Trial Discussion Thread #11 weekend thread

[minor4th]

I disagree that if there were audio tests that cast doubt on Oscars version that anyone would ignore it or write it off.

I for one expected some more solid evidence from the state. Something that really would make it easier to say Oscars version can't be true - but it hasn't come.

 

[Rumpole]

I disagree that if there were audio tests that cast doubt on Oscars version that anyone would ignore it or write it off.

I for one expected some more solid evidence from the state. Something that really would make it easier to say Oscars version can't be true - but it hasn't come.

I don't see how the State can prove a version of their own..... BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

They might have put forward a plausible version at odds with OP's version... but I don't see how it could dispel all reasonable doubt? I don't think they have done even that. And wont no matter what they do with last few witnesses.
As I have said before, I think they should have conceded OP's version and argued the criminality of his actions, given that he thought there was an intruder in his toilet.

 

[Suthrnqt]

Does anyone know if OP will testify?? :blushing:

 

[Trooper]

Whatever it was that comvinced the police that Oscar was a stone cold killer is right there in Van Stadens photographs.. ..

it wasn't mrs Burgars testimony or the misters, or stipps.. none of those were interviewed until some days later..

before Van Staden had completed his photographic journey thru that house, Oscar was being read his rights and arrested in the garage of his home. For murder

and the State has not resiled from that position.


so whatever it was. an article, an object, a word, a blood spatter, whatever,.. I don't know what it was, and I expect to find out, it was plain to the detectives before anyone else was interviewed.

in fact, the only person Van Rensburg had spoken with, before Oscar , and it could be called an interview, in a way was Clarice Standar..

 

[sorrell skye]

I do sincerely hope for Oscars sake, ( and I do believe that Oscar is not getting good representation, from what I have heard and seen so far.. I'm more than ready to change that view) that Roux hasn't persuaded himself that that vclip doing the rounds on the internet of the old guy plugging away with a bat, the microphone stuff is NOT the tests he presents. It made me very nervous for Oscar when he asked Vermulen to watch it, and learn from it. Vermulan 's look of disbelief was mirrored in my own.

I was quite baffled, not to mention stunned & stifling laughter (to no avail), when Roux brought up that youtube demonstration, and 'put it' to the witness, as if that ridiculous youtube video proved anything scientifically.

IDK - maybe the forensic standards aren't as high in SA. I've read that investigators/forensics labs are underfunded, there's apparently a 5 year back-logs in testing potential evidence in rape cases, etc., so perhaps OP's Defense team doesn't feel that they need to rise above what may be substandard evidence.

I'm used to following US cases and watching US trials where the forensic evidence is top-notch and state of the art.

Vermeulen looked as if he was about to burst out with a loud guffaw when Roux mentioned the youtube farce.

If Roux enters that youtube as evidence, I'll LMAO.

I doubt he will, though, because he was quick to ask for Vermeulen's credentials regarding tool marks.

One would hope that if Roux expects the State's forensic witnesses to know what they're talking about, then he would also do the same with his own Defense forensic witnesses. One would hope.

 

[Rumpole]

Does anyone know if OP will testify?? :blushing:

Nothing is certain except death and taxes... but close behind those two is..... YES OP will testify.

 

[LemonMousse]

Um, isn't it? I don't recall the defense asserting that there were more cries or shouts after the last set of bangs but I could be wrong. Everyone seems pretty consistent in that after the last set of bangs the shouts trailed off and then silence.

Erm yes. Listen to Dr Stipp.

He was on the balcony talking to security and pointing them towards OP's house when he clearly heard a man call "help, help, help". This was a few minutes after the last set of bangs.

Of course, it won't be mentioned much in this thread, because if Dr Stipp is correct, then the entire "it was a cricket bat" narrative falls apart, and OP is shown as a liar because it contradicts his affidavit. He claims he called from the balcony before bashing down the door.

Interestingly - and presumably, coincidentally because Stipp is either deluded, a liar or both - he is clear that this man's voice was coming from a different place from where the screams were coming - slightly more to the left.

OP's balcony is to the left of the bathroom, where the screams were coming from.

Whoops.

 

[sorrell skye]

I disagree that if there were audio tests that cast doubt on Oscars version that anyone would ignore it or write it off.

I for one expected some more solid evidence from the state. Something that really would make it easier to say Oscars version can't be true - but it hasn't come.

May I ask why you expected 'more solid evidence' (I'm not quite sure what that means) from the State?

At the commencement of this trial, Nel stated to Judge Masipa that the State's evidence was largely circumstantial. In my experience from following cases & trial-watching, most evidence is circumstantial.

Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone expected a 'smoking gun', as it were, based on Nel's opening statement.

IMO, the State has presented a solid case of premeditated murder with the earwitnesses' testimony, security guard Baba's testimony, firearms expert Sean Rens, and with expert forensic evidence/testimony that included both ballistics & blood spatter evidence/testimony.

 

[LemonMousse]

May I ask why you expected 'more solid evidence' (I'm not quite sure what that means) from the State?

At the commencement of this trial, Nel stated to Judge Masipa that the State's evidence was largely circumstantial. In my experience from following cases & trial-watching, most evidence is circumstantial.

Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone expected a 'smoking gun', as it were, based on Nel's opening statement.

IMO, the State has presented a solid case of premeditated murder with the earwitnesses' testimony, security guard Baba's testimony, firearms expert Sean Rens, and with expert forensic evidence/testimony that included both ballistics & blood spatter evidence/testimony.

Very true.

Nel has been massively underestimated on this thread, and Roux given points he hasn't actually scored.

His defence so far amounts to "My client screams like a woman (except when he doesn't) and nobody except my client can be trusted to actually tell the truth". He's done it with style, but that's all he's done.

And people seem to think that every piece of evidence will be weighed up and a decision made about whether it proves OP wrong "beyond a reasonable doubt". This is not what happens at all - the entire narrative will be looked at too to basically see which version of events is more believable.

I have actually changed my mind. I think the state have a good enough case to convict him.

Looking at the overall picture, it is pretty clear that OP is a guilty as sin. His story makes no sense on any level - the state's not only makes sense, it is so far consistent with all of the evidence.

Of course, it's not over until OP sings like a woman, but straw poll right now would have me convict him.

 

[MeeBee]

I disagree that if there were audio tests that cast doubt on Oscars version that anyone would ignore it or write it off.

I for one expected some more solid evidence from the state. Something that really would make it easier to say Oscars version can't be true - but it hasn't come.

I agree. If the state had presented such evidence I would totally accept it and welcome it with open arms. But the state presented no such evidence and it doesn't seem they will so it's moot.

 

[sorrell skye]

Very true.

Nel has been massively underestimated on this thread, and Roux given points he hasn't actually scored.

His defence so far amounts to "My client screams like a woman (except when he doesn't) and nobody except my client can be trusted to actually tell the truth". He's done it with style, but that's all he's done.

And people seem to think that every piece of evidence will be weighed up and a decision made about whether it proves OP wrong "beyond a reasonable doubt". This is not what happens at all - the entire narrative will be looked at too to basically see which version of events is more believable.

I have actually changed my mind. I think the state have a good enough case to convict him.

Looking at the overall picture, it is pretty clear that OP is a guilty as sin. His story makes no sense on any level - the state's not only makes sense, it is so far consistent with all of the evidence.

Of course, it's not over until OP sings like a woman, but straw poll right now would have me convict him.

BBM

As they say 'It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings', or in this case, 'til OP screams like Reeva in terror for her life'.

ITA agree about points given to Roux that he hasn't actually scored & that he's done it with style but that's all he's done.

I think Roux has done a masterful job of creating confusion, but that's what he's being paid by OP to do. He's earning his paycheck. Roux has tripped me up a few times, but when I review witness testimony I realize that the State's case makes more sense (evidence based) than Roux's version (via OP, which, thus far, does not seem to be evidence based).

Having said that, I'm still open to the Defense's CIC. I'm willing to be proven wrong, if Roux and/or Oldwage presents scientific evidence that refutes the State's CIC.

 

[MeeBee]

Erm yes. Listen to Dr Stipp.

He was on the balcony talking to security and pointing them towards OP's house when he clearly heard a man call "help, help, help". This was a few minutes after the last set of bangs.

Of course, it won't be mentioned much in this thread, because if Dr Stipp is correct, then the entire "it was a cricket bat" narrative falls apart, and OP is shown as a liar because it contradicts his affidavit. He claims he called from the balcony before bashing down the door.

Interestingly - and presumably, coincidentally because Stipp is either deluded, a liar or both - he is clear that this man's voice was coming from a different place from where the screams were coming - slightly more to the left.

OP's balcony is to the left of the bathroom, where the screams were coming from.

Whoops.

I simply didn't realize this. I'm not writing it off, I just didn't know this is what Stipp said.

 

[MeeBee]

However, his testimony doesn't mean Oscar's story falls apart does it? He is one man who heard Oscar crying help after the last set of bangs if what you're saying is true. Didn't the Burgers hear him yelling help before the last set of bangs? As if mocking Reeva? This is the problem. With so many inconsistencies, how can we be sure of who's telling the truth, who's mistaken and who's lying? I don't know why one would put more weight on one person's testimony than anyone else's. If the Burgers heard him crying help before the last set, then isn't it possible Stipp is mistaken about what he heard, and vice versa? Isn't it possible Oscar is telling the truth since the Burger's testimony lines up with his version and Stipp just mixed up the order of when he heard the bangs and when he heard the shouts for help?

 

[Trooper]

The State has presented evidence of the audio test.---> the original audio sounds , VD Mewre, Burger, Johnson and Stipp.

8 human ears that were subjected to the event, then <modsnip> stated what they heard and were x-examined on it.

 

[beach]

Monday's Trial Discussion thread is still locked but please take time to review Post #2 linked here before I open it for posting.

:tyou:

 

[sorrell skye]

Erm yes. Listen to Dr Stipp.

He was on the balcony talking to security and pointing them towards OP's house when he clearly heard a man call "help, help, help". This was a few minutes after the last set of bangs.

Of course, it won't be mentioned much in this thread, because if Dr Stipp is correct, then the entire "it was a cricket bat" narrative falls apart, and OP is shown as a liar because it contradicts his affidavit. He claims he called from the balcony before bashing down the door.

Interestingly - and presumably, coincidentally because Stipp is either deluded, a liar or both - he is clear that this man's voice was coming from a different place from where the screams were coming - slightly more to the left.

OP's balcony is to the left of the bathroom, where the screams were coming from.

Whoops.

Yep - I distinctly remember transcribing that snippet of Dr. Stipp's testimony, because after I heard it, I immediately looked up OP's BH affidavit, wherein OP stated that he went out onto the balcony and yelled for help BEFORE he claimed that he got the cricket bat & bashed in the toilet door.

Dr. Stipp stated that he heard the "help help help" AFTER the 2nd set of sounds that he identified as gunshots.

Dr. Stipp's testimony completely contradicts OP's claim that he yelled for help before he bashed the toilet door with the cricket bat.

 

[MeeBee]

Yep - I distinctly remember transcribing that snippet of Dr. Stipp's testimony, because after I heard it, I immediately looked up OP's BH affidavit, wherein OP stated that he went out onto the balcony and yelled for help BEFORE he claimed that he got the cricket bat & bashed in the toilet door.

Dr. Stipp stated that he heard the "help help help" AFTER the 2nd set of sounds that he identified as gunshots.

Dr. Stipp's testimony completely contradicts OP's claim that he yelled for help before he bashed the toilet door with the cricket bat.

But what about the Burger's testimony that says they heard Oscar yelling help before the second set of sounds?

 

[MeeBee]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rger-paralympian-reeva-steenkamp-murder-trial

"She testified that she had also heard a man shout for help three times before the shots were fired. At the time, she assumed the man and woman were being attacked by burglars."

So who do we believe? Stipp's version contradicts Oscar's version, but Michelle Burger's corroborates it if the second set of bangs were indeed bat sounds. Why is her version being ignored in favor of the version that goes against Oscar's? One of them is mistaken, but who?

 

[nastasya]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rger-paralympian-reeva-steenkamp-murder-trial

"She testified that she had also heard a man shout for help three times before the shots were fired. At the time, she assumed the man and woman were being attacked by burglars."

So who do we believe? Stipp's version contradicts Oscar's version, but Michelle Burger's corroborates it if the second set of bangs were indeed bat sounds. Why is her version being ignored in favor of the version that goes against Oscar's? One of them is mistaken, but who?

Burger's testimony does not even come close to corroborating OP's version.

• Burger heard a woman screaming.
• Burger heard a man's voice and a woman's voice.
• Burger heard the woman screaming in terror, then gun shots.

Burger did not just hear OP yell "help help help" then a bat hit a door twice.

 

[MeeBee]

Burger's testimony does not even come close to corroborating OP's version.

• Burger heard a woman screaming.
• Burger heard a man's voice and a woman's voice.
• Burger heard the woman screaming in terror, then gun shots.

Burger did not just hear OP yell "help help help" then a bat hit a door twice.

I realize this. But I am talking about this one point. You can't say Stipp's testimony proves Oscar is lying on this one point when there is other testimony that contradicts Stipp's version.

I do remember Burger saying she heard a man and a woman's voice. But this does not negate the possibility that what she heard was Oscar screaming. It just doesn't. Burger could he mistaken or have embellished her story after hearing news reports of the story. I feel this has been said many times. There are too many inconsistencies and too many things that make me go, "huh, maybe he is telling the truth" to totally rule out all possibilities.