Trial Discussion Thread #12 - 14.03.24, Day 14

[zwiebel]

Strolling into court, sorry I'm late. I burned my crumpets and had to start the day over.

Another heard screaming witness eh, OP has alot of splainin to do.

Pic or I don't believe you have crumpets at all! I put it to you that you are crumpetless.....

 

[MeeBee]

Oh. My. God.

He's so...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

 

[zwiebel]

OW wants her to concede her times may be unreliable.

AS: Sorry, don't understand the question.....then reiterates just moments between the first set of shots and the second.

 

[MeeBee]

I'd say that would help her credibility rather than harm it... easy to put something into a witness statement because you believe it to be true (hubby saw it) and then realise afterwards that it is more important to give YOUR view and your view only, than to try and explain everything that happened on that night.

That is true. At least she corrected it and is giving her version.

 

[BritsKate]

I'd say that would help her credibility rather than harm it... easy to put something into a witness statement because you believe it to be true (hubby saw it) and then realise afterwards that it is more important to give YOUR view and your view only, than to try and explain everything that happened on that night.

Right. She was ill, likely exhausted, and in all probability, upset by the events in question - I'm thinking her husband probably mentioned what he'd seen - and she construed it as her own until she had a clearer head.

To think because of this mistake (as I truly believe it was) she isn't credible means the other four witnesses can't be credible either and that defies my logic. JMO

 

[soozieqtips]

She's qualifying her answers too much.

And if she didn't qualify them enough?

 

[lisasalinger]

The dogs didn't bark, did they?

Nobody has testified about dogs barking, that is part of the reason the Judge had a problem with Oldwage pestering her about it. Good objection by Nel.

 

[Really?]

Ha...another witness on ground level heard screams

 

[G.bng]

I just don't see how you can be mistaken about such a thing. She lied.

Bit to strong to say "lied". According to the defence it appears all the witnesses are liars. After a traumatic event and after discussing it with hubby IMO it would be normal to get some things mixed up.

And now OW is talking about times on later reflection being longer or shorter than were thought and that she could be mistaken. So what is it, you can reflect later and decide you may have been mistaken, or you must be lying or falsifying evidence if you do reflect later and find you have made a mistake. IMO such contradictions go to show the defence is desperate, one the one hand begging the witnesses accept they might have made a mistake but when a witness voluntarily accepts they may have made a mistake and corrects testimony tar them as a liar.

 

[zwiebel]

OW: There was a call made by your husband to Mr Baba....was it answered on the very first time?

AS: He could not get through....well he did get through but it wasn't answered. (initial call)

In addition the 10111 went unanswred too?

Talking about the domestic servant now, who lives on the ground floor. She also heard screaming. But OW says 'That is not what we learn from her statement'.

Servant said:
'I just fell asleep and was woken up by crying. I thought it was the baby next door. I was just trying to listen when I heard boom, boom boom."

 

[MeeBee]

And if she didn't qualify them enough?

?????

 

[Peliman]

Pic or I don't believe you have crumpets at all! I put it to you that you are crumpetless.....

I would but the dog ate em, I threw em and said hush puppy.

 

[kaos]

I'm glad it's a judge and not a jury or I think I may be swayed by OW's heavy sighs before he reads out statements he believes not to be true and the snidey "wonderful" remarks when he thinks testimony has proved they're lying.

 

[Really?]

Oh vey......the lights again

 

[sorrell skye]

Oldwage insisting that OP had instructed him that the toilet room light wasn't working on that night.

 

[james83]

Bring back roux, please please please :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:
Can't stand much more of this Oldwadge.

 

[zwiebel]

Back to toilet light.

OW: What would you say if I said it was not operative at the time. Would you concede you made a mistake...or your husband made a mistake?....it's my instructions from my client that the light was not working.

AS says she cannot agree. She thinks there was a light on.

OW says she is 'unwilling to make a reasonable concession'.

 

[katydid23]

OMG. Oldwage is soo damn condescending. At least Roux is somewhat likable when he is doing cross.

 

[zwiebel]

It is obviously very unreasonable to disagree with anything Oscar has told OW about that night.....

 

[MeeBee]

I have to say she does seem honest. And the defense has quite an uphill climb explaining the woman's and man's voices. But what does she mean? Were they intermingled? Or did she hear a woman and then a man and the a woman...? I can see, personally how a man under extreme duress can sound like a woman. Another witness has testified that she mistook the cries for a woman when it was Oscar.

That said, I do not like this attorney. He's just insufferable.