Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[minor4th]

Dang, I do not understand most of Nel's questions. It seems he's just trying to be tricky and force an unwitting misstatement - rather than actually dealing with the substance of OP's testimony.

 

[Viper]

Blame game

Stander - he said put her down stopping OP from taking Reeva to hospital

And Dr. Stipp, because although he's a doctor he didn't seem very knowledgable and he absolutely did not bring Reeva back to life like I expected him to.

And the small fan. It's cord was to short, or I tripped over IT'S cord, or I... I am on trial for my life! It is not fair that I have to answer all of your questions. Ask my attorneys and my experts your questions, I'm on trial for my life! (Insert soundtrack of OPs fake crying here) :smile:

 

[zwiebel]

What's the problem with this?

I do recall him saying he put the cricket bat down to stop the door, but he explained that he did that because even though he locks the door, the locks are not that great or they don't always hold etc.

But I'm not seeing the problem in the various statements he made about the doors that you mentioned.

Maybe because when he left the bedroom last, he was carrying a dying woman he'd said he couldn't carry, that he needed the help of Stander with? So I can't see how he managed to shut the bedroom door behind him. Unless they are firedoors that swing shut automatically.

Unless I got confused about the order of the up and downstairs. Entirely possible. Some bits went very fast, others very slow today.

 

[04009margaret]

LOL I probably jumped the gun. I thought we were done, but it was only a break. I'm listening to the rest now.

It was a train wreck, I actually feel sorry for Roux

 

[DebinGA]

I hate to say it but I would not be totally surprised if OP had a complete mental and emotional collapse, landing him in a psych hospital before the trial is over.

beats prison, as he well knows

 

[Interested Bystander]

Please anyone? I missed practically all this morning's court proceedings but did I pick up somewhere that she had her phone in the toilet cubicle and that OP admitted he had checked to see if she had used it? Is this correct?

Can you imagine if she had been on a call when the shots rang out or when she was screaming - he needed to know that because there could have been damning evidence that would put him away for life.

 

[aa9511]

O: I asked the photographer if he could pls just take the photos so I could take my clothes off, because they were all just stained.

Oh poor poor Oscar. Stained clothes. Dirty hands. Poor, poor Oscar.

 

[minor4th]

In his affidavit, he says he went out onto the balcony. Now he says he never said that and that he was never out on the balcony. That's quite a leap from on the balcony... to never on the balcony. You did say if he'd knowingly signed a document that contained incorrect information, you'd be hard on him too... and he did indeed knowingly sign a document that contained incorrect information. It can't be one rule for him, and another for Mrs Stipp. He's also insisting his version has never changed, when in fact it's changed quite a bit! And if he knowingly signed a document which had incorrect information in it, how can you be sure which parts of it are true anymore?

The affidavit didn't say "out" on the balcony. It said "onto" the balcony. And you're right he didn't go "onto" the balcony, he simply went "to" the balcony.

I do not see that at all the same as Stipp saying she saw a man in a window that she didn't see.

Does it give me slight pause about the complete accuracy of his account and whether he has tailored it as time has passed? Well - yes, it's something that contributes to an overall skepticism about the truthfulness of all of his account.

As far as giving additional details and explanations later in his plea statement and his testimony - I don't see that as indicative of deception.

 

[crasshopper]

Ok, Nel is being confusing with his questions and nitpicking semantics - I want him to ask substantive questions.

Just like Roux...

 

[zwiebel]

I am thinking with this line of questioning, Nel really should have gathered some photos of the fans plugged into various sockets in the bedroom, to see if they actually reached out onto the balcony or not?

 

[BritsKate]

Dang, I do not understand most of Nel's questions. It seems he's just trying to be tricky and force an unwitting misstatement - rather than actually dealing with the substance of OP's testimony.

Or, Oscar is totally unable to answer anything directly without subsequently changing the testimony he's just testified to.

I'm really not joking when I stated he says he never intended to shoot the door he intended to shoot and he never denied intending to shoot it because it's obvious why.

He.said.that. He's a terrible, terrible witness. Innocent, guilty, or a flying purple people eater, he's still a terrible witness. (But I for one, don't actually believe that's Roux & Co's fault.)

 

[Gryffindor]

It was planned to show the photo

That's what I said in my post??????

 

[minor4th]

beats prison, as he well knows

But it would only be temporary until he could resume with the trial. Having a mental breakdown is not going to make the trial or the charges go away.

What I'm saying is I think his emotional state is very fragile right now and I could see him just having a complete breakdown and legitimately be unable to continue the trial until he is stabilized.

 

[soozieqtips]

He's the most indignant witness I've ever seen.

Seems to think he doesn't have to answer questions that he's already pretended to answer.

"Did your gun go off accidentally?"

"I was in fear for my life. I thought the intruders were going to come out and attack me"

"Did your gun go off accidentally?"

"I wasn't thinking. I knew I had to protect myself"

"Did your gun go off accidentally?"

"I wasn't thinking..... I had many thoughts...."

"Did your gun go off accidentally?"

 

[zwiebel]

beats prison, as he well knows

I think a SA poster said he might end up in Valkenburg where another man standing trial for murder, Dewani, has just gone? And that it hasn't got a good reputation?

I googled pics. I think it looks quite nice and imposing. From the outside. If you ignore the security fence.

 

[Gryffindor]

The affidavit didn't say "out" on the balcony. It said "onto" the balcony. And you're right he didn't go "onto" the balcony, he simply went "to" the balcony.

I do not see that at all the same as Stipp saying she saw a man in a window that she didn't see.

Does it give me slight pause about the complete accuracy of his account and whether he has tailored it as time has passed? Well - yes, it's something that contributes to an overall skepticism about the truthfulness of all of his account.

As far as giving additional details and explanations later in his plea statement and his testimony - I don't see that as indicative of deception.

And Dr Stipp stated movement of a figure at the bathroom window.

 

[minor4th]

Just like Roux...

In some respects, yes, but I could at least follow what information Roux was trying to elicit. With Nel, I cannot even figure out what information he wants. In fact, it seems like Nel is not even seeking information - he is only trying to rattle OP.

 

[soozieqtips]

Please anyone? I missed practically all this morning's court proceedings but did I pick up somewhere that she had her phone in the toilet cubicle and that OP admitted he had checked to see if she had used it? Can you imagine if she had been on a call when the shots rang out or when she was screaming - he needed to know that because there could have been damning evidence that would put him away for life.

Yes, her phone was in the toilet with her and he brought the phone out of the toilet to call for 'help help help' - but wasn't able to because he didn't know her passcode.

 

[soozieqtips]

The affidavit didn't say "out" on the balcony. It said "onto" the balcony. And you're right he didn't go "onto" the balcony, he simply went "to" the balcony.

I do not see that at all the same as Stipp saying she saw a man in a window that she didn't see.

Does it give me slight pause about the complete accuracy of his account and whether he has tailored it as time has passed? Well - yes, it's something that contributes to an overall skepticism about the truthfulness of all of his account.

As far as giving additional details and explanations later in his plea statement and his testimony - I don't see that as indicative of deception.

If he's on the balcony - then he's out on the balcony.
They're the same thing. He can't be on the balcony if he didn't go out onto the balcony.

BBM - but when State witnesses added details, you said they'd been influenced by the media and had added details that weren't there originally. How is what OP is doing any different? It's not!

 

[minor4th]

Nel has lost the plot IMO ...