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

[Greater Than]

Well, I wouldn't have thought that's acceptable either. I don't know South African laws, but most systems say a person is responsible for being aware of what is illegal and what is not. They couldn't possibly work, otherwise - drunken driving? My dad told me it was legal....Murder? My best friend swore to me it was totally legal..

I'll be really shocked if OP is not found guilty on this count.

Pop wouldn't sign an affidavit claiming it was his either.

And OP had placed an order for a .38 special.

He made his bed. It's high time he get comfy in it.

 

[Greater Than]

BBM - unless OP's father confirmed it was his own ammo, then the court must surely assume it belonged to OP, in which case it was illegally held. There is just no good reason for OP's father not to admit it was his own, especially as OP storing it for him would have been legal. But Henke Pistorius, unlike his son, doesn't seem to want to perjure himself.

ETA - actuallly, I'm not sure if OP was allowed to store ammo for someone else. I think he said hie 'interpreted' Roux's comments about it as being legal? I'm once again caught up in OP's lies!

I don't believe for one second it was his father's, but if it was, it's very possible he may have gotten in some sort of trouble for giving it to someone without a license. But Darren Fresco got immunity for testifying truthfully, so I'm inclined to think if OP's father took responsibility, he too may have been off the hook, or maybe with nothing more than a fine. MOO

 

[04009margaret]

It was briefly referenced on Oscar radio before court today that OP's father has now provided the DT with an affidavit claiming the ammunition was his. They have closed their case so I'd presume they can't submit this into the court record.

 

[Greater Than]

IMO as a professional of still and moving image, and I did several tests on that and for me the part of the white extension cord you can see (there could be a kink or whatever under/behind the bedside table, and the dark looped cord of the fan itself, were plenty long enough to reach the centre of the duvet even in the first photo, if both were extended straight out on the ground and not modulating as they were.

Photos can be so very deceptive. If the State meant to rely on the cord to prove their case they should have done the test with a tape measure and/or at very least a series of photos taken parallel to the cord not one taken from the front which will obviously have foreshortening. IDK but I would be surprised if Masipa goes on a photo for her verdict.

The length of extension cord will hardly make or break this case.

 

[04009margaret]

Considering Oscar himself claimed to have gone onto the balcony & yelled help, help, help............3 times just as Stipp described.

 

[Greater Than]

It was briefly referenced on Oscar radio before court today that OP's father has now provided the DT with an affidavit claiming the ammunition was his. They have closed their case so I'd presume they can't submit this into the court record.

A day late and a dollar short!

 

[Interested Bystander]

That will just be another of those things Roux keeps promising he will prove/show us but never does ..

I think the judge should make him prove his statements but will she?? I think not.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

15:01 Masipa says court can sit another half an hour. Roux begins...

Barry Roux says he wants to correct some 'material facts' made by the State. The advocate is speaking even slower than Nel.

Roux: what you cannot do in a criminal matter is ignore serious material facts.

Roux: State said accused wasn't anxious, but it's not to say two hours later when he perceived danger he's not anxious.

Roux argues the state is unfairly using OP's gun charges to bolster their murder case. Says they cannot be linked.

Roux now mentions references where Nel said: "You were lying".

As Roux speaks, Kenny Oldewadge sits back in his chair, his head held high as if he's thinking "Exactly. Take that, Nel".

Roux: We KNOW investigating officer Hilton Botha told blatant lies to incriminate.

Roux: You cannot dump a police official onto the defence... that's not what a criminal trial is all about.

Roux: I show seriousness of this aspect...we're not talking about a conspiracy, but expect things to be there, and they're not....

Roux: We know that police picked up and moved things, it happened. Now state demands we show conspiracy.

Roux: it was put to accused that the extension cord cannot reach the plug...we asked for the cord to test it...

Roux getting quite high-pitched. His frustration and anger making itself clear in his tone.

Roux says defence now has photo that shows cord was long enough. Cord itself went missing.

Roux says he has more photos showing the police have been telling untruths about crime scene and trying to make OP

Roux defending his client strongly over this - 'You cant call the accused a liar because scene was disturbed'

Roux now pointing to the "incorrect" translation that Van Merwe "woke up" when it was actually "she got up".

Roux on Tashas shooting: Yes, the accused was negligent when handling the firearm. We will deal with that.

Roux rejects Nel's claim today that RS and OP might have been arguing in kitchen in early hours. "It doesn't fit..."

Roux says the state's facts cannot reconcile.

Roux: All these difficulties appear in state's case because they were forced to vacillate.They had to say 2nd noise were the shots

It's avoiding of material, objective facts that's causing the difficulties, says Roux.

Roux: what about the 1st set of shots? Heard by neighbours. This isn't fantastical evidence.

Roux: If the shots were at 03:17, how would the accused have been able to do all things he had done? Its impossible.

Roux repeats that Nel had to move gunshots from 1st to 2nd shots because it would destroy evidence of his witnesses.

Roux: Stipp tells us about accused shouting help help help at a time when no-one else heard it...that was after 03:30.

Roux: once you measure the evidence against objective facts, there's a difference between reliability and credibility.

Roux asks if he can continue tomorrow (Friday). Judge shuffles some papers... :giggle:

15:39 Court will resume at 09:30 tomorrow. It has adjourned.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_Pistorius/Live/LIVE-Final-arguments-in-Oscar-trial-20140807

 

[Greater Than]

I think the judge should make him prove his statements but will she?? I think not.

I guess she can't make him, but if he doesn't follow through on promises to the court it shows how incredibly weak his case is.

 

[patCee]

It was briefly referenced on Oscar radio before court today that OP's father has now provided the DT with an affidavit claiming the ammunition was his. They have closed their case so I'd presume they can't submit this into the court record.

Wow! The family must be feeling uneasy then. Lots of pressure exerted there.

 

[Interested Bystander]

It was briefly referenced on Oscar radio before court today that OP's father has now provided the DT with an affidavit claiming the ammunition was his. They have closed their case so I'd presume they can't submit this into the court record.

Sounds all a bit too convenient to me. The defence finds that ammunition can be kept in someone elses safe, so dad steps up and says, afterall, it is his. Not very likely in my opinion but no way of proving that happened.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

I guess she can't make him, but if he doesn't follow through on promises to the court it shows how incredibly weak his case is.

I really hope that is the case.

 

[Greater Than]

Sounds all a bit too convenient to me. The defence finds that ammunition can be kept in someone elses safe, so dad steps up and says, afterall, it is his. Not very likely in my opinion but no way of proving that happened.

Nel specifically addressed OP's father's refusal to sign an affidavit when he was on the stand in April. APRIL. FOUR months ago. And now he signs it? Please

 

[04009margaret]

Basically each side can point out the weaknesses in the others case, but the crux of the case is what was OP's intent when he pulled the trigger, that is utimately what the judge will rule on. We will find out when she hands down her ruling which version she believed lol

 

[04009margaret]

Sounds all a bit too convenient to me. The defence finds that ammunition can be kept in someone elses safe, so dad steps up and says, afterall, it is his. Not very likely in my opinion but no way of proving that happened.

Smoke & mirrors appears to be a Roux specialty

 

[Interested Bystander]

Unfortunately I have had visitors all week and they have literally just departed so I have missed almost everything that has been said. I did put my bluetooth earphones on and hopes I could make sense of some of it but there were so many interruptions I gave up. I am hoping to watch a rerun later.

I did listen in to a little of Nel at the start of the day but, sad to say, I didn't think he came over very well. It was all very disjointed and when summing up one needs to be cogent and articulate which I felt he was not. I just hope that the Judge and Assessors put it all together correctly and that Nel got it together later on.

There was something about the Judge and OP's relationship which I missed. Was it very important?

I haven't heard anything of Roux, other than a few snippets but he sounded much more articulate. However, he has an annoying whine in his voice all the time which I find difficult to listen too. It reminds me of a 6 year old making excuses to get out of trouble.

I have no doubts whatsoever that OP is guilty but am beginning to think, once again, he will get away with committing murder and get CH. I hope I am very wrong. It would be a travesty.

 

[G.bng]

The witness heard blood curdling screams, OP didn't hear anything, not Reeva speaking or screaming. Before OP shot he was screaming by his testimony, once he saw what he had done he had no reason to scream.

Edit: screaming like a woman, so all the witnesses heard OP screaming only, no reason for Reeva to be screaming, she was only being shot to death.

BIB
You sure you got that right, PS?

That OP claimed he was screaming "like he'd never done before" (iirc, that's basically what Nel said and what I was referring to in my post) BEFORE he fired the shots? Or did OP use that description for the screaming, going by his version, AFTER he'd fired the shots but BEFORE batting down the door when, according to him, he was realising it could be Reeva in the toilet?

And the time when he said he "had no reason to scream", was, iirc, and I think I do, AFTER he batted down the toilet door and saw Reeva, not after he fired the shots.

 

[Interested Bystander]

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Smoke & mirrors appears to be a Roux specialty

 

[Greater Than]

Basically each side can point out the weaknesses in the others case, but the crux of the case is what was OP's intent when he pulled the trigger, that is utimately what the judge will rule on. We will find out when she hands down her ruling which version she believed lol

The thing is, OP's version can only be true if all the state's testimonies were false - if all the ear witnesses were wrong, if Saayman was wrong about the stomach contents and that she didn't have time to scream, if Magena was wrong about the timing and order of the shots, if the police tampered with the scene, if the police moved his fans and duvet and curtains and the jeans - then, yes, his version might be true. And surely Masipa will look at all of these facts and ask herself what the probability of all these things happening is. If not, would anyone ever be found guilty if the accused can just say that everybody else is lying and the rest he can't remember?

 

[Greater Than]

BIB
You sure you got that right, PS?

That OP claimed he was screaming "like he'd never done before" (iirc, that's basically what Nel said and what I was referring to in my post) BEFORE he fired the shots? Or did OP use that description for the screaming, going by his version, AFTER he'd fired the shots but BEFORE batting down the door when, according to him, he was realising it could be Reeva in the toilet?

And the time when he said he "had no reason to scream", was, iirc, and I think I do, AFTER he batted down the toilet door and saw Reeva, not after he fired the shots.

G.bng, once he eliminated her, he never screamed again.