Trial Discussion Thread #30

[BritsKate]

Do I detect a hint of bias regarding the Dewani trial which has not even started yet?

Other than believing he's guilty, I'm totally innocent of bias. :biggrin:


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

 

[Trooper]

Hey Trooper, glad to see you're out on parole! Welcome back! :seeya:

it was an unjust and ridiculous verdict.. :floorlaugh:

 

[molly333]

Why??

Why what?

Why a serious head injury? Any kind of severe blow to the head like that causes the brain to whipsaw inside the skull, bouncing against the skull walls.

Why relevant to this trial? Brain injuries affect behavior, including impulsivity.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Yes. OP had no real fear. He liked to play with his gun. He played with it in his house 'going comando' to that scarey washing machine. I guess he forgot the laundry was on.

OP is a liar. He lies. He speaks Oscar-speak . :jail:
I'd hate to see any other outcome than a prison term,

Oscar-speak :floorlaugh:

I like that.

Have you folk made a list yet? Anywhere I can see it - back posts?

I wish I had found this site whilst he was on the stand. I can imagine some of the comments.

I know my husband has started dabbling in Oscar speak to irritate me.....

Anything I ask gets a, "I don't remember M'lady".

 

[nastasya]

I think Nel made valid points regarding the above, and I think OP realized how implausible his version is, so he took it upon himself to insist that he didn't mean to shoot - claiming he fired accidentally.

Did anyone get a look at Roux when OP made that claim? I'd be willing to bet that Roux was wishing he could have jumped up and told his client to STFU.

I agree, but I don't think that OP changed the defense on his own. He's not that smart.

It was obvious that any reasonable person watching OP testify could see he was lying and making **** up as he went. Remember, in a case of prima facie murder, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to prove that the killing of the victim wasn't a violation of the murder laws.

OP's entire story was proven false during his cross examination. The only way it's not false is if they could prove the police moved things. Roux didn't challenge the position of the items in cross-examination of the police so they're stuck with the photos showing OP's story is a lie.

The only option left was to abandon the self-defense argument. Clearly, the prima facie case itself was not self-defense considering OP pursued what he alleges was a perceived threat.

Once the self-defense argument was abandoned, the only thing left is the gun went off on it's own.

As ridiculous as it sounds, there's nothing else left for OP. He's guilty, he was caught red-handed moments after he killed his girlfriend in cold blood.

All he histrionics and blubbering aside, he's a killer of an innocent woman who did nothing to deserve to die that night.

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

yes... I am an habitual attendee at Newlands and Constancia.

Gerri looks so laid back always in the first part of his trial appearance... lots of folks here were concerned... but .. one only has to wait for Nel to get to his definitive part.. his x-examination of defence witnesses.. he is ruthless.

Oscar is small peanuts to Nel.. he's taken on bigger and worse..

Most in the legal profession rate Nel as one of (if not) the finest cross examiner in the country.

His Jackie Selebi cross was something so special; schoolkids should be tested on it's content. His '5 great lies' list.

 

[yozzdi]

In OP's own version of events... Is there an indication of how much time could have elapsed between the shooting and the start of the cricket bat? From the neighbors testimony, it would seem like 15 minutes - 3:00am for the shots and 3:15am for the bats (using op's version). Fifteen minutes seems a long time to shout on balcony, briefly look for RS, and retrieve the bat. Is he claiming that he was doing other things too?
Has the defense indicated a timeline that was less then 15 minutes between these 2 events ?

 

[Trooper]

my infuriating partner has been doin Dixon all damn day... picking up his weird calipers and some old side rule he found in a drawer and crooning 'my instruments! my clivias!,,,,

 

[molly333]

it may be .... I emphasis may.. relevant to his sentencing, if Roux brings it up as a mitigating factor. ..its a very very very long shot and may only be applicable to what prison he is incarcerated in. ... its no part of the trial itself.. Oscar should have pleaded guilty due to mental diminishment. but he didn't.. that bird has flown.

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think it adds to putative self defense because it makes his state of mind and actions more believable. The Judge has to believe that he believed there was an intruder about to rush out of the toilet at him. But, we'll see.

 

[Gryffindor]

Thanks.

There are a few from SA that post on here. It's a beautiful country.

From your name I'm presuming you're from Cape Town. What part are you from and are you native SA?

It'd be good to have some info from a SA poster who has a first-hand perspective of the lifestyle and security issues in a populous area such as Cape Town.

Hi Steve.

Had Oscar lived in Pretoria for a substantial number of years or moved there more recently? I can't recall.

 

[Viper]

Yes - OP steadfastly answered Nel's questions with rote answers for the majority of his testimony - until Nel had dissected each and every aspect of OP's version to the point that I think even OP himself had begun to doubt that anyone would believe his claim that he had genuinely perceived he was in imminent danger when he shot Reeva.

His putative self defense claim is based on his state of mind at the time of the shooting. Nel hammered the point again and again that OP went toward the perceived danger, rather than away from it. Nel also reminded the Court again and again that OP (who claims to have believed his & Reeva's lives were in danger) at no time confirmed Reeva's whereabouts or ensured that Reeva was safe before firing through the toilet door.

I think Nel made valid points regarding the above, and I think OP realized how implausible his version is, so he took it upon himself to insist that he didn't mean to shoot - claiming he fired accidentally.

Did anyone get a look at Roux when OP made that claim? I'd be willing to bet that Roux was wishing he could have jumped up and told his client to STFU.

Here's the thing, while Roux was examining OP, did OP ever say that he feared for his life so he went after the intruder and intentionally fired four bullets at him? And if OP did not say specifically that, wouldn't Roux try again and again and again to get him to say that?

IDK. Maybe I am confused and OP did tell Roux that he intentionally fired at the intruder and he did not waffle about "accidentally" firing. Please let me know.

 

[Trooper]

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think it adds to putative self defense because it makes his state of mind and actions more believable. The Judge has to believe that he believed there was an intruder about to rush out of the toilet at him. But, we'll see.

:drumroll:

 

[Cape Town Crim.]

Why what?

Why a serious head injury? Any kind of severe blow to the head like that causes the brain to whipsaw inside the skull, bouncing against the skull walls.

Why relevant to this trial? Brain injuries affect behavior, including impulsivity.

It was his impulsive nature and reckless disregard that earned him the facial injury in the first instance.

The defects in personality were there long before he slammed the boat without a skipper's license.

In this case the chicken really did come before the egg.

 

[shane13]

Oscar-speak :floorlaugh:

I like that.

Have you folk made a list yet? Anywhere I can see it - back posts?

I wish I had found this site whilst he was on the stand. I can imagine some of the comments.

I know my husband has started dabbling in Oscar speak to irritate me.....

Anything I ask gets a, "I don't remember M'lady".

Oscar-Speak was my creation, naturally.
I am the only one in the world certifed directly by Oscar to grant degrees in Oscar-Speak.

As I wrote in my first post on Oscar-Speak. it is being offered at the best Unis in the world. It's a joint discipline between the Depts of Physics and Linguistics. That's because it incorporates Quantum Physics at the macroscopic level.

In a separate post I explained that--everything is indeterminate in Oscar World, as communcated via Oscar-Speak, in the multiverse into our own universe.

Should you wish to have Oscar-Speak offered at your Uni, you can PM me.

 

[molly333]

In OP's own version of events... Is there an indication of how much time could have elapsed between the shooting and the start of the cricket bat? From the neighbors testimony, it would seem like 15 minutes - 3:00am for the shots and 3:15am for the bats (using op's version). Fifteen minutes seems a long time to shout on balcony, briefly look for RS, and retrieve the bat. Is he claiming that he was doing other things too?
Has the defense indicated a timeline that was less then 15 minutes between these 2 events ?

Dr. Stipp if I recall, thought it was less than 7 minutes. Stipp heard the shots, then the screams, then he went to call security. While on the phone with security, he hears the second set of shots.

 

[BritsKate]

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think it adds to putative self defense because it makes his state of mind and actions more believable. The Judge has to believe that he believed there was an intruder about to rush out of the toilet at him. But, we'll see.

Liesbeth, I believe, posted the legal definition of a reasonable person and it isn't and cannot be mitigated by any disability - I personally believe any brain injury, which is rumour at this point - would likely be included. This isn't an American courtroom - by law there is very little room for mitigation.


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

 

[james83]

In OP's own version of events... Is there an indication of how much time could have elapsed between the shooting and the start of the cricket bat? From the neighbors testimony, it would seem like 15 minutes - 3:00am for the shots and 3:15am for the bats (using op's version). Fifteen minutes seems a long time to shout on balcony, briefly look for RS, and retrieve the bat. Is he claiming that he was doing other things too?
Has the defense indicated a timeline that was less then 15 minutes between these 2 events ?

According to Oscar it was around 5 minutes.

 

[weeeva]

other than believing he's guilty, i'm totally innocent of bias. :biggrin:


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

it was an unjust and ridiculous verdict.. :floorlaugh:

jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[shane13]

It was his impulsive nature and reckless disregard that earned him the facial injury in the first instance.

The defects in personality were there long before he slammed the boat without a skipper's license.

In this case the chicken really did come before the egg.

Ah, but the seeming defects in OP's personality are but the surface manifestations of the things really and deeply wrong with Oscar...

And the chicken and the egg really are the same critter, even at the same time. E.g. with modern techniques like DNA extraction, you can in effect pull the egg right out of a chicken.

 

[molly333]

It was his impulsive nature and reckless disregard that earned him the facial injury in the first instance.

The defects in personality were there long before he slammed the boat without a skipper's license.

In this case the chicken really did come before the egg.

Do I detect a hint of bias against the defendant?

Who would you compare him to in the States?