Trial Discussion Thread #16

[jay-jay]

That's misinterpreting my post. I only disagreed on the fact you suggested only Reeva deserved justice - nothing else.

Well, perhaps I worded it badly but that wasn't what I meant .. what I meant was that Reeva should be the person first and foremost in this case, and the truth must be found for her .. because she is the one who suffered and who is now dead. OP, being the person who has pleaded guilty to killing her, is secondary in all of this .. he is a killer, and that bit is not in dispute .. it's not as if he isn't one and that we are discussing whether he is guilty of killing or not.. and quite honestly, I don't really care what happens to him because of that fact. This case is all about Reeva, and we should never lose sight of that fact, all the while we are discussing all this 'evidence' about him. The justice and the truth must be for her, and it therefore follows that if she gets justice and the truth, then the verdict for OP will be the correct one (whichever scenario that turns out to be, but it must be the truthful one) .. so it's not as if OP won't get justice as well .. he will .. it's just that I personally couldn't give a four XXXX about what happens to him.

 

[G.bng]

Ok, scare, maim, injure, warning shot to legs, etc etc. the point I was making was that if he was shooting to kill, the person, the most logical thing to do would be to to aim higher where the head would be. I don't see the reason to aim low if you're trying to kill.

BIB But with expanding bullets like Black Tallon that is exactly how it works... you shoot at the largest body mass, i.e. the torso, and let the expanding bullet do the rest as it rips the body apart. You are not supposed to aim at the head which is a small target. I posted a YT video several threads back explaining why special forces use them. They aim at the mass because otherwise if you miss, nick or only wound, and the head is easy to miss as it is small and a one inch move takes it out of gun sight, the terrorist shoots you instead of you shooting him. The sledge hammer hit you get in the torso, lower or upper, hip, etc., crumple the target to the ground so they cannot shoot back. The say it is like being hit with a sledgehammer... Reeva was hit with three !

 

[Val1]

I'd like to. :smile: but...

Being able to see through the panel would make it more difficult. I know you're going to think it strange but it's not. I'll explain...

To see Reeva you've got to be quite close to the panel. As soon as you get close to the panel you cannot hold the gun in front of you, there's no room. You can't be right up to the door as the gun wasn't fired from against the door. This means that your eyes are looking through the panel, and your arm cannot naturally follow your line of sight. You literally have to shoot one-handed with your arm bent more or less from your hip, and pulled backwards (your arm needs to be as far back from the door as the minimum distance specified by the expert witness).

The easiest example I can give you is shooting pool. To get the ball in the pocket you look down the cue and line everything up (even then you may still miss). Now, try to pot that same ball with the pool cue stuck out at the side of you rather than directly in front of you. Your eyes can look straight at the pocket (OP looking at Reeva's head), the cue is out to the side (OP's gun) and your hoping to hit the ball in the pocket (bullet to target). The shot becomes much more difficult. Remember, this is a bullet, not a pool ball.

The far more accurate way to fire a gun is to stand further back from the door, put both hands in front of you, look along the sight at where you want to fire, and shoot. This is exactly how you learn to shoot on a shooting range. You hardly ever see anyone shoot one-handed, and certainly nobody does it for accuracy.

This is why I'm convinced that OP was a few feet back from the door when he fired. He put his arms out front and fired four quick shots through the door. No specific target, just at the most likely area someone would be.

I believe he was either leaning into the wall by the sinks or against the sink's countertop at which angle he would have easily been able to tell through that crack whether the person he was shooting was on the right or the left, I never claimed he could see exactly where RS was but could have certainly seen a pretty close approximation where she was. OP's toilet room is what, 4'6" by 4' at the most? From the pic below it appears smaller than my toilet room that has a sink in it and it's only about 4 and 1/2ft square with the sink on the left side(as you face the toilet) so there was literally no place to hide.
http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/03/17/oscar-pistorius-crime-scene-photos-murder-trial

 

[steveml]

Well, perhaps I worded it badly but that wasn't what I meant .. what I meant was that Reeva should be the person first and foremost in this case, and the truth must be found for her .. because she is the one who suffered and who is now dead. OP, being the person who has pleaded guilty to killing her, is secondary in all of this .. he is a killer, and that bit is not in dispute .. it's not as if he isn't one and that we are discussing whether he is guilty of killing or not.. and quite honestly, I don't really care what happens to him because of that fact. This case is all about Reeva, and we should never lose sight of that fact, all the while we are discussing all this 'evidence' about him.

No problem. You'll not find any posts in this threat that have disrespected Ms Steenkamp - not a single one. The thread topic is clearly indicated though and it is not a campaign forum for either OP or Reeva.

Oscar Pistorius Did the South African Olympic track star murder his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp? Or is tragic case of mistaken identity.?

There have been many many comments against OP which are fairly vitriolic, and I just let them go, because I see them as immature and it doesn't interest me.

I'm not here for any other reason than to discuss the case from a defense/prosecution stance.

 

[G.bng]

Here's a diagram showing the place and direction I think OP fired from.

* I didn't have any small-man clip-art available so used a gingerbread man.

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/21/police_add_more_confusion_to_oscar_pistorius_case/

Aha... OP a gingerbread man ! After the Grimm's Bros nightmarish tale about one of these, giving rise to the expression, "You can't catch me I'm the gingerbread man" ?

 

[steveml]

I believe he was either leaning into the wall by the sinks or against the sink's countertop at which angle he would have easily been able to tell through that crack whether the person he was shooting was on the right or the left, I never claimed he could see exactly where RS was but could have certainly seen a pretty close approximation where she was. OP's toilet room is what, 4'6" by 4' at the most? From the pic below it appears smaller than my toilet room that has a sink in it and it's only about 4 and 1/2ft square with the sink on the left side(as you face the toilet) so there was literally no place to hide.
http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2014/03/17/oscar-pistorius-crime-scene-photos-murder-trial

I agree with regard to the cubicle size - not much room at all,

It's quite reasonable to believe that by firing 4 shots into there he was likely to kill whoever was in there.

 

[steveml]

Aha... OP a gingerbread man ! After the Grimm's Bros nightmarish tale about one of these, giving rise to the expression, "You can't catch me I'm the gingerbread man" ?

Hmm...I knew I should have chosen a boat instead...

 

[jay-jay]

No problem. You'll not find any posts in this threat that have disrespected Ms Steenkamp - not a single one. The thread topic is clearly indicated though and it is not a campaign forum for either OP or Reeva.

Oscar Pistorius Did the South African Olympic track star murder his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp? Or is tragic case of mistaken identity.?

There have been many many comments against OP which are fairly vitriolic, and I just let them go, because I see them as immature and it doesn't interest me.

I'm not here for any other reason than to discuss the case from a defense/prosecution stance.

I'll just remind you of the post which started this line of discussion:

Originally Posted by steveml
I'm sure he will get a long sentence.

It's a tragic situation that is hard for any of us to imagine. That aside, there is such a huge difference between killing your girlfriend without realizing she was there, and stalking and terrorizing your girlfriend before killing her.

That is the most important thing I want the trial to ascertain. Reeva's family deserve no less, and OP should receive the correct punishment. If he did kill Reeva unintentionally, he will still probably serve many years in prison, and will have to live with the fact that he killed his girlfriend.

If the court gets it wrong then he has a triple punishment. Serving many years in prison, having to live with the the fact that he killed his girlfriend, and being labelled as a man who terrorized his girlfriend.

.. which I found to be giving too much emphasis on him and his needs ("having to live with the fact he killed his girlfriend", etc) and not Reeva's. The fact is that, regardless of whether he thought it was an intruder or whether he intentionally killed Reeva, the situation should never even have arisen .. and it only did because he is gun crazed and paranoid. Don't even give him the time of day, let alone suggest he might have to "live with the fact he killed his girlfriend" .. he knew he had anger management issues, he should've got them sorted out .. the responsibility is all his.

 

[jay-jay]

No problem. You'll not find any posts in this threat that have disrespected Ms Steenkamp - not a single one.

I have never said that there were.

The thread topic is clearly indicated though and it is not a campaign forum for either OP or Reeva.

I've never suggested that, either.

 

[screecher]

Oh, jeez. I agree.

It's not like OP is the victim here. Why should he be treated with kid gloves? He murdered a human being. Actually, he TRIED to murder her 3 times, succeeded the 4th try. Period.

Reava, her family and friends are the victims.

Again, 4 attempts, succeeded on the 4th. Let's not forget that.

 

[nastasya]

You're seriously not suggesting that it won't make a huge difference for Reeva's family to know that Reeva died without being stalked and terrorized?

It's not often I'm lost for words.

You were talking about the court getting the verdict right, not whether or not Reeva was stalked and terrorized.

They're never going to know what really happened thanks to the killer's actions that night.

 

[soozieqtips]

I'll just remind you of the post which started this line of discussion:



.. which I found to be giving too much emphasis on him and his needs ("having to live with the fact he killed his girlfriend) and not Reeva's. The fact is that, regardless of whether he thought it was an intruder or whether he intentionally killed Reeva, the situation should never even have arisen .. and it only did because he is gun crazed and paranoid. Don't even give him the time of day, let alone suggest he might have to "live with the fact he killed his girlfriend" ..
he knew he had anger management issues, he should've got them sorted out .. the responsibility is all his.

BBM - I agree. The trouble is he's been allowed to run riot for too long without being held properly to account for his actions, and now he has to face the music. I feel no sympathy for him at all.

This was no accident. He shot to kill, simple as that. And it is Reeva's family who have to live with the consequences of her violent death through no fault of their own. OP is the one responsible for that violent death, no one else. I have no qualms about criticising him, none at all. He did after all shoot an innocent and defenceless woman DEAD. My sympathy lies with Reeva's family, not with the killer.

OP might end up losing his freedom for a while and certainly his career will be gone, but that's not a punishment, it's a consequence of shooting someone dead. If he hadn't have done it, he wouldn't be in this situation, so I'll save my sympathy for the victim.

 

[jay-jay]

Oh, jeez. I agree.

It's not like OP is the victim here. Why should he be treated with kid gloves? He murdered a human being. Period.

Reava, her family and friends are the victims.

Let's not forget that.

Exactly. Thank you.

 

[nastasya]

When has anybody targeted by voice? Show me incidents where killers hit parts of the body by targeting voice. Or is this something new that's never before happened?

This is real life not The Matrix.

What never happened before was the killer suddenly mistaking the sound of his house mate peeing for a burglar.

What never happened before was Reeva innocently going to pee in the middle of the night and having a house mate shoot her four times before she was able to get out of the toilet.

 

[BlueShoe]

Powerful and compelling reasoning. And I would add that if you look then step back to shoot you have lost the target so that wouldn't work either.

True enough, but if you look after the first shot and see Reeva huddled in the corner by the toilet, you would know to shoot towards that corner and could approximate fairly accurately where that corner was.

 

[lisasalinger]

Going back to our earlier conversation about the tiles in the bathroom, here is a pic of the tiles reassembled. It looks like there is a crack straight down the center of that row. I'm thinking one good whack to one of those tiles may have caused the crack that brought the whole row down. But I am no tile expert, so who knows.

 

[Really?]

How's this for a theory:

Oscar and Reeva argue in the bedroom earlier in the morning starting before 2am

Estelle van der Merwe is woken at 1.56am by the noise of a fight.

It is hard to make out but she hears a woman's voice, but does not know where it is coming from

She tries and eventually gets back to sleep

At some time the bedroom door may have been damaged

At some point the arguing calmed down only to begin again later

Oscar picks up or threatens to pick up the cricket bat

Reeva starts to feel scared. She runs from the bedroom up the corridor to the bathroom

(She may have even opened the window thinking about getting out)

(Oscar may have argued with her in the bathroom and thrown her jeans out of the window)

She locks herself in the toilet.

The toilet is dark

He hears the door lock and is furious that he cannot confront her directly

The light in the toilet was broken so she could only see by the far away street lights

She does not have time to phone for help

Mrs Stipp has a bout of coughing which wakes her up

She looks at her clock which says 3.02. (Clock was fast - actual time about 2.58)
(She will look at her clock again at 3.17 actual time about 3.13)
The clock is now running and the defence must account for how OP used up this time an did not confirm to himself that he shot Reeva for another 15 minutes.

Oscar comes into the bathroom with the cricket bat. The light may already be on or he may now switch it on

He may or may no be on his prosthetics.
The damage shows the angle of the cricket bat in the door is consistent with being hit by a shorter person standing in a natural position
The damage is also consistent with a taller person leaning into the hit, putting their body weight into the blow to use maximum force.
After the defence case it is unlikely that this will be reliably decided.

Reeva sees the light go on, she may scream which is not heard due to the locked toilet or
does not scream so as not to escalate the situation.

Mr Stipp is woken by 3 loud bangs
Mrs Stipp is fully awake and hears 3 "gunshots" as OP hits the door with the cricket bat and moments after a woman screaming
Roux tries to make out that Mrs Stipp slept through the first "shot" by first lying to the court about her being "asleep" when cross examining Mr Stipp
She has line of sight to the bathroom window from her bed.

The "shots" are OP hitting the door breaking it. There are only 3 hits

The cricket bat has broken out a piece of the door along the weakest line of the joint at the right edge of the top inner panel
It runs almost the complete height of the panel and parts of it are the splinters lost from the door exhibit
Only the Stipps heard these "shots"

At this point OP may break away some other part of the panel. Now the panel is broken parts may be relatively easily lifted out

(Note: The toilet and bathroom windows are frosted. The toilet window is separate to and to the left of the bathroom window. The bathroom window has 3 sections, the left section was open. The Stipps could see straight in through the open section where the bathroom light appeared bright)

Mrs Stipp see's the bathroom light on and crucially LIGHT IN THE TOILET almost as bright as behind the closed part of the bathroom window.
She described it as a "light on in the toilet"
Mr Stipp said he ALSO SAW "LIGHT" IN THE TOILET. but it was not as bright as in the bathroom window - it would certainly not have been as bright as the light from the open part of the bathroom window.
He did at one point say he didn't see a "light on" in the toilet as he thought it was not bright enough for this.
The defence sought to confuse and negate this evidence. It appeared as if the Stipps disagreed about there being light in the toilet, which they did not. It was a difference in description only.
The fact that the Stipps had not colluded to clarify and strengthen this evidence is telling
THE STIPPS SAW THE BATHROOM LIGHT THROUGH THE HOLE OP MADE IN THE TOILET DOOR
If both Stipps saw light in the toilet straight after the first sounds which OP said were only gunshots then OP must have been lying.
Roux had already told the court that OP said the toilet light was broken.

Reeva's screams could now be heard clearly through the hole and out through the open bathroom window (Stipp said the screams were clear and unmuffled)
Roux argued Monday 4 March, Session 3 at 28.00min in support of MB hearing OP screams that should be easy to hear through same open window at the distance

The Stipps go quickly to their small balcony, they hear a woman/female screaming.

They say the screams were "moments" after the shots.

At about 3.03 (2.59 actual time) "just after 3" the Bergers are woken by Reevas screams. (They did not hear the door being hit)

Mr Berger very roughly estimates there is 2 minutes before the cries of "help"

After 3/4 min the Stipps move to their big balcony for a better view

Mr Stipp goes in and spends some time during the following events calling:
Silverwood Security No answer
Called 10111 - not in service

Its is now about 3.05/3.06 (3.01/3.02 actual time)
Reeva screams help help help
Oscar shouts help, help, help mocking her. He may have been in the bedroom at this point as Mr Stipp said the helps were muffled.

The Bergers call security

There is continued screaming some of which may not have been heard as the witnesses were busy getting dressed/phoning

Oscar goes to get his gun.

Reeva can see out through the hole in the door and she knows Oscar is coming with the gun

Her screams intensify. Mrs Berger says "to a climax"

Mr Berger is on his balcony and hears the same

Mrs Stipp hears this as screams coming closer as if along the road

He then hears "2 /3 loud bangs". Thinks it is shooting

The Bergers hear shot....shot shot shot taking
The shots lasted 3.5 seconds with a longer approx 1.5 second pause between shot 1 and 2

Mrs Stipp hears a man screaming just before the shots, she cannot make out words then hears 3 shots.

Mrs Stipp has just looked at he clock. It says 3.17 (actual time 3.13)

For a short time it was together with the woman screaming. There was differences in the pitches at the same time.

Estelle van der Merwe and her husband now both hear bang bang bang bang, her husband says they are gunshots

OP now angry beyond control comes into the bathroom
As he does so he raises his gun and fires four shots, moving towards the door and to the right as if to try to see Reeva through the long narrow vertical hole in the door
He may be on his stumps and firing with the gun raised to his eye although as he is moving this would seem odd
He may be on his prosthetics firing from the hip. He had a trapped easy target so as he was moving at the time this would seem more likely
The bullet holes are not tightly grouped and not consistent with double tapped shots.

Reeva fell back onto the magazine rack where a ricochet hit her

The next two shots hit her in the arm and head, She screamed as long as she could but it died away after the last shot.

The screams dying away after the last shot were heard by the Bergers and Mrs Stipp

Estelle van der Merwe describes silence after the shooting

When Mr Stipp goes back on the balcony and hears a man shouting "help" "help" "help"

Security arrive and talk to the Stipps on their balcony

Mr Stipp again went to the other balcony and watches Security leave

Mr Stipp sees a light coloured figure moving from right to left through the bathroom window

Mrs Stipp initially reported the same but retracted this when she realised it was her husbands recollection.
She also "remembered" the event before the final shots not after

Mr Stipp said the bathroom and toilet lights did not change at any time

Mrs Stipp said the bathroom and toilet lights did not change at any time

Oscar with prosthetics now on, probably realising the terrible truth of what he had done, pulled out the rest of the panel, got the key and dragged her out.

It was as he was breaking down the rest of the panel that the bullet hole that the bat man expert pointed out caused a crack in the wood to deviate.

It was only 1 hole that showed this effect. It has been heavily assumed including by me, maybe wrongly, that all the shots preceded all the bat hits.

Oscar horrified at what he has done picks up Reeva and carries her downstairs where he is met by Security and later Dr Stipp.

Thanks...on this note I will retire for the nite....till some crazy 2/3 o'clock hour when I wake.....great theory and spot on!!!

 

[jay-jay]

You were talking about the court getting the verdict right, not whether or not Reeva was stalked and terrorized.

They're never going to know what really happened thanks to the killer's actions that night.

Yes, and I believe there is a strong possibility of him actually not having to serve a prison sentence at all for this .. if the defence team actually win their case, but only by virtue it can't be proven that OP intentionally killed Reeva. That really worries me, that that poor girl may well have gone through a hellish DV night and received horrific gunshot injuries on top of that, and yet he may still walk free.

 

[nastasya]

The police photos of the toilet show a bowl of water tinted with dark red blood. A bullet fragment was recovered from it a day or two later as well. So IMO and logic the toilet was never flushed.

There are water marks evenly spaced around the inside of the bowl through the blood.

Go look at how the water flows into the bowl after flushing. It's the only way this pattern can be explained.

Toilet was filling up with water after Reeva was bleeding into it.

The fact that the bowl's water was blood red indicates that Reeva had flushed the toilet in the seconds prior to being shot.

 

[BlueShoe]

True enough, but if you look after the first shot and see Reeva huddled in the corner by the toilet, you would know to shoot towards that corner and could approximate fairly accurately where that corner was.

Sorry to quote myself, but I just realized that this is the reason on OP insisting that the toilet light was broken. Then he could not really peek in through a small crack (or even use the first bullet hole as a peep-hole, if that is possible) and see where Reeva was. He could only do this if there were some light in the toilet cubicle. I just had not thought of this aspect of the light being out before.