Trial Discussion Thread #49 - 14.08.7, Day 39 ~final arguments~

[PrimeSuspect]

Oscar Trial Channel ‏@OscarTrial199 2m
Nel: there is nothing left of accused's version if Mrs Stipp's evidence is accepted that light was on just after shooting...

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: What I find interesting, in heads of defence, the conclusion by defence " all of conduct of police leaves no certainty where the fans were'. Milady, we will get to how 'lucky' the police were to be able to move the fans into position to prejudice the accused.

 

[JudgeJudi]

OP's evidence was that his version was on a reconstruction of the scene. This raises a warning. State says he did not share with the court what he could remember, but that he was defending his life.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: Just the accused saying "I reconstructed what happened that night'. That should set alarms ringing.

When he (later) said "there was no reconstruction", that was not true.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel: we have identified many significant incongruities but will stick to a baker's dozen, to 13.

 

[whiterum]

Go Nel! Now we are getting down to the nitty gritty , the lies and blatant tailoring from the horses mouth during his testimony on the witness box.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel is talking about OP's evidence about the zombie stopper. "I have no idea what a zombie stopper is". OP knows something is coming and says "Not as far as I can remember". OP said, "It's a lot softer than brains". It's just a lie. OP never thought we would get to that video. It's also an indication of the nature of his evidence.

 

[katydid23]

I didn't think that was in dispute. Not in my mind anyway

OP once said that he never aimed.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: Accused said "He had no idea what a zombie stopper is."

Then says "As far as I can recall" because he realizes something's coming.....Just a lie. Accused never foresaw state would produce this video....Fallacious.

 

[Susza]

Uncle A always looks as if he is smiling - strange

 

[minor4th]

Decent point being made by Nel - about Roux believing OP went all the way onto balcony

 

[JudgeJudi]

OP realised that he had to be inside the bedroom for his version. He was adamant he never went onto the balcony but he then voluntarily said he was at the amplifier. OP started to argue the clear contradiction. OP said "onto the balcony", but that it was a manner of speaking.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: Accused forget what his version was when he said he heard the sound from the bathroom...he said "If someone said I went out on balcony to fetch the fans it would not be true." Then he started arguing. He repeated it... I didn't make him say that.

 

[sorrell skye]

I am SO loving how Nel is picking apart OP's lies one by one! :cheer:

 

[JudgeJudi]

OP blamed his counsel. "The mistake was Mr Roux's". It's very strange the defence says Roux wasn't wrong, the accused was wrong - the word "onto". It's attempting to cover an untruth. OP had to put himself into the bedroom, but it's untrue.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Nel: the accuse even accused his defence mr. Roux for putting another version in front of court.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: We said the accused was argumentative. He bounced back, and blamed his counsel. He blamed Mr Roux.

 

[Suthrnqt]

I am SO loving how Nel is picking apart OP's lies one by one! :cheer:

Me too.

 

[zwiebel]

Nel: He then pretended that he didn't understand my question....

Did Nel start giggling there?

 

[JudgeJudi]

Nel is going through the lies one by one, and countering what the defence have said in their heads. He's doing a brilliant job so far.