Trial Discussion Thread #13 - 14.03.25, Day 15

[minor4th]

I see, you were just basing your comments on what Pistorius says.

Yes, exactly

 

[TorisMom003]

Just curious - of those of you who are sure that Oscar was abusive and killed Reeva in a fit of rage, who also believes that Alice LaViolet was correct in her analysis of Travis as an abuser based also on a few text messages?

Is there really a comparison since ALV also thought that Snow White was abused? Can we at least come up with a question that involves a sane individual?

 

[minor4th]

But if OP really asked for Stander to call for paramedics, then why was the next phone call OP made to Netcare?

My guess is he was asking Stander to call the standard ambulance number and he was going to call the faster, private one. Or he might have said - oh nevermind, I found NetCare's number and I will call them myself.

 

[minor4th]

Is there really a comparison since ALV also thought that Snow White was abused? Can we at least come up with a question that involves a sane individual?

So you did not agree with ALV I take it? lol

But you are convinced OP was abusive based on the 4 texts between him and Reeva?

 

[Carol70]

Unlocking the door was not a problem, it was not locked from the outside.

The distance to the exit was a matter of a few paces, much closer than heading down the double passage. He or Reeva could have grabbed his prostheses on the way. And one of them could have hit the security alarm button.

Having left the room, OP could have locked the door from the outside, trapping any intruder in the bedroom suite.

I have said all this before though, and am still waiting for an explanation from Minor4th who keeps stating that it was not an option. Why not?

It could have been a problem if the actual key was NOT in the door. We lock our bedroom security gate and door at night and certainly don't leave the keys hanging in it. Who does that anyway??

Anyhow, it's a matter of could have, should have, would have but didn't.

 

[TorisMom003]

So you did not agree with ALV I take it? lol

But you are convinced OP was abusive based on the 4 texts between him and Reeva?

Based on those alone, no. But then I also don't believe that he killed Reeva in a blind rage either.

 

[Insp.Dots]

But..but....he absolutely killed her in a rage. He didn't buy her a valentines gift!
//runs

Loving your sense of humour....and boy it's needed at times.

sent via my kindle

 

[BabaJ]

That's what I think too - he went and unlocked the front door to allow Stander in and the paramedics that he asked Stander to call.

Now I am completely confused. I understand that OP called Netcare and was told to bring Reeva to the hospital, which would be consistent with OP brining Reeva down and rushing her to the car. But then he asked Stander to call the ambulance, did Stander actually call the ambulance? Did he change his mind and decided to wait for paramedics and give her first aid ie trying to open her airway (see Dr. Stipp's testimony) instead of rushing to the hospital?

 

[TorisMom003]

It could have been a problem if the actual key was NOT in the door. We lock our bedroom security gate and door at night and certainly don't leave the keys hanging in it. Who does that anyway??

Anyhow, it's a matter of could have, should have, would have but didn't.

Why would the key not be in easy reach? After all, the gun was right there where OP could easily grab it. I don't know of anyone that would lock their bedroom door and then put the key somewhere where it would be difficult to get to, unless of course they are trying to keep someone in the room.

MOO

 

[minor4th]

Based on those alone, no. But then I also don't believe that he killed Reeva in a blind rage either.

Oh, ok. My question was really directed at those who are sure OP was abusive and murdered Reeva intentionally.

 

[Carol70]

:smile:

He did, he bought her some jeans.

And they ended up in the garden :wink:

Oh lol

 

[Gryffindor]

My opinion, he opened the door for Stander to get in. Not so he could exit the house with Reeva.

If Stander takes the stand, Nel's cross of him will be interesting too

Plus the fact he asked STANDER to take Reeva to hospital in the car. Stander refused and suggested they wait for paramedics/ambulance. Bizarre request from Oscar . . .

 

[james83]

So either Oscar didn't in fact tell Stander to phone an ambulance, or he did and Stander chose not to.

Very strange that Stander would chose not to phone an ambulance until he comes into contact with other people, and very interesting that he tells Baba to "go" and call an ambulance, did stander or his daughter not have a phone with them, or is it that they just wanted baba out of the way?.

"Stander then ordered Baba, who says he didn’t enter the house, to go and call the police and an ambulance", the guard said.

 

[Carol70]

I would love to see trials in the UK mainly because the law fascinates me but I do have reservations. I think some witnesses both for and against, even unseen, will feel profoundly uncomfortable knowing they are being listened to and may not perform well under questioning.

I have already listened to some journalists and a lawyer saying they think Roux is playing to the camera. That I would not like.

We can of course watch trials live in court and I have done so. The only problem is those that go on for weeks involve a lot of downtime and a lot of travelling.

I don't know if that is true about Roux. I read this article about him and there are a few more similar if you google.
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Barry-Roux-stalked-for-autograph-20140323

 

[TorisMom003]

It would be interesting to know, is there anyone who believes that OP intentionally killed Reeva, but agrees with any part of his affidavit?

If we go off the presumption that he lied, it would be far more sensible to create a story and change only a few critical parts.

Once on the witness stand the least you have to remember, the less likely you are to trip yourself up.

Most of the theories I've heard so far in favor of prosecution have refuted almost every single part of the affidavit.

Just a thought.

I believe there are bits of truth in his affidavit. I also believe that most of those bits of truth he has attributed to himself as saying, doing, yelling and/or screaming when in fact it was Reeva that said, did, yelled and/or screamed them.

I do believe that he ran down and opened the front door, not so that he could take Reeva to the hospital though, so that Stander AND his lawyer daughter could enter the house.

I do believe that he yelled "get out of my house" but that it was not to any "intruder" but during a fight he had with Reeva and to Reeva.

I do believe that he "yelled" helphelphelp but that it was not on the balcony and that it was in a mocking tone towards Reeva because she was truly yelling HELPHELPHELP.

MOO

 

[steveml]

Is there really any other reasonable reason to not get medical help immediately?

There is another big question for me as well. In OP's bail statement he said that he ran downstairs and opened the front door in order to take Reeva to the hospital. So why did he not also open the car door so that he could put her in the car? And if he did do that, then why is not in his statement?

I'll try and explain the reason for generality in a statement. In a situation where you are likely to face a murder charge, the first thing you will be told by your lawyer is to keep your mouth shut. This is applicable to both innocent accused and guilty accused. The classic 'anything you say can and will be used...'. It's just a way of protecting yourself.

The same applies to a statement. Explain what you need to, and leave it at that. The more detail you put in there, the more problems you may have if you feel the need to change something afterwards. Look at how Roux has dealt with any of the witnesses that have done this. As the accused you'll get your chance to fill in the missing pieces in court.

If I just take the gun cartridges as an example. Had OP put in his statement one of the gun cartridges came out near the back wall, and said he shot from there, we could have a situation where the cartridge was kicked, thus making it look like he lied on the statement.

Before trial prosecution will look for any detail they can to use against you. Why give them a helping hand?

 

[TorisMom003]

Oh, ok. My question was really directed at those who are sure OP was abusive and murdered Reeva intentionally.

Don't get me wrong. I believe that he was abusive and murdered Reeva intentionally. I just don't believe that he murdered her in a blind rage. I believe that he was very clear headed about what he did.

 

[Really?]

British law and South African law does indeed follow and in fact invented the term, premeditated murder.. this consequence comes in at the sentencing..


for the purposes of this trial. forget all you think you know about degrees of murder.. that's the main area that befuddles.

think. MURDER.. .. the meaning of the word.. to deprive of life intentionally.

it means no more, and no less. its what it is..

but running a short course on legal terms is not what I'm here for.. I expect folks to already know it.

:gthanks:

 

[minor4th]

I don't know if that is true about Roux. I read this article about him and there are a few more similar if you google.
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Barry-Roux-stalked-for-autograph-20140323

Roux opposed the trial being televised as well

 

[minor4th]

Don't get me wrong. I believe that he was abusive and murdered Reeva intentionally. I just don't believe that he murdered her in a blind rage. I believe that he was very clear headed about what he did.

Why do you think he was abusive? And why do you think he planned and murdered her?