Trial Discussion Thread #17

[Duchy]

Personally, I can hear perfectly well over my oscillating fans so, yeah, I suppose he could have heard the window sliding open. If his hearing was sort of obstructed he also could have heard what he thought was a window being opened when Reeva closed the door. But without him explaining it, once again, I can only speculate.

You can turn off fans by pressing a button behind the fan.

 

[Insp.Dots]

Thank you for some badly needed reason and balance.

It is all do-able/possible when you read that. especially if we also add to that OP's known paranoia.
I will still wait to give my verdict until the defence has been.
I have issue with the Intentional Murder part....there is no doubt that they were 'in love' IMO. So the big question for me is how in a few hours with no big evidence to set them off did a row turn into Oscar wanting to kill RS. I get that she may have been trying to leave him after the row....but what was it that made him SO totally mad.
Yes, she was friends with her ex and had never hidden that from OP, even WL doesn't say she was upset or scared, not a hint. If anything he says RS wouldn't be with OP if he was a bad man. He never physically threatened his ex's. ST would still be with him if she could, his EX of 5 years says he was never bad to her. Possessiveness is not a rare thing, lots of men and women are that way, usually from previous hurt. SO My billion dollar question is what drove OP to intentionally kill Reeva, as yet I just don't have an answer which leaves me on the Murder charge, which I can see being downgraded to culpable if the defence have their way.
PLEASE don't jump on me, this is just my honest thought from a would-be jurors look at it all so far.

 

[Cherwell]

That's fair enough. I agree the screaming has to be looked at carefully.

It's the tracking of Reeva's body parts that doesn't sit at all right with me.

No, he had no way of knowing how she was positioned after she'd fallen.

 

[Feynman]

I don't think either Stipp looked out exactly as the shots were being fired, but afterwards when they heard screaming the light was on according to their testimony.

In any event, I did not get the impression that the bathroom was totally dark like the bedroom. There would have been some ambient light from the bathroom windows I think. Far as I know, OP never said the bathroom was pitch black but I might have forgotten.

Remember, one of the bathroom windows was open. OP said "I noticed that the bathroom window was open. I realised that the intruder/s was/were in the toilet because the toilet door was closed and I did not see anyone in the bathroom." that's from the affidavit. The clear implication is that he has visibility in the bathroom.

 

[Feynman]

Only one witness has reports this, and I feel her home is too far from OP's house to hear loud talking, "as if arguing" coming from there. Yelling? Probably. But not loud talking.

Yet Merwe heard the loud voices again in 2014 when Roux and his merry crew were testing out various acoustic scenarios.

 

[Feynman]

According to Samantha he and Darren laughed and no one screamed like a woman "I'm deaf" - but Darren did testify that there was a very loud ringing in his ears. So, yeah, kind of like that.

"my ears were bleeding" or something like that. A single gunshot without ear protection can permanently damage hearing.

 

[minor4th]

Remember, one of the bathroom windows was open. OP said "I noticed that the bathroom window was open. I realised that the intruder/s was/were in the toilet because the toilet door was closed and I did not see anyone in the bathroom." that's from the affidavit. The clear implication is that he has visibility in the bathroom.

That's what I assumed. And now that you mention it, I do remember that from his statement

 

[minor4th]

Yet Merwe heard the loud voices again in 2014 when Roux and his merry crew were testing out various acoustic scenarios.

But they were standing outside in front of the house at that time. Of course there's still an argument to be made that she could have heard them inside if the windows were open and they were arguing loudly.

I think at this point it doesn't matter because she didn't identify the woman's loud talking as coming from Oscar's house.

 

[Insp.Dots]

Was just thinking, wishing we didn't have this gap in the court proceedings as I feel like I will be totally insane by next week....Which then makes me realize how truly unbearable it must be for the innocent people involved in the case. Poor Reeva's family and friends. OP's family and friends...guilty or not I would think that it highly possible it could lead to a mental breakdown for OP. All his own doing.
The one thing we CAN all be sure off is that OP is already paying for his actions that night and Justice will be done very shortly.
RIP beautiful Reeva.

 

[Feynman]

And how many bullet holes does the washer sport? NONE.

But he didn't hear movement inside the washer. "I heard movement inside the toilet." - affadavit

 

[Gryffindor]

Sorry, that is incorrepleaThe ladders were laying flat at the base of the house and were not even under the bathroom window.

Yeah, you and I know that That's why I put "Oscar's claim", as he did in his plea statement .

 

[Gryffindor]

But he didn't hear movement inside the washer. "I heard movement inside the toilet." - affadavit

No but he states he thought the washing machine was an intruder, SAME as Feb 14th bathroom scenario

 

[DebinGA]

"my ears were bleeding" or something like that. A single gunshot without ear protection can permanently damage hearing.

Wonder how many ear protectors OP owns and whether he keeps one near his gun?

 

[Feynman]

steve - it's fact that she was shot in the hip first. Viper is stating a fact from the trial, it's not an assumption.

That's certainly not a fact. It's a theory put to the court by the PT via Mangena. Don't be surprised if Roux and crew attempt to demolish it.

 

[Gryffindor]

I CAN'T WAIT till Monday. Has felt like FOREVER :-\

 

[Gryffindor]

Just to say, this is a great site to be part of, so thank you to EVERYONE who participates, no matter how frequently or infrequently. Regardless of disagreements, agreements, opposing views or similar views.

The discussion, chat and banter always covers every angle possible and is always food for thought

Well done everyone. Good job :-D

 

[Noisy Fan]

What was the response Oscar expected from the intruder(s)?

If the threat was farther away, downstairs or outside trying to get in, he might have woken Reeva to escape down the stairs but these were inside the on-suite bathroom, close, maybe 5 seconds away from the bed. So, quickly, quietly he retrieves his weapon and places himself between Reeva and the threat. Once he has space protecting Reeva, he warns them to vacate his house and yells for Reeva to call the police. He has a weapon pointed in their direction. You are Oscar. It is real and happening now. What would you do?

You have not heard what you wanted which was an evacuation back out the window or the words,"we give up don't shoot us!" Instead you hear movement and action around that toilet door. It all becomes very real and immediate. What would you do? Reeva is safe back in bed and there are intruders in the toilet and they aren't saying anything, but they are playing with the door handle. What will you do? ... Times is almost up ...

So, you decide to fire one shot towards the sound around the door handle. You don't fire center mass, you tip the gun down 5 degrees. Bang. You hear more crashing around but still no words of surrender. What do you do?

Please stay in character as well, no jumping between prosecution model and defence model. Defence model has Oscar believing the threat behind the door was about to come at him. What would you do?

Times up.

If the intruders were real are you dead or alive?

Again this is the defence model ...

 

[Interested Bystander]

Yeah, you and I know that That's why I put "Oscar's claim", as he did in his plea statement .

Sorry, I completely misunderstood.:blushing:

 

[steveml]

steve - it's fact that she was shot in the hip first. Viper is stating a fact from the trial, it's not an assumption.

I'm afraid it isn't a fact. This is an opinion introduced by the prosecution expert witness.

You seriously don't think it ends there do you?

The DT will now bring in their expert witness. Then everyone get's to listen to his opinion.

Only then can we decide what we believe is most probable.

 

[DebinGA]

Previewing the DT pathologist testimony:

"During cross-examination, defense attorney Barry Roux suggested the magazine rack caused bruising on Steenkamp's back, the Telegraph said. Mangena disagreed, but Roux said the expert hadn't tested that theory.Roux also said the shooting sequence couldn't be determined, and Mangena again said, "I disagree with that." [UPI - Mangena's on stand]

I understand why Roux wants the head shot to be first, but what difference does it make whether RS's back bruises were from the ricochet or the rack? I think I read Roux also said or will say there was no ricochet, despite the one bullet hole in the wall. How would there being no ricochet help OP? Didn't he admit to firing 4 shots?