Trial Discussion Thread #34 - 14.05.06 Day 27

[crasshopper]

In fact you stated:

The appearance of the eyes is often the first visual sign that a person has died. The eyes (corneas) are supplied with blood, so that they can live, by tiny blood vessels called capillaries and these capillaries are far removed from the arteries that supply them with blood. Once the blood is no longer being moved through the body the eyes start to dry and present a milky appearance within minutes after the heart stops beating.

...and that is flat out wrong (in healthy corneas)

They receive all nutrients and fluids through aqueous material delivered via various chambers.

Just pointing out a fact for other readers.

but I'm done.

 

[Cherwell]

I hope OP is banned from carrying a gun in public for many years at least. If so, he'll be paying heftily for bodyguards. He's incapable of venturing outside without protection imo, as he's angry and confrontational by nature. Wherever Oscar goes, trouble is sure to follow.

He shouldn't be allowed access to guns at all, in public or private. He didn't shoot Reeva in public. :no:

 

[Interested Bystander]

another reason to look favourably at burger's testimony, right at the start of the trial. she stuck to her 'version' even under heavy cross from roux, and the bang...bangbangbang was then shown to be v v possible from that point. both in its division and its time of the morning.

Oscar should have taken a leaf out of her book.

 

[lithgow1]

How can 3 people identifying a man cry equal proof the other ear witnesses did not hear Reeva scream? That logic defies me :floorlaugh:

Absolutely! People using the testimony from yesterday are all steadfastly ignoring that what they heard was AFTER the shooting so therefore these high-pitched wails were obviously Pistorius, though I doubt he sounded like yesterday's demos. Kudos to whoever it was that said they sounded more like a ewe calling for her lamb than blood curdling screams - funny because it's true!

I don't think people not hearing a woman's screams while they are asleep will outweigh people hearing them while awake. And again it bears repeating that other than Ms Phelps-Pistorius, all experts say it did little to advance the defence case. The most I've heard is that the defence will use it to say his anguish runs against the idea that he had just committed a cold-blooded killing but then they qualify that by saying it is not at all unknown that anger quickly turns to anguish on realising all the implications of what has just taken place.

Have also heard a few US journos commenting on how could he so quickly come up with the intruder story when he rang Stander - I don't see at all how you couldn't think 'I know, I'll say ...' in a matter of seconds as soon as what you have done sinks in -which would be swiftly IMO. Seems more obvious than ingenious.

 

[Cymbaline]

Do you think they washed her black vest/tank top before they took the photos in evidence?
Where's all the blood?

 

[soozieqtips]

CORRECTION: I was addressing accused muderers, not convicted, sorry.

While I agree in principle, especially in the more clear cut cases. In the US they quite often grant them bail.

The bail is usually pretty high so only the wealthy or those with supportive families willing to put up the bond amount are freed on bail.

Okay. I posted a reply but have now deleted it as I see you thought I was referring to people not yet convicted of murder.

 

[curiousjo]

Quote: Gunshots/bangs & screams reported to security on 14th Feb

1:56am - Mrs. van der Merwe (very loud woman's voice over an hour)

3:00am (approx) - Mrs. van der Merwe (gunshots/bangs)
3:00am (shortly after)- Security guard on bike. (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mrs. Burger (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mr. Johnson (gunshots)
3:04am - Dr. Stipp. (gunshots)
3:04am - Mrs. Stipp (gunshots)
3:16am (before) - Mr Nhlengethwa (gunshots)
-----------
Can someone add the time that Dr Stripp heard 2nd round gun shots

 

[Linda7NJ]

How can 3 people identifying a man cry equal proof the other ear witnesses did not hear Reeva scream? That logic defies me :floorlaugh:

Exactly!

As if it couldn't be both


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lithgow1]

I think someone has mentioned this but it's worth repeating in relation to the last couple of days. It's my understanding I can't quote people from other forums (and rightly so) so I'm going to paraphrase:

According to a Professor James Grant, the Standers' evidence relating to Pistorius' state of anguish is inadmissable because it is 'evidence of a previous consistent statement'. Apparantly, had Nel cross-examined on this it would have become admissable so he didn't, leaving it to the judge to 'ignore them'. Any legal minds know much about this aspect? TIA

Just added - the other poster has further clarified by saying that Roux was likely wanting Nel to cross-examine on this to make it admissable but he didn't take the bait, leaving Roux in the lurch both in terms of admitting the evidence and having no other witnesses lined up. Was also suggested that this whole issue was why Nel and M'lady wanted to see each other post-proceedings.

 

[DebinGA]

IIRC, this is how Mr. Stander testified to that subject. He said that when OP brought RS over to the Standers to introduce her, and for a coffee, OP asked Stander if he wouldn't mind watching his dogs for a week in December. Stander agreed to do so, BUT REEVA SAID " I will gladly do that, Oscar..no problem.'

So you are correct, Reeva volunteered.

Well, that moves OP's "Welcome, neighbor" shtick from the friendly category into the self-interested category imo.

 

[Lochlynsmom]

Absolutely! People using the testimony from yesterday are all steadfastly ignoring that what they heard was AFTER the shooting so therefore these high-pitched wails were obviously Pistorius, though I doubt he sounded like yesterday's demos. Kudos to whoever it was that said they sounded more like a ewe calling for her lamb than blood curdling screams - funny because it's true!

I don't think people not hearing a woman's screams while they are asleep will outweigh people hearing them while awake. And again it bears repeating that other than Ms Phelps-Pistorius, all experts say it did little to advance the defence case. The most I've heard is that the defence will use it to say his anguish runs against the idea that he had just committed a cold-blooded killing but then they qualify that by saying it is not at all unknown that anger quickly turns to anguish on realising all the implications of what has just taken place.

Have also heard a few US journos commenting on how could he so quickly come up with the intruder story when he rang Stander - I don't see at all how you couldn't think 'I know, I'll say ...' in a matter of seconds as soon as what you have done sinks in -which would be swiftly IMO. Seems more obvious than ingenious.

bbm especially when it seems he's had a lot of experience in having to come up with fast explanations for his wrongdoings in his past. The intruder story is the most logical.

 

[DebinGA]

He shouldn't be allowed access to guns at all, in public or private. He didn't shoot Reeva in public. :no:

Absolutely, but is there any doubt that he'll have a gun at hand whenever he's in a place he can't be seen? A gun is some sort of equalizer that compensates for his "little man" syndrome, and he feels naked and helpless without it .. in my totally unqualified to opine opinion.

 

[aoibhinn]

Thanks for this - only issue I see is that Johnson reported gunshots at 3:17 - right after he got off the phone with the wrong security company. He made no further calls when he heard the second "shots"

Not to my knowledge, Minor. I believe that Mr. Johnson had recently moved and he didn't have the correct number. He made at least two calls that night to two separate security numbers, so there was a little confusion and delay by the time he eventually got through.

I'm not sure that anyone made a second call after hearing the second set of bangs? Mr. Nhlengethwa called twice, but only because he got no answer on the first attempt.

 

[Cherwell]

bbm especially when it seems he's had a lot of experience in having to come up with fast explanations for his wrongdoings in his past. The intruder story is the most logical.

The intruder story is blindingly obvious and would instantly spring to mind. Let's not forget it was about five days before details were added.

 

[crasshopper]

Okay. I posted a reply but have now deleted it as I see you thought I was referring to people not yet convicted of murder.

No problem. Shockingly after my correction, I looked it up anyway and found that they can get out on bail but it is rare and very hard to obtain. If you're in the US IDK if you remember the case of Dahlia Dippolito, who hired a 'police informer' hitman to kill her husband. Great case btw. Apparently though she was let out on bail after her conviction, again though, she lives in Florida

Dippolito, 30, remains on house arrest after posting $500,000 bail in September 2011, four months after a jury found her guilty of paying an undercover police officer, posing as a hit man, $3,000 to kill then-spouse Michael Dippolito.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-04-19/news/fl-dalia-dippolito-appeal-filed-20130419_1_dalia-dippolito-michael-dippolito-new-trial

 

[DebinGA]

bbm especially when it seems he's had a lot of experience in having to come up with fast explanations for his wrongdoings in his past. The intruder story is the most logical.

According to OP's friend's story, at Christmas his young son was confronted in the middle of the night by a gun-toting OP who'd mistaken him for an intruder. OP must have thought later about the ramifications if he'd shot him, i.e. thinking through various scenarios, excuses, etc.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Quote: Gunshots/bangs & screams reported to security on 14th Feb

1:56am - Mrs. van der Merwe (very loud woman's voice over an hour)

3:00am (approx) - Mrs. van der Merwe (gunshots/bangs)
3:00am (shortly after)- Security guard on bike. (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mrs. Burger (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mr. Johnson (gunshots)
3:04am - Dr. Stipp. (gunshots)
3:04am - Mrs. Stipp (gunshots)
3:16am (before) - Mr Nhlengethwa (gunshots)
-----------
Can someone add the time that Dr Stripp heard 2nd round gun shots

I have Annette Stipp awaking, coughing, at 03:02 on her clock radio, and then hearing what sounded like 3 shots. Her clock is 3 or 4 minutes fast, so that puts the time at say 02:59.

Dr Stipp is the same time as above for the first loud bangs.

Annette Stipp comes in from teh balcony at 03:17 on her clock radio and hears 3 more shots. So that's around 03:14.

Dr Stipp hears the same after trying to call 10111 (no time) but before calling Baba at 03:15:51.

 

[Lochlynsmom]

I think someone has mentioned this but it's worth repeating in relation to the last couple of days. It's my understanding I can't quote people from other forums (and rightly so) so I'm going to paraphrase:

According to a Professor James Grant, the Standers' evidence relating to Pistorius' state of anguish is inadmissable because it is 'evidence of a previous consistent statement'. Apparantly, had Nel cross-examined on this it would have become admissable so he didn't, leaving it to the judge to 'ignore them'. Any legal minds know much about this aspect? TIA

Not a legal expert but this makes a lot of sense considering Nel did not argue anything after the shooting even with OP himself. With this being a bench trial hopefully the judge will not consider character testimony brought in the backdoor by the defense.

 

[Ncl1968]

I think you missed my point.

OP is up on four other charges besides murder. As I understand it, those charges can carry a custodial sentence. So assuming he is found guilty on a firearms charge, he could well be imprisoned for that immediately. A completely separate issue from the hypothetical appeal against a murder conviction. So while hypothetically he might get bail for that alone, he would still be in prison for the other offence.

i too wonder about this.. Can he appeal all the charges??? Surely he will at least get done for the restaurant gun incident and at very least ch.. So can he walk on appeal to both.. I was hoping he would get jailed for at least the gun charge then appeal the homicide

 

[sleuth-d-]

But according to what OP is saying about his version, she would have been there in the bed, right in the vicinity where the alarm remote would be. So the question would be WHY didn't he tell her to hit the panic button? If she had lived at his home for a week alone, she must have known how it worked.

Yet he told the court he didn't think she knew how. :waitasec:

I think the lady assessor is seeing that as an untruth told by OP.

also, if the alarm was on... when did op pick up the remote and his keys to switch it off and unlock the front door?

and, why after the shooting, did he even need to switch it off? he has shouted for help from the balcony; for help by phone from stander; but didn't allow the alarm to shout for help???

which suggests to me that the alarm was never on. they never went to sleep. etc, etc, etc.