Trial Discussion Thread #20 - 14.04.08, Day 18

[Magdalyn]

Imo, he stopped maturing emotionally around the age of 15 yrs old. Something seems off or stunted regarding his emotional age vs his physical age. It's as if he stopped maturing mentally in his early teen years but continued to age physically.

JMOO

ETA: redundant sentences.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

I think 15 is too generous. :seeya: I have a 15 year old boy. He's your average teen, rolls the eyes from time to time, but emotionally....years ahead of OP's observable behaviors. I'd estimate OP's emotionally maturity/reactions/responses to be the equivalent to a toddler. I'm not kidding. Not even a little.

OP's behaviors (fingers in ears, sobbing outbursts, lopsided, ever changing story telling (can only remember details that make him look good, otherwise...all a blur!) all smack of toddlerhood to me.

What, in my opinion, killed Reeva? OP giving free reign to the mother of all temper tantrums.

And before someone can ask what precipitated the temper tantrum... IMO, the same thing that would inspire any three year old to have a temper tantrum. He wasn't getting his way, or Reeva wasn't listening, Reeva would stop yelling, Reeva was leaving, Reeva and I don't want you to leave, Reeva was taunting me, Reeva called me a name, Reeva made fun of me, OP is jealous, OP is embarrassed, OP is tired and Reeva won't let me sleep....Seriously. I think he's three. Especially after today.

So well done OP and defense, you really swayed me today! :jail:

 

[kittychi]

I guess you missed the memo

The State contends that OP is lying. He never thought there was an intruder. He fired at the door KNOWING that Reeva was in there.

YES you can certainly chose to not believe a witness (including the defendant). That is usually covered in Jury instructions. You give testimony weight according to how you perceive the credibility, accuracy etc of a witness. You can reject some or all of a witness's testimony. If the Judge thinks that OP is lying to avoid jail.. she will discount his testimony. She has to be sure it is untrue, though if she is to reject his version as completely discredited. She has to be SURE that the State's version is true before accepting that, and any reasonable alternative explanation is sufficient to counter "Beyond Reasonable doubt"

You can not say with certainty that OP lied about Sunroof incident.

A giggly 17 year old fb bffwb who has been dumped is not somebody whose evidence I would give much weight to.
Darren Fresco? I would not believe about anything.. he was caught lying on the stand after a plea bargain to tell the truth :floorlaugh:

Yes, i missed the memo...i was going by the indictment.

 

[Forensics]

Exactly what is the lie?

Whatever seeming inconsistencies there are, you can bet Nel won't let them slide. He's not even finished with direct examination.

If he's lying and cannot explain things it should be obvious during cross examination.

After hearing him today, I find his account more credible than I ever have.

Yes, I think Nel's direct examination will be pivotal to the case, as least in my mind. The perceived inconsistencies will either be explained away or fully exploited to open up major holes in OP's defence strategy.

 

[Gryffindor]

I found OP testimony "heart wrenching"

As human beings we empathize (to a greater or lesser extent) when we hear of fellow human beings in dire circumstance.

I could imagine his fear and dread... terror...total darkness and on his stumps he would be as vulnerable as a small child... I picture a child rather than a 6ft adult.

And afterwards.... I can imagine more terror, confusion and the horror of seeing what he had done.

People can get right into hearing, seeing, reading fictional description .. and feel emotion and cry themselves (over fictional events). Listening to Oscar was far more that a fictional description it was real and VERY moving. (for me)

And that was purely auditory. No visuals.

Even more powerful. Haunting . . .

 

[BabaJ]

That's what the post was - that everyone in the court room thought it was genuine (except for the political lobbyists, but what do you expect from those who believe all men are bad abusers and all women are innocent victims)

I am not sure how much credibility this article has but it shows that OP's performance may be interpreted differently by a psychologist (I hope it is OK to post the link) http://www.biznews.com/oscar-pistorius-performance-may-prove-mental-state/

On another note I believe that OP can get extremely volatile and probably killed Reeva in a rage knowing well what he was doing. There are a lot of week points in his testimony and extremely unreasonable behaviour, which is hard to explain. It also seems to me that OP embellished his original story to reflect the evidence given by the prosecution. I really, really detest the fact that there was no assistance provided to Reeva immediately as well as she was laying downstairs like a piece of garbage, while a number of OP relatives and acquaintances were called and nobody would worry about notifying her family for almost one hour.

However, I do not feel that at this point the prosecution has enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was premeditated.

My opinion only

 

[Val1]

That's what the post was - that everyone in the court room thought it was genuine (except for the political lobbyists, but what do you expect from those who believe all men are bad abusers and all women are innocent victims)

Was RS's mom in the courtroom at that point? From the occasional pan to her during today's spectacle, she certainly didn't look either convinced or impressed by OP's story.

 

[luvmygarden]

Yes it pretty unfortunate that Baba impliedly told us that he can't scream like a woman anymore because it was a one time event.

I really believed in Roux when he said he will show us that Baba can scream like a woman when he was trying to discredit a witness!

So he had it planned with OP to do all the hysterical crying maybe. Judge may not like R using court time that way I bet. I like the testimony asked and answered not just a long conversation like yesterday and today.

 

[G.bng]

Nel still has to cross examine. Though he hasn't presented hard evidence thus far for premeditated. Not at all.

And the screaming I mentioned a few pages back. If 500 witnesses testified to female screams, it's irrelevant, as Oscar DIDN'T hear anything, thus didn't know it was Reeva behind door. He's the one who has to hear screaming.

How does anyone PROVE Oscar DID hear her screaming? Now that's tricky . . .

Nope. Neither "irrelevant", or "tricky", simply ridiculous. The judge doesn't need the prosecution to PROVE Oscar heard Reeva screaming, rather for her to find, based on all of the evidence, (ME testimony and ear witnesses), whether it is more reasonable than not to conclude that he did. The judge can't accept as a fact that OP didn't hear her just because OP says so, when it is obvious OP cannot admit to hearing Reeva scream because if he does he is 100% toast... and burnt to a shrivel at that!

 

[luvmygarden]

I wish Nel could get the crime scene out of the way first. Let OP have his meltdowns and be done. Then get on to the evidence that would make OP look silly having a melt down for his finale. Then I can really get the facts organized in my head innocent or guilty. Today was such a distraction at the end. The OP Documentary yesterday was much easier to sit through.

 

[wb180]

Best post of the thread, imo! Thank you!

Just how do we getbthis to Nel?! :clap:

I'm sure PT and DT are all reading WS for tips as there are lots of smart people (for and against OP side!)!

 

[wb180]

I wish Nel could get the crime scene out of the way first. Let OP have his meltdowns and be done. Then get on to the evidence that would make OP look silly having a melt down for his finale. Then I can really get the facts organized in my head innocent or guilty. Today was such a distraction at the end. The OP Documentary yesterday was much easier to sit through.

Wonder if someone will do a comparison of the various versions of events (albeit it is the same general story of intruder and fear - have to give that to OP!)

 

[luvmygarden]

Wonder if someone will do a comparison of the various versions of events (albeit it is the same general story of intruder and fear - have to give that to OP!)

Yes true, I forget it is really about Oscar P not the deceased. Sad but true. Reeva was done with this whole thing Last feb. 14th a year ago. She is in her home of glory and at peace. Poor Oscar!!!

 

[katydid23]

I found OP testimony "heart wrenching"

As human beings we empathize (to a greater or lesser extent) when we hear of fellow human beings in dire circumstance.

I could imagine his fear and dread... terror...total darkness and on his stumps he would be as vulnerable as a small child... I picture a child rather than a 6ft adult.

And afterwards.... I can imagine more terror, confusion and the horror of seeing what he had done.

People can get right into hearing, seeing, reading fictional description .. and feel emotion and cry themselves (over fictional events). Listening to Oscar was far more that a fictional description it was real and VERY moving. (for me)

BBM

SO he is as vulnerable as a child, and unsteady on his stumps. And so what did he do?

Did he call quickly for armed backup? Did he grab Reeva and his gun and head for the exit?

NO, he ran on his stumps, into a long dark hallway, screaming, headlong into unknown danger, that he thought was armed and more powerful than him?

I just cannot get past that. It does not ring true to me at all.

 

[luvmygarden]

Wonder if someone will do a comparison of the various versions of events (albeit it is the same general story of intruder and fear - have to give that to OP!)

Also with Oscar so unsteady without his legs how is he stable enough to shoot his gun? That is a mystery to me.

 

[Val1]

One thing that I didn't understand today.......

Why did Reeva ask him if he wants something warm to drink the night of Feb 13? They weren't at Reeva's place, they weren't married, so why was she waiting on him as if he was a child?

I can answer that, to put him in a good mood...

 

[minor4th]

I think that the evidence that will be the best evidence as to who was screaming will be evidence around the time line. Especially times confirmed by phone records.

People can be reluctant to believe that OP can "scream like a woman"... although that can never be totally discredited as not being possible under such extreme conditions as occurred at the time of the shooting... However, if the time of the shots is established (which it is in my mind) and the time of the screams is established as after that, then the screams were NOT Reeva. She was incapable of screaming after the shots. The State concede that point. The screams were OP unless there is some woman out there who happened to be passing by the estate randomly screaming that night.

I don't see how the state has any case at all for murder at all if they're not going to give some kind of conclusive evidence about what the first gunshots were that the Stipps heard. We haven't even gotten a theory - much less conclusive evidence.

 

[minor4th]

Also with Oscar so unsteady without his legs how is he stable enough to shoot his gun? That is a mystery to me.

He was supporting himself with the wall

 

[vansleuths]

Do you think we might see the PT start the cross examination tomorrow or are we going to sit through another day of this?

 

[Rumpole]

I'm sure PT and DT are all reading WS for tips as there are lots of smart people (for and against OP side!)!

I have seen several people post that they think the SA teams are reading at WS.

What is it you think they are reading here?

We don't have raw discovery documents as we did for Anthony case, where I know some very good analysis was done... and picked up on. I was involved.

But here we only know what little has been speculated on in the media (and some of that is wrong), plus what we hear at the trial. The people on the ground have far more knowledge of the documents and evidence in court.

I can not see the idle (and biased), and not fully informed speculation we all do at WS as being of the slightest interest?

 

[vansleuths]

The more he lies, the longer his sentence will be.

Mark my words, he's going to walk or get off very lightly with a non-custodial sentence. Watched his testimony yesterday/today, they are certainly plugging holes.

I remember reading somewhere here as to why he didn't just push the panic button and he did address this today....can't remember the exact details but it had to do with the batteries being down.

There were other questions that were similar and he is addressing them one at a time.