Trial Discussion Thread #30

[TrueDetective]

My theory runs along the lines of it being Colonel Motha, not Labuschagne as the 'family friend.... I got the distinct impression he was faffing about taking 'alternative 'photos as a direct competition to Van Staden, the official pic man....


When its all said and done, whatever the SAPS conclusion was that early morning at Oscars home.. it was not reliant on all the ear witnesses or ballistics or autopsy... they had Oscar charged with murder in the garage within a few hours of being called out there.. whatever they saw...and its all in Van Stadens photos.. it convinced them, and it must have been convincing to the Dept Of Justice, Prosecutions and they haven't backtracked from it to this day..

thanks for your posts, capetowner... welcome to the laager of websleuths..

Ive been catching up on Dix's testimony.. . I cried with laughter, god help us.. thanks to everyone for your astounding comments...

I reckon Roux put Dixon up there because his bill isn't being paid.. there can be no other explanation , he was grotesquely absurd..

Welcome back T.
Glad to see someone else who saw the Dixon charade in its true light - a truly ridiculous low point of the trial on almost every level.

 

[TrueDetective]

The Pistorious's are pure 'Lannister' from Game of Thrones.

Oscar makes a fine Joffrey.

He does seem to be very close to his sister...

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Welcome back T.
Glad to see someone else who saw the Dixon charade in its true light - a truly ridiculous low point of the trial on almost every level.

He was pretty effective at placing the magazine rack where the prosecution had said it was .
I am really surprised OP didn't need his bucket or tissues during that part of his testimony

 

[TrueDetective]

Why did Roux have OP use both putative self defense and involuntary action in his testimony?

To bring an alternative plea into play. Keep another option on the table.
There can't be any other explanation surely, otherwise he would have been determined to clear it up. Or not even ask the question again.
Or maybe OP just veered off script and left him hanging.. Again. Remember the three setups he gave him to come clean on the ipad ? (Not that Nel then bothered to pursue it anyway)

 

[Viper]

On the .38 ammo.
Oscar had a whole slew of guns on order, as a dealer or collector.
But he did not have any ammo for any of those coming guns in his safe, only the .38 ammo. And perhaps a gun there with it?

Curiously 1 of the guns on order was basically a machne gun.

I recall one of the articles on him going back now 3 years ago or so alleges that the reporter saw several guns in his bedroom. The 9 mm parabellum and a machne gun. Now there are so many inaccuraccies in the OP matter, and in general from MSM, so I don't take the reporter's word on the machine gun as fact. Who knows?

As far as OP having a machine gun in his bedroom, I have seen a lot of confusion about firearms here at WS as folks endeavor to learn about them and understand how they work. So IMO what the writer saw as a machine gun was just as likely the air rifle fitted with the hunting silencer.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Why did Roux have OP use both putative self defense and involuntary action in his testimony?

Do you really believe Roux could have orchestrated that ? I had just thought it was OP being a train wreck loose cannon of a witness

 

[Lyra500]

Why did Roux have OP use both putative self defense and involuntary action in his testimony?

I thought that was probably due to OP going off piste, being true to form and absolutely refusing to admit responsibility for anything and ignoring his instructions from Roux et al.

Is there something to suggest it was Roux behind it? I thought Roux had his head in his hands and looked well cheesed off for most of OP's testimony - but that is only from what I have read rather than watching the TV coverage so I could well be mistaken.

 

[Trooper]

Welcome back T.
Glad to see someone else who saw the Dixon charade in its true light - a truly ridiculous low point of the trial on almost every level.

it was baffling, TD ... considering that one of Roux's main thrusts to Oscars defence is police incompetence, it just didn't jell at all. Why put a defence incompetent on the stand?? I maintain that a year wasn't long enough to mount a case of this complexity for either the defence or the prosecution, and Dix is a prime example of rushed work, ye gods the man was still pootling around last week gaining 'insight'....

He has to be a sudden inclusion as a witness.. I cant believe Roux would have had him as the prime mover from the get go, even though he says he was hauled in at around the bail hearing.. he must have sunk and then been fished out again in a hurry.. or... someone has started cutting costs. .

 

[Gbtaketwo]

I thought that was probably due to OP going off piste, being true to form and absolutely refusing to admit responsibility for anything and ignoring his instructions from Roux et al.

Is there something to suggest it was Roux behind it? I thought Roux had his head in his hands and looked well cheesed off for most of OP's testimony - but that is only from what I have read rather than watching the TV coverage so I could well be mistaken.

Off piste ,that is a good expression for OP's testimony

 

[BritsKate]

I think the defence has to be very careful introducing a previous head injury altogether. Either the defence is putative self-defence, which shouldn't require such evidence, or it isn't. Unless they're seeking to introduce it as a means of challenging the reasonable person definition?

If that's their aim I don't think it will go far considering his disability can't even be argued to mitigate the definition of reasonable person.

I believe if they had actual, irrefutable evidence of a traumatic brain injury they wouldn't have bothered with putative at all. They could have gone involuntary which would have given the best chance of outright acquittal. JMO

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[Viper]

Thanks for the reply a lot of useful info here.
Good to hear he won't be carrying a gun again.
With regard to the Ex girlfriends testimony my thoughts were that she will feel very lucky that it wasn't her so that to me will have mitigated any feelings of jealousy or bitterness she may have felt towards OP
To put herself through the Ordeal of giving evidence I figure she is probably speaking the truth but obviously that is just how I would see it if I had been in her position.
I was listening to legal view points on you tube today and they were saying the previous head injury is likely to be used in his defence .
That being the case it is very good that the prosecution brought the other charges at the same time as the murder charge because I can't see him being able to use the head injury as an excuse for them . I also am hoping for culpable homicide as a minimum even with the head injury excuse

This "head injury" thing is something I find funny, because IIRC he had a severe facial injury, not a head (brain) injury.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

it was baffling, TD ... considering that one of Roux's main thrusts to Oscars defence is police incompetence, it just didn't jell at all. Why put a defence incompetent on the stand?? I maintain that a year wasn't long enough to mount a case of this complexity for either the defence or the prosecution, and Dix is a prime example of rushed work, ye gods the man was still pootling around last week gaining 'insight'....

He has to be a sudden inclusion as a witness.. I cant believe Roux would have had him as the prime mover from the get go, even though he says he was hauled in at around the bail hearing.. he must have sunk and then been fished out again in a hurry.. or... someone has started cutting costs. .

You would have to think it was just a rush job and a second choice although
Magena rated him as being very competent if the press reports are to be believed.

 

[Gbtaketwo]

This "head injury" thing is something I find funny, because IIRC he had a severe facial injury, not a head (brain) injury.

One of the guys on the legal panel tried to say it was because he was placed in an induced coma rather than the injury itself but in any event I personally think OP may well have had all his traits long before that bump on the head /face

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Welcome!
I love your insightful posts!

Fair warning...yes this website is addicting. I came here following another case back in 2005 and have never left




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you! It's a fantastic site. Brilliant reasoning and logical thought added to that some healthy speculation and valid argument.

I really enjoy all the contributions. And via this website I saw the juror13 Blog mentioned, and I have started reading that as well. Brilliant. Not sure who the 'writer' is, but if he/she is on here - most impressive.

Perhaps I should :hills: before I start contributing late into the night and missing my meals :scared:

 

[Viper]

Do you really believe Roux could have orchestrated that ? I had just thought it was OP being a train wreck loose cannon of a witness

Yes. Roux had a year to pound in to OPs head exactly what he was supposed to say in his testimony. Throughout his testimony OP steadfastly answered the questions in the very same way. OP is not the brightest bulb in the box, but he is "fighting for his life" and you can bet everything that he is following his attorneys instructions and advice.

 

[BritsKate]

I thought that was probably due to OP going off piste, being true to form and absolutely refusing to admit responsibility for anything and ignoring his instructions from Roux et al.



Is there something to suggest it was Roux behind it? I thought Roux had his head in his hands and looked well cheesed off for most of OP's testimony - but that is only from what I have read rather than watching the TV coverage so I could well be mistaken.

I'm fairly certain it was Oscar's fault too. I highly doubt Roux would advise him to dip his toes into an involuntary defence. I think it likely Oscar heard from Roux 'it's not murder if they don't prove intent' and Oscar ran with it, not realising his defence was dependent on some intent.

There's a lot of question and debate as to whether he didn't irreparably harm his putative claim...and advice like that would only come from a defence advocate who got their degree free with a decoder ring.

MOO


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[sorrell skye]

Why did Roux have OP use both putative self defense and involuntary action in his testimony?

I don't think that was Roux's doing. I think OP, in a failed attempt to outwit Nel's damaging cross, unwittingly undermined his own defense of putative self defense.

I think after Nel demolished OP's version, OP may have realized how unbelievable his version sounds. He then went off script, possibly unaware that he was negating his initial defense position.

 

[TrueDetective]

Thank you! It's a fantastic site. Brilliant reasoning and logical thought added to that some healthy speculation and valid argument.

I really enjoy all the contributions. And via this website I saw the juror13 Blog mentioned, and I have started reading that as well. Brilliant. Not sure who the 'writer' is, but if he/she is on here - most impressive.

Perhaps I should :hills: before I start contributing late into the night and missing my meals :scared:

Cape, juror13 is our very own lisasalinger
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[Gbtaketwo]

Yes. Roux had a year to pound in to OPs head exactly what he was supposed to say in his testimony. Throughout his testimony OP steadfastly answered the questions in the very same way. OP is not the brightest bulb in the box, but he is "fighting for his life" and you can bet everything that he is following his attorneys instructions and advice.

That is an interesting viewpoint to consider. From all the reports I keep reading that seems to have been very bad for OP's case ,so what do you believe could be Roux's game plan on this . Where would be the benefit for OP ?

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

it was baffling, TD ... considering that one of Roux's main thrusts to Oscars defence is police incompetence, it just didn't jell at all. Why put a defence incompetent on the stand?? I maintain that a year wasn't long enough to mount a case of this complexity for either the defence or the prosecution, and Dix is a prime example of rushed work, ye gods the man was still pootling around last week gaining 'insight'....

He has to be a sudden inclusion as a witness.. I cant believe Roux would have had him as the prime mover from the get go, even though he says he was hauled in at around the bail hearing.. he must have sunk and then been fished out again in a hurry.. or... someone has started cutting costs. .

Dixon was already 'signed up' shortly after the shooting. He, Wolmarans, vd Westhuisen and Dr Perumal. Perumal won't testify. Dixon bombed out Gangnam style. Wolmarans and vd Westhuizen to go. (Both ballisticians)

Sadly for Wolmarans and vd Westhuizen; Dixon :facepalm: has already cast huge doubt on the scientific value of any and all tests they will present to the court. I'm sure Wollie will be on the phone to Barry (who is probably holidaying in Kleimond) throughout the 2 weeks.

Unless Barry cancelled his Easter Hols........ :fence: