Trial Discussion Thread #31

[Estelle]

Did OP lied on the stand?

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2014-04-22-did-oscar-pistorius-lie-on-the-stand/#.U1fM8VWSx1G

 

[jay-jay]

That is such a sad statistic to read . One intimate murder every 8 hours .
3 per day ,truly awful. We have a lot in the UK but I don't think it will be anywhere close to those statistics .

.. two women a week in the UK, Gb .. which is still higher than probably a lot of people realise.

 

[sleuth-d-]

Even so - why stand off at an angle several meters away if his intent was to shoot her dead?

It doesn't seem likely to me at all. If you disagree, I understand.

But what about the other points in my post about the problems I have with that scenario? How do you reconcile those issues?

i have explained before...
re: the position of the crack in the door, the angle and the ability to see into the toilet - op would need to be standing slightly off to the right, to see into the centre, and the back left corner.

 

[wb180]

That's why he said he didn't shoot at the shower. But there would be virtually no possibility that a bullet would ricochet back and hit him when he's firing through a closed wooden door.

And what about the other issues?

I'm very sincerely asking how to reconcile these things because this is the one hurdle I do not see the state as being able to overcome, and to me that throws their whole theory into question. Given some of the issues I have with Oscar's version, I would feel more comfortable dismissing it as fabrication if I could somehow get the sequence of shots/bat to work out in some kind of plausible manner.

Am sure the smart websleuthers will respond. All I know is it is more plausible that the bangs heard at around 3.17 were gunshots as everyone heard this. Whether bangs first or bats first or some combination, the time of shots were still at around 3.17.

 

[zwiebel]

O/T
There has just been a terrible event in England, with a South African Family.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-27122410

ETA: Thread
UK/SA-3 children dead, mother arrested. Apr22 '14 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[minor4th]

re: your point 1. who can say if the crack was definitely caused by the hard cricket bat hits. as i explained, i am saying the crack in the door running down from top to bottom was caused by the handle meeting the wooden panel as the panel was twisted to be removed in phase three - so the crack was caused after gunshot d

re your point 2. there was a gap in time between the first bangs and the second bangs. possibly he didn't have the gun at first, and went to fetch it.

Thanks for your response.

Re: point 1 - Vermuelen, Mangena and the defense experts have all agreed that one bat hit caused the crack that intersected with the bullet hole that was already there. That's what I'm going by. I mean, they specifically said that crack was caused by the bat hitting the door and not from a panel being pried out - that seems to be the one thing they all agree upon.

re: point 2 - yes, assuming he didn't have the gun with him and had to go back to get it, it still doesn't make sense that he would stand against the far wall and at an angle to intentionally shoot and kill Reeva. And what would be the purpose of hitting the door with the bat first if his intention was to ultimately shoot her and kill her?

 

[Gbtaketwo]

What I meant was that Motha and Van Staden were both taking photos of the crime scene during the same time period. Maybe seconds apart, maybe a minute apart - but they were both there in the bathroom and the hallway and the bedroom during the same time period when Van Staden was supposed to have been alone.

I understand it is policy for him to work alone
But in some respects it would be a better policy for him to be accompanied by at least one person at all times so as to verify that there is no movement of anything .I am not saying he has or would do that but a police photographer working totally on his own could move things
I wonder what the rules are on this in the UK .

 

[minor4th]

O/T
There has just been a terrible event in England, with a South African Family.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-27122410

Oh dear. How awful

 

[wb180]

Did OP lied on the stand?

http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2014-04-22-did-oscar-pistorius-lie-on-the-stand/#.U1fM8VWSx1G

Yes but we didn't need this to know

But this just shows again how he blames anyone and anything (this time it was the sun or the submerged pier) even though the truth is he should be the person to blame.

 

[minor4th]

Am sure the smart websleuthers will respond. All I know is it is more plausible that the bangs heard at around 3.17 were gunshots as everyone heard this. Whether bangs first or bats first or some combination, the time of shots were still at around 3.17.

Well, I'm waiting for y'all to convince me so that I can make sense of this I am really trying to get a grasp on how it could have happened this way and still fit with the forensic evidence.

 

[sleuth-d-]

No, that's not the point .. about whether it was unusual or not for her to have been wearing shorts and a vest (or whether it was OP's) .. there seems to be (from what I took from that portion of the video I posted) something else they know about Reeva's clothing, something which will provide hard evidence. I've no idea what it is yet, and that guy in the vid wouldn't say what it was, and my guess is that it still hasn't yet come up in the trial (and that it has already been presented to the judge, because it is something which doesn't need to be put to the defence).

interesting.
are you saying evidence has been [can be] put to the judge by the prosecution, and not to the defence?

 

[jay-jay]

I believe the testimony was that it was a Canon DSLR - and yes the grip is on the right. sleuth-d pointed out my mistake, and I agree that I was confusing my left and right

Yes, I saw your post just now :thumb: (I've finally caught up with the thread :scared: )

 

[minor4th]

i have explained before...
re: the position of the crack in the door, the angle and the ability to see into the toilet - op would need to be standing slightly off to the right, to see into the centre, and the back left corner.

I disagree with that; he could stand right up against the door and peer in and shoot. And why would he need to see anyway? Shooting 4 shots into that tiny area - especially shooting towards their core, which it looks like he was doing (roughly) - is almost certainly going to kill the person.

 

[jay-jay]

I thought OP said (ignoring his changed accidental shooting plea) he was scared the bullet might bounce back and hit him? Maybe that's why?

I would also look too obvious that he knew Reeva was in the toilet .. he needed to be further away in order to make it appear as if he was shooting at an intruder.

 

[BritsKate]

That is such a sad statistic to read . One intimate murder every 8 hours .
3 per day ,truly awful. We have a lot in the UK but I don't think it will be anywhere close to those statistics .

It isn't. In the UK, 2 women a week are killed by their intimate partner. Africa has one of the highest rates of domestic violence though across the board.

There was recently a global review of domestic violence published, based on 86 countries. The first of its kind. The findings are both grim and heartbreaking. 40% of women killed across the world die at the hands of their intimate partner; 30% of women globally experience domestic or sexual violence; and 600 million women live in countries where domestic violence is not even considered a crime. (For comparison - the entire population of South Africa is 51 million, the UK about 63 million, and the US 313 million.) Imagine putting together nearly two Americas.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/20/domestic-violence_n_3474032.html

 

[minor4th]

I understand it is policy for him to work alone
But in some respects it would be a better policy for him to be accompanied by at least one person at all times so as to verify that there is no movement of anything .I am not saying he has or would do that but a police photographer working totally on his own could move things
I wonder what the rules are on this in the UK .

I really don't know what the protocol is for different police departments - but in this case Van Staden testified again and again that he was alone the whole time he was photographing the initial crime scene, so that is apparently what is expected when preserving the initial scene with photographs. Despite Van Staden's insistence, the evidence seems to suggest that he was no in fact alone while capturing the initial scene.

 

[BritsKate]

To me, it just seems like he put the call in to NetCare just to ensure there was evidence of the call on his phone data .. I think he really was that calculated about it. Same with the call to Baba/Security. Just to get them both on record as him having dialled their numbers .. only it does tend to look just a wee bit odd that they weren't the first people he called, and instead it was Stander (and what is more astonishing is that OP testified that he tried to use Reeva's phone to call NetCare first, but then when he gets hold of his own phone, who does he call first? Nope, not NetCare, but Stander :facepalm: )

Yep. That bugs me and so does calling Stander to help pick Reeva up before netcare has said to move her at all...only then to pick Reeva up on his own anyway.

 

[minor4th]

I would also look too obvious that he knew Reeva was in the toilet .. he needed to be further away in order to make it appear as if he was shooting at an intruder.

If he was in a murderous rage though, this also does not seem likely - if he was killing her in a rage, I do not think he would be calculating how to position himself to support an intruder version that he hadn't yet fabricated.

The fact that he was against the wall and shielded by the corner, shooting at a fairly severe angle - to me that suggests more that he was afraid of being shot at or attacked and was trying to remain at a distance and behind some cover while shooting.

 

[jay-jay]

Wouldn't surprise me if he'd punched a hole in the door, considering he has form for it. He didn't need the bat for that.

I've been wondering about this 'prising the panel in the door with a bat' thing .. I can't see how you can possibly prise a bit of panel off with a thick, blunt, end of a cricket bat. I know that some of the marks match up, but that must just have been from bashing, I cannot see how the bat itself could be used to prise a bit of wood like that. I'm more inclined to think like you, that he used brute force with his hands.

 

[wb180]

If he was in a murderous rage though, this also does not seem likely - if he was killing her in a rage, I do not think he would be calculating how to position himself to support an intruder version that he hadn't yet fabricated.

The fact that he was against the wall and shielded by the corner, shooting at a fairly severe angle - to me that suggests more that he was afraid of being shot at or attacked and was trying to remain at a distance and behind some cover while shooting.

Wait has there been evidence (other than his own testimony) on where he was standing in the bathroom when he was shooting? I guess so as u have mentioned the above?