Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[zwiebel]

Nel's reading a court record: Or asking OP to?

No. Nel just read it. It was about defence saying the scene 'contaminated, disturbed and tampered with' Nel asks if that was why he pleaded not guilty.

It's a plea explanation but OP says that's not why he pled not guilty. (he repeated the contamination etc really fluenlty)

 

[jay-jay]

This unravelling quicker than I expected.

Yes, same here! :floorlaugh:

:jail:

 

[zwiebel]

OP setting out reasons why people will come forward to explain how scene was tampered with. But Nel insisting he wants to hear what the tampering is from OP.

O: There were many things....he then lists phones, firearms, clothes etc. All moved.

Nel now going thru, item by item.

 

[soozieqtips]

WTH...he signed it. His freedom and life depended on it.

They brought it to him and he signed it???

Doesn't even take responsibility FOR HIS OWN STATEMENT.

So he knowingly signed a document that he knew contained incorrect information... and never bothered to correct it - but when Mrs Stipp corrected her OWN statement, she was the subject of several sarcastic and mocking comments on here by some posters. Those same posters said that if OP was found to have done the same thing, they would be as hard on him as they were on Mrs Stipp. Well, guess what. OP's done the same thing... AND he didn't bother to correct his false document.

 

[steveml]

I can see what Nel's trying to show, but Judge Masipa is well aware of how these things are scrutinised by lawyers before submission.

He's doing exactly the same as Roux did when he suggested that the witnesses didn't fill in their statements entirely on their own.

Fair play, it's only to be expected.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel asks where was Reeva's cell before?

OP explaining how the photo shows it's been moved.

N: Where was it before?

O: I don't remember where I left the cell phone.

N: You cannot remember where you put Reeva's phone?...

 

[Lyra500]

They're back....

N: Was it ever your version you went onto the balcony

O: In my bail statement it was said I went out on the balcony....at that time it was interpreted I went onto the balcony...I never said I went onto the balcony.

O: As I said I wasn't there when my statement was drawn up-if I could change....I'm sure that what they wrote there they interpreted as what I'd said....as I said, I never went onto the balcony to bring the fan in

What has happened to the second fan? Has that disappeared again? Didn't he claim he brought in two fans at the beginning of the trial? Has he reverted to the one fan in the bail hearing affidavit?

 

[BritsKate]

Nel calling Oscar out on his (over) preparedness. Not answering question posed - answering about investigators not wearing protective clothing because that's what he wants to answer.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel 'advises' O to listen to his questions.

 

[kaos]

Jesus H Christ, he's just not answering a straight question where the phone was!

"I don't have the photos in front of me".

If he knew it had been moved then surely it stands to reason he knew where it was moved from to know it had been moved in the first place.

 

[Interested Bystander]

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????

Just catching up. In his Bail Affidavit OP definitely said he closed the doors, blinds and curtains before he said he heard a noise but I don't think Nel was at that point arguing from the actual bail statement. He said they would come back to that after lunch. I think he was reading from trial notes where I assume the bit about closing everything up was not stated.

Nel seems to be going softly, softly. Did something happen this morning to cause this? I cannot read 20 odd pages of posts to find out before they return from lunch.

 

[04009margaret]

Wow, keeps repeating the words contaminated, disturbed & tampered with

 

[zwiebel]

WTH?

OP is talking about the case like he's a disinterested, third party. Nothing to do with him. And he sounds a bit like a lawyer? He is not answering the question, just reading something.

Judge asks for line number from where he is reading.

 

[steveml]

So he knowingly signed a document that he knew contained incorrect information... and never bothered to correct it - but when Mrs Stipp corrected her OWN statement, she was the subject of several sarcastic and mocking comments on here by some posters. Those same posters said that if OP was found to have done the same thing, they would be as hard on him as they were on Mrs Stipp. Well, guess what. OP's done the same thing... AND he didn't bother to correct his false document.

OP should have done the plea explanation totally on his own. He deserves this questioning.

no problem with that.

 

[BritsKate]

What has happened to the second fan? Has that disappeared again? Didn't he claim he brought in two fans at the beginning of the trial? Has he reverted to the one fan in the bail hearing affidavit?

Not actually on the balcony either. Sort of half in, half out. You've gotta throw the bail affidavit out altogether too because it's his attorney's interpretation, not his.

Still on plural fans right now. They'll morph back into one by tomorrow. Just wait.

 

[zwiebel]

N: Are u saying the fans were tampered with?

O: Pls give me the meaning of tampered with again?

Judge steps in and says as O didn't write the affidavit, he deserves clarification of what 'tampering' means.

 

[kaos]

Nel calling Oscar out on his (over) preparedness. Not answering question posed - answering about investigators not wearing protective clothing because that's what he wants to answer.

More box ticking for OP. Getting the bit about police tampering into the evidence.

 

[zwiebel]

O: ...in that case I'd say it was tampered with (he talks about it only in ref to photos of the crime scene. Not him putting something somewhere that he knows got moved).

 

[Insp.Dots]

Knew this would come up.
He has a point in saying anyone involved would have a problem with changes, and the problem for the state is.....it's true.
HB needs to be called....if they want to get rid of this issue.
It's a fine line as there is still plenty of other evidence.
Notice.... how confident OP now sounds when he KNOWS he is speaking the truth.
Fascinating stuff.

 

[BritsKate]

Phillip de Wet@phillipdewet
All that money spent on lawyers and nobody told #OscarPistorius to leave argument to his advocate.

https://twitter.com/phillipdewet