Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[jay-jay]

Section 60, Bail Application Statement:

"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains. I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom."

OP is now saying he didn't go 'out onto the balcony', just put one foot out .. and Nel is disputing this and saying it conflicts with what he stated in his Bail Application (above).

 

[canny]

Horrible lunch for OP and his dream team today.

 

[BritsKate]

I don't understand where this Prosecutor is going. He's all over the place and I think even the Judge is getting a bit anxious.

Nel is calling OP out on every, itty bitty discrepancy. It's becoming a semantics game though because OP is arguing back rather than answering.

More will come after lunch.

 

[zwiebel]

N asks OP a question and O stops him, wants time to read through the statement.

Still going back and forth with the on/off the balcony thing. OP maintains he did not go out on the balcony.

Lunch.

I am not really sure what all this is about.....why does Nel want OP out on the balcony so much? Wouldn't that mean he was more likely not to hear Reeva get up and go to the bathroom?

 

[MeeBee]

Do you think he should be pussy footing around then, in order not to upset the accused? I don't.

That's not what I said.

 

[jay-jay]

Nel is calling OP out on every, itty bitty discrepancy. It's becoming a semantics game though because OP is arguing back rather than answering.

More will come after lunch.

.. important though, he needs to pick him up on all of these things which have been changed since the bail statement .. and they are things that we have all been listing on here, too!

 

[james83]

Nel "Why are you arguing with me"
Op"Sorry"
Nel "Sorry isnt a answer, why are you arguing"

This is the real OP ladies and gentlemen.

 

[jay-jay]

N asks OP a question and O stops him, wants time to read through the statement.

Still going back and forth with the on/off the balcony thing. OP maintains he did not go out on the balcony.

Lunch.

I am not really sure what all this is about.....why does Nel want OP out on the balcony so much? Wouldn't that mean he was more likely not to hear Reeva get up and go to the bathroom?

Yes, both that and he wants to show that OP has been shifting some of his 'evidence' to fit his overall version of events.

 

[MsY]

I'm disappointed. Urgh.

 

[Viper]

Lol, Nel's just read something he attributed to Roux and it was him! It was from the Botha testimony, about 'being out on the balcony'.

Now Roux's up objecting: 'That does not come from the bail affidavit.'

Judge agrees: That's very important.

BIB I missed that. Do you remember what Nel read?

 

[Rumpole]

I don't see this nit-picking getting Nel anywhere... he is just short of questioning the punctuation in the bail application.
It is obvious what the story is regarding the fans. Let it go Nel.

Op NEVER said he was on the balcony when he heard the noise. It was always after he shut the door and drew to curtains, and so unless OP could do that while on the balcony, jump off and runaround the house and back up to the bedroom... he clearly drew the curtains while in the bedroom????

 

[Cherry]

What time est does court begin again?

 

[04009margaret]

O doesn't recall calling baba, switiching on bathroom lights, carrying Reeva. But "There was no reconstruction of anything in my house"

He read every expert witness report & his testimony was constructed around those reports & witness statements. Listen carefully to his words, he doesn't remember a lot of things, so his testimony was not all his memory

 

[Viper]

Yes, both that and he wants to show that OP has been shifting some of his 'evidence' to fit his overall version of events.

BIB If OP shifted evidence of the events between 1) going to bed and 2) killing Reeva that is very telling. Besides not going on to the patio, what else did he "shift?"

 

[BritsKate]

I'd never call this nit-picking. It's an attorney being thorough for the benefit of their case. Now - if Nel asks the same question 17 times in 14 different ways - then I may concede nit-pickery. :biggrin:

 

[Rumpole]

This is going to take a very long time if Nel does not get on and ask clearly what it is he wants answered. I am sure OP can cope.

I wonder if it is a language problem... is English a second language for Nel?

 

[Cherry]

I agree w margaret he has tailored his statement completely which is wot nel was getting at

 

[rachael123]

Wish we could see his face.He is going the route of arguing instead of answering and he will go downhill fast.Funny how he's not sobbing now.

Nel "Why are you arguing with me"
Op"Sorry"
Nel "Sorry isnt a answer, why are you arguing"

This is the real OP ladies and gentlemen.

 

[Rumpole]

What time est does court begin again?

8:00AM EST... trust me, I'm a Time Lord

 

[MeeBee]

I don't see this nit-picking getting Nel anywhere... he is just short of questioning the punctuation in the bail application.
It is obvious what the story is regarding the fans. Let it go Nel.

Op NEVER said he was on the balcony when he heard the noise. It was always after he shut the door and drew to curtains, and so unless OP could do that while on the balcony, jump off and runaround the house and back up to the bedroom... he clearly drew the curtains while in the bedroom????

Yes, that one got away from him. He was trying to say OP said he was on the balcony when he heard the noise, then read the sentence and :doh: