Trial Discussion Thread #17

[DebinGA]

I got the impression it was the . What else could it be?

Maybe the writer trying to sell more papers by making "the " more important than the state thinks it is. Only at the end does the writer mention the phone data was yet to be revealed, and that's certainly part of "the evidence" that shows OP and RS's relationship wasn't as loving as he claims.

IIRC the timing of OP's watching is interesting though as it was soon after he arrived home at 6 p.m. and greeted RS.

 

[soozieqtips]

They are two different types of abuse though .. and with child abuse, you would've have been exchanging the types of texts that Reeva and OP were .. but in adult abusive relationships, those types of exchanges (particularly text and email exchanges, nowadays) are commonplace. They can't just be dismissed and they are an extremely good indicator of that relationship, how it was going wrong, and just how it was deteriorating. They are basically Reeva's testimony from the grave.

Exactly. She can't tell us her side of it anymore thanks to being shot dead by OP, so her messages are her own evidence about the state of their 'deeply loving' relationship.

 

[Gryffindor]

OK, I have found the neck touching incident. Definitely no thumping. In fact, to me it seemed more like a tender touch.


http://drum.co.za/uncategorized/oscar-and-reeva-whatsapp-messages/

“I touch your neck to show u I care and you tell me to stop”

I think, as you say, in some relationships there are times when the people involved do not necessarily want to be touchy-feely at that point in time. I wonder whether he said it in an angry voice? We shall never know. However, he did seem very irritable at this point.

Think they possibly meant THUMBING not THUMPING. i.e. massaging

 

[MeeBee]

Maybe the writer trying to sell more papers by making "the " more important than the state thinks it is. Only at the end does the writer mention the phone data was yet to be revealed, and that's certainly part of "the evidence" that shows OP and RS's relationship wasn't as loving as he claims.

IIRC the timing of OP's watching is interesting though as it was soon after he arrived home at 6 p.m. and greeted RS.

If the phone evidence hasn't been revealed then it probably won't be.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

She wasn't thumping it. She was tapping it, but it annoyed OP, just like the gum chewing, the accents, the pony tail, the talking to waiters for too long, the dressing 'too casually', the touching someone's arm... the list goes on.

Like Simon Gittany ........

 

[Gryffindor]

Such as?

Where to start???

Phones, bat, tiles, air rifle, slippers, key, towels, cartridge positions ad infinitum LOL

 

[Viper]

Lol...

I don't know what kind of it is and I think filling in the blanks is probably not advised. The search was for 'you****'. Don't know what he looked at after that. I'm thinking it's more likely it was just regular . Don't know why it has to be gay .

BIB. Most here did not fault OP for the , but now you have brought it to the forefront that the State intends to show that the relationship between Reeva and OP was not loving. I cannot see a way for the State to do that with heterosexual , I really can't. Even if it was heterosexual depicting rape or brutality because some couples are in to that. But homosexual is something entirely different IMO.

 

[MeeBee]

Where to start???

Phones, bat, tiles, air rifle, slippers, key, towels, cartridge positions ad infinitum LOL

I get the phone, but what could be doing to the rest of that stuff that would change the scene? It's not like he hid them.

 

[steveml]

RBBM

I don't think we can in all honesty. My ex wrote me love letters, cried on his knees begging me to forgive him, and told me I was beautiful everyday. He also told me I was stupid, set our house on fire, and disabled my car to prevent me from leaving while he proceeded to smash our furniture. To outsiders, he appeared to adore me. Very often, emotional abusers are charming enough that friends and family will be none the wiser to the abuse - until and unless it escalates. It's part of the reason why victims don't necessarily recognise abuse. Everybody else keeps telling you how great your significant other is. That Myers and Steenkamp both interceded on Reeva's behalf is telling to me.

(Not to compare my relationship to Reeva's but to highlight that abusers keep their victims in the relationship by appearing remorseful, loving, complimentary and apologetic. If they were gits all the time, no one would stay. It's a constant see-saw. Over time though, an erosion of confidence occurs and the victim usually blames him/herself for the abusive behaviors instead of calling out the abuser for their behavior.)



MOO

No problem Kate,

I understand that it's a real emotive subject for many. I admit it's not an area I'm over-familiar with, and for that reason people needn't feel my view is at all valid. It really is just my opinion on the text content of a WhatsApp message

 

[DebinGA]

If the phone evidence hasn't been revealed then it probably won't be.

In my "tech" ignorance I considered text msgs are part of phone evidence.

 

[Viper]

If the phone evidence hasn't been revealed then it probably won't be.

:smile: I strongly disagree.

 

[MeeBee]

BIB. Most here did not fault OP for the , but now you have brought it to the forefront that the State intends to show that the relationship between Reeva and OP was not loving. I cannot see a way for the State to do that with heterosexual , I really can't. Even if it was heterosexual depicting rape or brutality because some couples are in to that. But homosexual is something entirely different IMO.

Idk, if it was rape I'd think that'd be a red flag...

I think the state was just saying, basically what you were saying earlier: why would he be looking at minutes after his beautiful girlfriend walked into the door if this was really a loving relationship?

And...not sure how gay can be worse than rape/abuse ?

 

[jay-jay]

Originally Posted by jay-jay View Post
.. and did you exchange lots of texts and emails?

Why would you like to see them?

Eh? .. OK, if you're not going to take this seriously then there's no point discussing this any further. My point was about the way people communicate these days, and it is only just recently that this has come about. When you said 'when I was a teenager', it sounds like quite a while ago. Anyway, it's clear to me that you're not going to accept there was anything wrong in the relationship between Reeva and OP, and that there was a lot of textbook abuse going on there, so there is no point me wasting any further time on this with you.

 

[MeeBee]

In my "tech" ignorance I considered text msgs are part of phone evidence.

Phone history.

 

[Viper]

In my "tech" ignorance I considered text msgs are part of phone evidence.

Some, but others are in the WhatsApp evidence, those have not been read out but they are in evidence and likely will be read out by Roux first to try to explain them before Nel hammers OP with them!

 

[jay-jay]

Exactly. She can't tell us her side of it anymore thanks to being shot dead by OP, so her messages are her own evidence about the state of their 'deeply loving' relationship.

Yes, thank goodness for modern technology, otherwise we would never have known her side of it.

 

[Interested Bystander]

And this is why context is important. She thinks she was lovingly stroking his neck, he thinks she was tapping him. How can we possibly know who is right if we weren't there?

And does it really matter? The point is she touched him somehow, he got irritated and told her to stop. He realized afterward he should have asked her in a nicer way to stop. Still don't think irritation or moodiness is abuse. His excuses may be legitimate reasons for why he acted how he acted.

I can see what you are getting at but I think it depends from where one is coming from. I happen to think irritability and moodiness are the first signs things are wrong with a relationship. Particularly when someone is also being asked to change the way they are. I would be very wary of someone who got angry, picky, moody, selfish at only 8 weeks into a relationship. I also never cease to be amazed at how some (not all) girls who have been in an abusive relationship seem to end up in the same situation again.

 

[Gryffindor]

I agree. There are probably small or large pet hates in many relationships. If Reeva smoked and OP didn't quite like it, it really couldn't be construed as controlling or abusive if he indicated this in a message. The fact that it was gum is neither here nor there.

I'm inclined not to take these things in isolation when judging OP's relationship with Reeva.

The point being, it wasn't insignificant to Reeva. It was significant to Reeva, amongst other what you may deem, insignificant things. That in itself is extremely telling. That "minor" things (which they're not) in the relationship are so key, pivotal and MAJOR.

Context. Behaviours. Control.

Fear. Dread. Angst.

For another poster, Reeva didn't say scary. She said SCARED. Crucial difference.

 

[MeeBee]

Eh? .. OK, if you're not going to take this seriously then there's no point discussing this any further. My point was about the way people communicate these days, and it is only just recently that this has come about. When you said 'when I was a teenager', it sounds like quite a while ago. Anyway, it's clear to me that you're not going to accept there was anything wrong in the relationship between Reeva and OP, and that there was a lot of textbook abuse going on there, so there is no point me wasting any further time on this with you.

I was 18 at the time and I'm 25 now so I guess it depends on your definition of quite a while ago. We texted, we did not email. It was an emotionally abusive relationship that turned to stalking. This last a year only. I don't like to talk about such things and I don't think it's healthy to project your (general you) experiences onto every situation and every relationship you come across or to turn every man into an abuser. I'm not saying it was a perfect relationship just you cannot possibly tell from four text conversations. So many things go one outside of them that you can't see. There's no huge red flags in there that I can see. Similarity, it's clear to me you will not accept that maybe there was nothing particularly nefarious going on.

 

[Viper]

Idk, if it was rape I'd think that'd be a red flag...

I think the state was just saying, basically what you were saying earlier: why would he be looking at minutes after his beautiful girlfriend walked into the door if this was really a loving relationship?

And...not sure how gay can be worse than rape/abuse ?[/QUOTE]

BIB Simple. Rape/abuse is something that some heterosexual couples act out in fantasies in the privacy of their own bedrooms, but is just a fantasy and they don't hurt one another. So if it were those types of that OP was watching he could explain that to the Court, the State would have nothing to say really. But if OP was in to homosexual the State could show that OP really did not consider Reeva to be "the love of his life."