Trial Discussion Thread #16

[Harmony 2]

New thread is open, please make your way there. This thread will close in 10 minutes...

Trial Discussion Thread #17 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[BritsKate]

Hello all! Quick question: Many seem to believe that the DT is really going to put forth that Reeva was killed at 3:00 (approximately) and OP did his routine of screaming like a girl and arguing in both a man's and women's voice as 17 minutes (approximately) passed by before calling Stander and then Netcare; does anyone see that as a real possibility? I only ask because I just can't imagine that, although it sure looks like it from the tests at night that the DT did. Desperation is a word that comes to my mind...

Nope. I can't see many defense attorneys allowing for an almost 20 minute gap that would seriously harm their client's version of events. I believe they're simply going to do their best to discredit the witnesses recollection. As we saw with cross, any minor inconsistency is being used to cast doubt upon the entirety of testimony.

I believe the sound 'test' was conducted for that reason alone - simply to refute that the witnesses could have heard what they did. They'll use their own witnesses to further this too.

It may seem desperate and/or ludicrous but in reality Roux & Co. have a serious uphill battle ahead of them. Legally, their hands are quite literally tied. Someone earlier quoted an attorney as stating they'd have tried for an insanity plea but in SA the M'Naghten rule applies. For those unfamiliar, the onus to prove mental illness lies with the defence and it is a very heavy burden to prove. There is a legal presumption that the defendant is sane until it is proven otherwise on a balance of probabilities. It's seldom used as a defense because the bar is so high.

So, insanity defense is really tough to prove; crime of passion doesn't exist; there is no law to mitigate for mistaken identity; self-defense has strict perimeters this crime doesn't meet - so just about all that's left is not guilty due to putative self-defense. So they'll have to discount, diminish, and disregard. Mrs. Stipp was portrayed as a liar; Ms. Burger implied to have an agenda; Botha taints all the forensic analysts with the corrupt/inept brush, etc. That's about all they can do - and put Oscar on the stand to testify why it's reasonable he should have been so in fear for his life he fired four times without a single warning shot.

I don't much like Roux...but I certainly wouldn't want the job he has ahead of himself.

JMO

 

[Harmony 2]

New thread is open, please make your way there. This thread is closed...

Trial Discussion Thread #17 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

:seeya: