about this Christo M. fellow.

Regarding the bolded bit: that's been my point all along. No precise times were stated as to when the witnesses heard what they heard.

Yet, throughout the discussion about when the various witnesses heard what they heard, it's been put forth that exact times have been reported, ergo the implication is that the earwitnesses must all be mistaken or lying or biased or what-have-you because Roux says so.

The fact of the matter is: the times that the earwitnesses heard what they heard falls within a range of about 10-15 minutes or so.

As far as I'm concerned, Roux has done a good job of muddying the waters.

The good thing is that My Lady will have access to all the official court transcripts and all the exhibits. She'll be able to go over them with a fine-toothed comb.

That reminds me of another cool thing I learned about SA law. When the judge gives a decision they have to do so in writing with justification. They have to comment on every witness and what they accept and what they reject and why. It will very interesting at the end of all this to see what the judge writes about the different witnesses.

From the cases I've read, the judges do pay very, very close attention to witness testimony and discrepancies and issues that affect credibility.

 

[minor4th]

BBM

Dr. Stipp is the one who testified to hearing a woman & a man's voices intermingled. Dr. Stipp lives very close to OP's house - he can see OP's bathroom & toilet room window from his bedroom balcony.

I believe Dr. Stipp.

Well, I believe Dr Stipp for the most part but I do think his account has been influenced by media and by his knowledge of the State's case.

In his first to written statements to police, he said nothing at all about a man and woman's voices being intermingled. He said only that he heard a woman scream and then he heard Oscar call help help help after the shots.

 

[minor4th]

I think there are pros and cons to both systems. Having someone already knowledgable of the law and who doesn't need to be pandered to or have their opinions protected from prejudices does seem to have its advantages.

I don't particularly like the jury system because it is so unpredictable.

 

[Trooper]

No posters here are not saying that. How did you come to that conclusion, trooper? Why would anyone say that?

It is not in evidence already. But it is his story as already reported. Unless he decides to change his mind then it stands to reason that this is what he will say on the stand because according to the interview this is what he hear.

perhaps, then, its time to drop the reference as to Menelou and his 'reported' remark.. as a verified and testified witness..Until and unless he does exactly that.

Transposing this 3.08 stuff into what other witnesses stated is obfuscatorial.





as of now. the 3.08 that is constantly referred to as a given fact is merely a supposition, and its use as a tool to distort the witnesses who have already gone to the trouble of doing what Menelou has not, is a furphy, a herring as red as all get out and a waste of everyones time.

 

[MeeBee]

perhaps, then, its time to drop the reference as to Menelou and his 'reported' remark.. as a verified and testified witness..Until and unless he does exactly that.

Transposing this 3.08 stuff into what other witnesses stated is obfuscatorial.





as of now. the 3.08 that is constantly referred to as a given fact is merely a supposition, and its use as a tool to distort the witnesses who have already gone to the trouble of doing what Menelou has not, is a furphy, a herring as red as all get out and a waste of everyones time.

Fair enough.

 

[Val1]

Burgers woke up to screams - they only heard the second set of loud bangs

And... the second set of loud bangs ended the screaming... I don't know how much simpler that can be, unless you think the bat banging stopped the screams?

 

[Rumpole]

I think there are pros and cons to both systems. Having someone already knowledgable of the law and who doesn't need to be pandered to or have their opinions protected from prejudices does seem to have its advantages.

Just the circus around jury selection and sequestration etc is enough to put me off. And the "after match" interviews of jurors sometimes make me shudder.

I have opined before about a system of Professional Jurors. Selected to have a level of intelligence (not necessarily book-learning) and skills in English comprehension and logical thought. A large "Army" of jurors given training and forming a "Reserve" along the lines of Military reserves.
If and when they are called to duty... pay them EXTREMELY well to mitigate any personal financial negatives from serving. I think the economics will still work out to be favorable....far cheaper since sequestration and retrial will be less likely.

 

[Rumpole]

And... the second set of loud bangs ended the screaming... I don't know how much simpler that can be, unless you think the bat banging stopped the screams?

Oscar stopped screaming and shouting at that point. The next minute(s) he was busy dragging Reeva from toilet to the bathroom and trying to give aid. Then making phone calls etc. There WERE no loud noises or screams after he broke the door down at 3:17... exactly what the burger(s) heard.

 

[minor4th]

So what did the Stipps hear around 3:10 a.m. if it wasn't gunshots and it wasn't the cricket bat?

 

[Val1]

So what did the Stipps hear around 3:10 a.m. if it wasn't gunshots and it wasn't the cricket bat?

I can only surmise that it could have been that metal plate getting bashed in... or a warning shot, if it comes to light that there is a missing 5th cartridge or it is proven this week that the airgun had been recently fired.

 

[Trooper]

And... the second set of loud bangs ended the screaming... I don't know how much simpler that can be, unless you think the bat banging stopped the screams?

hard to give credibility to the concept that Reeva lived to scream after a black talon bullet thru the head, and out the other side of her head, all the time Oscar was running back for his legs, turning the light on, scrabbling around for the cricket bat and running back to the toilet door.. I'm with you Val. that scenario doesn't work.

 

[Trooper]

then again.. according to Oscar. she didn't scream at all.

if she had, he would have known who was behind the door.


then he wouldn't have had to plug her with 3 more bullets. Because he'd know then just exactly who he was firing at.

and then he wouldn't be on trial for murder.

and then he wouldn't have to sell his house, and all that stuff.

reading Oscars two statements, Reeva never said a word , scream, howl, whatever after 10pm

he makes a weird little addition in his 2nd statement that he spoke to her .. but. maybe he was influenced by press reports , the media, etc, at that point..

 

[Rumpole]

I can only surmise that it could have been that metal plate getting bashed in... or a warning shot, if it comes to light that there is a missing 5th cartridge or it is proven this week that the airgun had been recently fired.

If I HAVE to guess what caused the dent in the plate below bath.. I would say somebody threw the "plank" (panel from door) from toilet and it hit the plate... once.
Certainly THAT explanation could be easily "put to M'Lady"... even Roux's one-eyed pet cat, could propose that as a reasonable explanation... and that is all the Defence need do (if anything)
IF the State elaborate on the dented panel at all... which they have not.

Photo showing plank corner near dented bath panel

Photo showing close-up of damaged steel panel

 

[sorrell skye]

Please note that the 3:08 a.m. timeframe is hearsay and has NOT been entered as evidence, nor has ANY witness testified, thus far, to hearing anything specifically at 3:08 a.m.

If Christo Menelaou will testify, he says he was woken at 03.08 and heard what he believed was the sound of three thunder claps. (I think this would have beeen cricket bat) because if the thunder claps were the shots then it would mean the shots (the first being the one that woke him) were fired at 03.08 and not at 3.17am as everyone keeps stating. So it had to be bat. This guy lives next door facing bathroom window!

This is one more bit of evidence that supports Oscar's version that the sounds at 3:08 were gunshots that were heard by 3 people that we are now aware of - Dr and Mrs. Stipp and Menelaou.

If everyone agrees that there were 2 sets of loud bangs, and we know that the gunshots happened before the cricket bat hitting the door - the the only logical inference with the evidence we have is that the earlier sounds at 3:08 were the gunshots and the sounds at 3:17 were the sounds of the cricket bat hitting the door.

No one has made any allegation that there were any other sounds or activities that could have caused very loud gunshot-like sounds, besides the actual gunshots and the cricket bat hitting the door.

You guys are twisting yourselves in all kinds of knots in order to try to get around the evidence that has been presented re: gunshot sounds and cricket bat sounds and their sequence

Not damning for reasons I have explained over and over and over about

1) One set of loud bangs heard by three people at 3:08;

2) loud screaming heard by all witnesses (after first loud bangs)

3) another set of loud bangs at 3:17 heard by additional witnesses as well as those who heard the first bangs;

4) Ms. Burger's changed testimony, (originally said she heard "2 to 3" shots, not 4)

5) state confirmation that gunshots were before cricket bat.

6) No allegation or evidence that there were any loud bangs heard by any witness besides gunshots and cricket bat hitting door.

To come up with any theory other than the gunshots were at 3:08 and the cricket bat hitting the door was at 3:17 -- you have to add in additional speculation about additional bangs that sounded like gunshots and also believe that no one heard the cricket bat hitting the door.

I suggest that is twisting oneself in knots to try to avoid the actual evidence that has been presented.

Then what did Mr and Mrs Stipp and Christo M. hear at 3:08?

But the screams and the times of the sounds heard by the witnesses do match up exactly:

--Gunshots at 3:08 heard by the Stipps and Cristo M. (who will likely be called by defense?)

-- Loud screaming heard by all witnesses, including the Stipps

-- Loud bangs heard at 3:17 by all witnesses. Had to have been cricket bat sounds if the only two sounds were cricket bat and gunshots and the gunshots were before the cricket bat

-- Silence followed by Oscar crying or screaming loudly

I'd still like to know what people think the Stipps and this Christo guy heard at 3:08 (give or take since clocks are not all synched) if it wasn't gunshots

perhaps, then, its time to drop the reference as to Menelou and his 'reported' remark.. as a verified and testified witness..Until and unless he does exactly that.

Transposing this 3.08 stuff into what other witnesses stated is obfuscatorial.


as of now. the 3.08 that is constantly referred to as a given fact is merely a supposition, and its use as a tool to distort the witnesses who have already gone to the trouble of doing what Menelou has not, is a furphy, a herring as red as all get out and a waste of everyones time.

BBM

See above for a loose discussion timeline of where the unverified 3:08 timestamp came into being, and how it progressed as if it were fact - which it is NOT.

Trooper - I agree about transposing hearsay statements from media articles into witnesses' testimony. It's not accurate and only causes confusion.

Regarding the bolded bits in the above quotes: what's that about twisting oneself into knots? I agree that a knot has been twisted, but as far as I'm concerned, it has only been in relation to the 3:08 timeframe that was introduced as if it were a fact, when it is pure hearsay and has not been entered into evidence at this time.

I'm glad I looked up the timelines so that the knot could be untangled. Phew!

 

[Val1]

If I HAVE to guess what caused the dent in the plate below bath.. I would say somebody threw the "plank" (panel from door) from toilet and it hit the plate... once.
Certainly THAT explanation could be easily "put to M'Lady"... even Roux's one-eyed pet cat, could propose that as a reasonable explanation... and that is all the Defence need do (if anything)
IF the State elaborate on the dented panel at all... which they have not.

Photo showing plank corner near dented bath panel

Photo showing close-up of damaged steel panel

What's it made out of, aluminum foil? lol....

 

[Trooper]

Its hard for me to think what Oscar told the net care people when he rang them. ( if he rang them ) ..

by the time he says he rang them, he has broken down the door with the bat, he sees what he has shot at with the black talons.

the ballistics man, and the autopsy man went into detail about this. So I don't have to do it again.

But I picture Oscar looking at this utter slaughter, there are pieces of her head shot off , there are chunks of her head blown away..

and .. whatever he tells netcare ( a private health org, paid for with subscription) .. on the basis of their advice. whatever it was, he drags her out, , runs downstairs and starts the car, opening the back and front doors, runs back up, drags her out to the landing, and hauls her up and carries her downstairs.

he says this was the advice net care gave him.

I'm so curious to know what he told them that made them give this insane advice.

what ever he told them, they didn't send an ambulance.. no one rang for one until Standar delegated Baba to do so. Baba or Jacob. Oscar didn't. Standar didn't, Clarice didn't.

Stipp asked if it had been done, he was given the wrong info. Standar said he did, but Baba says Standar told him to do it.

 

[Rumpole]

What's it made out of, aluminum foil? lol....

very thin stainless steel would be my guess.

Looks like poor design to me. It would dent easily.

Which brings me to another point. Just because something is shown in a photo it does not mean that it is relevant to the night in question.
Holes in doors, cracks, broken windows, and even fly-spots? on walls might well have been there prior to the incident.

Just had a thought... in this case we can not rule out the Keystone Kops causing damage after the event.

We KNOW there was a great big Police boot print on the "plank" maybe a cop moved it vigorously and hit the bath panel, of kicked it against the bath panel as well as stood on it. Who knows?

 

[nastasya]

His complete version hasn't yet been told so saying it is simple and stupid is irrational. No disrespect

OP submitted an affidavit and had his lawyer read a statement in court describing his version of events.

It's simple.

He went outside while Reeva went to pee.
He heard a noise in the bathroom.
He grabbed a gun.
Her heard somebody in the toilet stall.
He shot Reeve through the toilet door.

OP effectively sentenced Reeva to death for committing the crime of going to pee in the middle of the night.

That's stupid. It would be irrational to think otherwise.

 

[nastasya]

Opinions and beliefs are fine, but to question justice at this stage is the very antithesis of justice. The use of the word justice implies fairness (amongst many other moral things). We're not even halfway through the trial, and the accused has not even had a chance to speak yet.

The accused has had over a year to speak. He's submitted an affidavit and a statement to the court explaining why he put three bullets into his girlfriend who got up to pee in the middle of the night.

It's the victim that hasn't had a chance to speak, except, presumably, her final screams of terror.