Trial Discussion Thread #21 - 14.04.09, Day 19

[Viper]

Why would he add such an inconsequential detail? What exactly could he be hiding?

The jeans were found next to the duvet.

BIB Please tell us. OP is the person that added that little detail.

 

[MeeBee]

I thought he said he covered it. I posted link above. With light on.....he could see clearly.

I must have missed it if he did.

 

[TorisMom003]

Then plainly explain the mark on the bat that correlates to the angle it was placed into the crack in the door, that also shows an indented mark on timber of pressure from prying?

OP hasn't given an answer for that yet. Once he does, then you too will have your answer for that.

Ever notice that what OP and/or the defense claims is taken as fact? The "barking dog" that Roux brought up to Mrs. Stipp. The nearby witnesses that heard something different than the other 5 ear witnesses. The "I thought there was an intruder" excuse for killing Reeva. The toilet room light was broken.

Heck, if OP lies on the stand, it isn't really a lie. It's more of a longer explanation as to what he didn't say in his BAS and/or plea statement.

MOO

 

[aa9511]

Wow! I'm not seeing a connection in the 2 defendants at all. OP is making perfect sense; Jodi Arias never did.

If someone actually believed Jodi Arias' story, then her story would have made "perfect sense." It's only b/c you didn't believe it, i.e. knew she was lying, that it made no sense.

JMO.

 

[minor4th]

All he needs is witnesses that believably, fundamentally contradict what the other witnesses heard. That he needs exactly the same amount of witnesses the state had and they had to have heard the exact opposite of what the state's witnesses heard is not what is a strange expectation to have. The judge isn't going to throw away their testimony just because there were less witnesses. :facepalm:

He doesn't even need that. He has already raised plenty of reasonable doubt about the witnesses who heard screams mistakenly identifying Oscar's screams as female.

He's already got one witness (and her husband) who identified the cries as coming from Oscar when they were initially believed to be female. So we have it on record that it's possible for a witness to make that mistake. And unless Nel comes up with some kind of stunning evidence that he forgot to bring forward in his case-in-chief, we've got solid evidence that the gunshots were first, and the subsequent screaming heard by neighbors could not have been Reeva.

 

[MeeBee]

If someone actually believed Jodi Arias' story, then her story would have made "perfect sense." It's only b/c you didn't believe it, i.e. knew she was lying, that it made no sense.

JMO.

That goes both ways, I think.

 

[supernovaNic]

I just read a comment on a blog that says OP only uses his blades on the athletic track and his prosthetic legs the other time.

Didn't OP put on blades that night (I saw a crime scene photograph)? Or does his prosthetic legs have blades?

Just curious. Guess it has nothing to do with the case.

But today, when he got up in court and showed how high he could kick on the door - which legs was he wearing.

Also, I wonder how quickly he was able to put them back on in view of the judge. If he took his timeeeeeeeeeeeee, making it look like a tedious task... or put them on like he does every day.

 

[aa9511]

There wasn't evidence that there was nowhere to plug it in. There was a picture that Nel displayed that showed one extension chord with no available slots. But there was no foundation about when that picture was taken, who plugged those devices in or if it was even supposed to be a picture of the exact crime scene before anything was moved.

There were other places to plug it in. But I don't even get why this is important or why anyone thinks this is some kind of win for the State.

Let me put it to you this way.

Which pattern makes more sense:

LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE TRUTH LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE

or

LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE

 

[Trooper]

that dreadful apology that Oscar began his testimony with was so inappropriate as to defy all description. As to why Roux advised him on it , words fail me. It was an ambush, and I hate to use that word , of Mrs Steenkamp and the extended family of Reeva in a manner so calculating it was gob smacking..

Mrs Steenkamp has been stalked by Aimee, Uncle Arthur all thru this trial, the last business of her daughters life by this family, its repulsive. She has to be there at the trial of her daughters killer, and they took advantage of that in a purposeful and determined way that was and is beyond cruel. Pistorius has lawyers contracted to carry on his civil case against Mrs Steenkamp, and has done for a year.. if he wanted to apologise he could have traded letters between his and her lawyers.. but no. .. the public display , the façade is everything..

Legally, it was a real conker.. a bad walnut that will ferment. The timing of it was just awful.

 

[Inspector Gidget]

How come my bathroom has no cubicle? You open the door and there you are.Is this a South African thing?

 

[minor4th]

Then plainly explain the mark on the bat that correlates to the angle it was placed into the crack in the door, that also shows an indented mark on timber of pressure from prying?

There were marks on the bat that indicated where the bat broke through the door. There was speculation about prying. But if you believe Vermuelen on that, it's fine ...I don't think it matters, either way. He hit the door with the cricket bat 3 times and at least one of those strikes broke through the door or broke a piece off the door.

 

[wb180]

There wasn't evidence that there was nowhere to plug it in. There was a picture that Nel displayed that showed one extension chord with no available slots. But there was no foundation about when that picture was taken, who plugged those devices in or if it was even supposed to be a picture of the exact crime scene before anything was moved.

There were other places to plug it in. But I don't even get why this is important or why anyone thinks this is some kind of win for the State.

Well if there weren't places to plug it in, that means he lied again that the fans were still on coz I thought he said the fans under testimony were still on and he just moved them? Maybe I got that wrong though.

But if there were places to plug it in, then yes, this is pretty irrelevant.

 

[shane13]

I just read a comment on a blog that says OP only uses his blades on the athletic track and his prosthetic legs the other time.

Didn't OP put on blades that night (I saw a crime scene photograph)? Or does his prosthetic legs have blades?

Just curious. Guess it has nothing to do with the case.

But today, when he got up in court and showed how high he could kick on the door - which legs was he wearing.

Also, I wonder how quickly he was able to put them back on in view of the judge. If he took his timeeeeeeeeeeeee, making it look like a tedious task... or put them on like he does every day.

Blades are only for running.
Kicking was with his prosthetics.

 

[MeeBee]

I just read a comment on a blog that says OP only uses his blades on the athletic track and his prosthetic legs the other time.

Didn't OP put on blades that night (I saw a crime scene photograph)? Or does his prosthetic legs have blades?

Just curious. Guess it has nothing to do with the case.

But today, when he got up in court and showed how high he could kick on the door - which legs was he wearing.

Also, I wonder how quickly he was able to put them back on in view of the judge. If he took his timeeeeeeeeeeeee, making it look like a tedious task... or put them on like he does every day.

His blades are only for running. He wears proper prosthetics everywhere else. The prosthetics have feet. He was wearing his regular prosthetics for the demo because that's what's he was wearing that night.

He neither demonstrated putting them on or taking them off for the judge. He was asked to remove the prosthetics so the judge could see how tall he was on his stumps. He did this behind closed doors. When they came back he had his prosthetics on again, also done behind closed doors.

 

[ShadyLady]

I must have missed it if he did.

Oscar Pistorius Trial: Tuesday 8 April 2014, Session 3 - YouTube

Start at 1:11:00............first he says he closed the curtains and it was REAL DARK......then LOOOONG pause because he knows it was not that dark with blue light on.....so then he says HE CAME BACK IN (giving Reeva time to leave bed and not hearing her).....like he was on the deck.....and says he saw her jeans on floor....and then is ambiguous about covering light (either it was so dark he could not see Reeva, or it wasn't) and then QUICKLY comments on hearing something in bathroom....changing subject quickly as story makes no sense. IMO

 

[Viper]

There were marks on the bat that indicated where the bat broke through the door. There was speculation about prying. But if you believe Vermuelen on that, it's fine ...I don't think it matters, either way. He hit the door with the cricket bat 3 times and at least one of those strikes broke through the door or broke a piece off the door.

BIB Please post a link.

 

[Gavel Rash]

There were marks on the bat that indicated where the bat broke through the door. There was speculation about prying. But if you believe Vermuelen on that, it's fine ...I don't think it matters, either way. He hit the door with the cricket bat 3 times and at least one of those strikes broke through the door or broke a piece off the door.

I see a different picture, as you have described, he says he hit the door 3 times...not 4, as was heard by the witnesses, 4 definite gun shots.

 

[aa9511]

That goes both ways, I think.

Except only one is the truth. That means out of the 2 people, one person's perception is incorrect and one's is correct.

So IMO it really doesn't matter if it goes both ways or not, b/c only one can be right....the person either committed the crime or did not commit the crime.

YKWIM?

 

[supernovaNic]

Blades are only for running.
Kicking was with his prosthetics.

Thanks Shane.

So, I wonder how long it takes to put on his prosthetics. I still can't get over that he didn't put them on first before he went towards the area where he thought the intruder was. Unless it takes some time to put them on.

 

[DebinGA]

That would be a question for OP. We can't get into his mind to know why he lied about any of the things that he has lied about. Well, in a way we can. He lies because he is guilty and wants to walk out of court a free man, not walk into a prison for 25 years.

In that link posted nearer the top of this page OP is lying like a rug about the shot through the sunroof episode. It's a good example of the deference people show him, even the officers in that event. Obviously, he's well known there and gets preferential treatment.