Trial Discussion Thread #31

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's always the potential that hearsay and media opinion can sway your recollection one way or another. Your recollection can change even without any other influences.

Why did Ms. Burger not mention 'blood curdling' screams within her initial statement to the police, yet was so adamant to keep repeating the words to the translator in court?

Her later recollection may well be more precise, but we know something happened that made her feel her initial words were not powerful enough.

People are entitled to change their minds, but there's usually a good reason for it.
I said that witnesses heard a woman screaming before they knew it was a woman who had been murdered. I'm not going down that road where they apparently all heard OP screaming but after reading in the paper that a woman had been murdered, changed their minds and decided it was a woman screaming. Too big a suspension of belief for me to believe all the witnesses were influenced in this way - especially having seen how lying comes as easily to OP as breathing.
 
Whatever the number was, Mangena said it was consistent with OP's account and set up his laser beam machine in that location.

Mangena didn't have "OP's account" when he testified, did he? IIRC neither the bail affi or plea statement mentioned his firing position in the bathroom.
 
Well, we can go by what the witnesses heard - but saying it was definitely a woman is an interpretation. We can also go by what the forensics indicate and we have OP's account as well.

I thought his voice sounded pretty feminine at a couple of times when he was really distressed. Enough that it's possible it could be mistaken for a female.

We'll see what the sound tests indicate - but given what we have heard so far, I don't think it's fair to say that it's impossible that it was OP screaming in a high pitch that sounded like a woman.

BIB .. people can basically say anything on a messageboard and this to me now is getting to the stage of being mischievous (or 'winding up').
 
Whoa! I just saw your post! Didnt you post earlier on this thread that you never said Reeva bled to death? I'll have to go check that later when I have time.

Since we have Reeva's cause of death, gunshot wounds, is it appropriate to speculate that she died of some other cause? Especially that she died over a period of 10 minutes; I have not heard any evidence to suggest that, none at all.

It is fun to speculate and I would never take away a person's speculation of what happened that night, but as evidence is presented certain opportunities to speculate close. Are you now expecting another DT pathologist to testify that Reeva did not die within seconds of gunshot wounds, but instead she bled out over a period of 10 minutes (27 minutes DT version)?

And in my eyes there is not 1.5 - 2 liters of blood in that bathroom, there just isn't.

Ah, will chat more later, I have to run.


I'd like that. I have to run again too!
 
Well, we can go by what the witnesses heard - but saying it was definitely a woman is an interpretation. We can also go by what the forensics indicate and we have OP's account as well.

I thought his voice sounded pretty feminine at a couple of times when he was really distressed. Enough that it's possible it could be mistaken for a female.

We'll see what the sound tests indicate - but given what we have heard so far, I don't think it's fair to say that it's impossible that it was OP screaming in a high pitch that sounded like a woman.

How did the intruder/s get in the window with no ladder? A thief stole the ladder?
 
BIB .. people can basically say anything on a messageboard and this to me now is getting to the stage of being mischievous (or 'winding up').
From his affidavit:

"I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door exiting onto the balcony and screamed for help".


He screamed 'help help help' on ONE occasion... on the balcony. That's it! Now, after knowing what the neighbours actually heard, he's suddenly screaming all over the place, crying and screaming "like I've never cried or screamed before". Tailoring, much???
 
I said that witnesses heard a woman screaming before they knew it was a woman who had been murdered. I'm not going down that road where they apparently all heard OP screaming but after reading in the paper that a woman had been murdered, changed their minds and decided it was a woman screaming. Too big a suspension of belief for me to believe all the witnesses were influenced in this way - especially having seen how lying comes as easily to OP as breathing.

ALL the witnesses who heard "a woman scream" in this case is just two married couples.. and one of those couples DID only come forward and describe what they heard AFTER seeing news reports etc for weeks. (And they were 200M away, and so unlikely to hear the nuances that they have evolved and embellished their testimony with eg "Blood Curdling")

It is not hard for me to imagine that if I heard a high pitched, anguished "scream" in the night.. I would assume it was a woman. That is the way human perception works. We make some sort of sense out of ambiguous information, based on our experiences and expectations.
It would be more precise to say the witnesses heard screams that to them sounded like a woman. But in the realm of "Reasonable doubt".. OP being the source is at the very least a reasonable alternative explanation. Add to that the fact that it is reasonable to conclude from the State's own evidence that the screams were heard AFTER the shots and so in that case it is not possible it was Reeva. It is logical to infer that it was OP screaming.
 
<RSBM>

Reeva's heart was beating when OP walked through the bedroom, no question. She might have been " dead" but her heart was still beating and could have done so for several minutes after the GSW to the head.

There is not point rehashing the many known physiologic principles which would account for the smaller than expected pools of blood in the toilet room, palor of skin, muscles/heart & liver, etc but at NO TIME was internal bleeding put forth as part of the picture, nor did it happen.

BIB1. Ok, lets assume that Reeva's heart continued to beat for 2-3 minutes, heck lets say it continued to beat for six (6) minutes. Nine (9) minutes had passed from when OP fired the three (3) bullets in to Reeva and then brought her downstairs as the Standers and Baba arrived. That is too much time for her heart to still be beating without brain and respiratory function. Agreed? Also, if her heart had been beating all if that time and she had bled out there would be in your opinion 1.5 liters of blood in the bathroom, but as you say there is not. So does it make sense that Reeva could be alive, heart beating, bleeding out for 9 minutes and she was still able to have arterial spurts? Nine minutes, minimal blood loss, surely arterial spurts at the stairway and dying on the stairway are impossible.

BIB2. I just want to point out that you are saying there is less than expected blood pooling (blood loss). Thanks.

BIB3: So you are saying that Reeva did not have internal bleeding, so that could not be used later as an excuse for where her blood loss was, that did not happen. Thanks.
 
BBM - I notice you have nothing but DEROGATORY things to say about most of the witnesses, implying (just like OP...) that they're LYING. However, unlike you, I don't believe the Burgers are liars/embellishers or anything less than decent honest people, same with the Stipps. Further, Saayman has STATED it that it would have been an involuntary reaction for Reeva to scream AFTER the hip shot - so not sure why you keep stating it WASN'T possible for her to be screaming! If the Burgers are embellishing because they added details, what exactly has OP been doing up there under OATH??

Did the defence team actually provide a sample of OP's "screaming like a woman" as promised?
 
I bet the judge is thinking just wrap this crap up now I've heard enough. I bet she already knows what she is going to do? It was quite telling when the assessor asked if Reeva could access the remote. They're thinking well if she could then anyone would shout to her to open up the door and call the police instead of tell her to get down. They're not buying what he's trying to sell. I can imagine him thinking he can use his charm on the judge which is why he only looks at her.
 
Did the defence team actually provide a sample of OP's "screaming like a woman" as promised?
I'm still waiting for Roux to prove the head shot was first and that Reeva couldn't possibly have screamed!! He did after all promise he would be able to prove it, but then he's promised quite a few things that have quietly fallen by the wayside!
 
Well, we can go by what the witnesses heard - but saying it was definitely a woman is an interpretation. We can also go by what the forensics indicate and we have OP's account as well.

I thought his voice sounded pretty feminine at a couple of times when he was really distressed. Enough that it's possible it could be mistaken for a female.

We'll see what the sound tests indicate - but given what we have heard so far, I don't think it's fair to say that it's impossible that it was OP screaming in a high pitch that sounded like a woman.

why didn't they play ole female Oscar's screams for the witnesses who heard Reeva scream and just ASK THEM? Because they didn't hear OP. (how many times over how long a period did OP try to get to the "right" tone!?)
 
I bet the judge is thinking just wrap this crap up now I've heard enough. I bet she already knows what she is going to do? It was quite telling when the assessor asked if Reeva could access the remote. They're thinking well if she could then anyone would shout to her to open up the door and call the police instead of tell her to get down. They're not buying what he's trying to sell. I can imagine him thinking he can use his charm on the judge which is why he only looks at her.

Lawyers frequently comment that trying to read the tea leaves in the questions of deliberating jurors is a fool's game. Probably much the same here. She may have been trying to ascertain whether Reeva could have gone down for food for all we know. She could have been simply gathering a missing fact with no particular attached question. Who knows.
 
Mangena didn't have "OP's account" when he testified, did he? IIRC neither the bail affi or plea statement mentioned his firing position in the bathroom.

Yes, Roux "put it" to Mangena during his testimony IIRC
 
I'm still waiting for Roux to prove the head shot was first and that Reeva couldn't possibly have screamed!! He did after all promise he would be able to prove it, but then he's promised quite a few things that have quietly fallen by the wayside!

I don't think it was ever the defense case that the first gunshot was to the head.
 
I'm still waiting for Roux to prove the head shot was first and that Reeva couldn't possibly have screamed!! He did after all promise he would be able to prove it, but then he's promised quite a few things that have quietly fallen by the wayside!

or not so quietly like when he had to admit someone erroneously led him down the double tap rabbit hole to the Judge and the open court. oops!
 
I bet the judge is thinking just wrap this crap up now I've heard enough. I bet she already knows what she is going to do? It was quite telling when the assessor asked if Reeva could access the remote. They're thinking well if she could then anyone would shout to her to open up the door and call the police instead of tell her to get down. They're not buying what he's trying to sell. I can imagine him thinking he can use his charm on the judge which is why he only looks at her.

That's interesting because I was thinking she was asking about the alarm and remote to determine whether Reeva could have gotten a midnight snack - and that would explain her stomach contents
 
why didn't they play ole female Oscar's screams for the witnesses who heard Reeva scream and just ASK THEM? Because they didn't hear OP. (how many times over how long a period did OP try to get to the "right" tone!?)

LOL - ask prosecution witnesses if this is what they heard? Because they would say "no" - safer to just give the info to the judge and let her decide whether the witnesses could have been mistaken
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
305
Guests online
803
Total visitors
1,108

Forum statistics

Threads
625,912
Messages
18,513,633
Members
240,882
Latest member
neurotic_cat
Back
Top