Trial Discussion Thread #9 - 14.03.18, Day 12

[steveml]

And did he find the watch when he searched everyone?

No watches have been found, although everybody had been searched. We've yet to hear evidence from OP's sister regarding the need to take a watch from the box so soon after OP shot Reeva. I guess having a watch is a priority to some people, minutes after a shooting?

 

[HauntsForHope]

“Hi guys, I’m too tired. It’s too far to drive. I’m sleeping at Oscar’s tonight. See you tomorrow,” she wrote.

http://dailyentertainmentnews.com/sports/cecil-myers-is-reeva-steenkamps-second-dad-photos/

 

[steveml]

“Hi guys, I’m too tired. It’s too far to drive. I’m sleeping at Oscar’s tonight. See you tomorrow,” she wrote.

http://dailyentertainmentnews.com/sports/cecil-myers-is-reeva-steenkamps-second-dad-photos/

Oh my god! I didn't realise you were quoting at first. Was shouting in my head 'no, don't do it!' :smile:

 

[steveml]

That they are NOT being used as evidence was the very reason why Nell objected to these photos being used by Roux.

Perhaps they were taken legitimately and on the same day and time by someone else, but the fact remains, the photos Roux was using to try and confuse the witness are not in evidence and it sure sounded like Roux was in no hurry to do so, he just wanted to obfuscate the evidence that this witness was presenting.

I was surprised that the introduction of these photographs was allowed. What could possibly be gained by asking somebody about photographs you have never seen, were never taken by you, and were not in your possession? The judge should have seen that this was an obvious attempt to confuse the witness and overruled. You can make anyone appear incompetent if you introduce things to a witness in court that they have no prior knowledge of.

 

[Really?]

I know it's police procedure for the cameras taking evidentiary photos to have an accurate time stamp

In the U S of A....or....SA...where?..........lol

 

[Really?]

I just want to say thank you to Minor4th for all the thorough explanations from a legal perspective of what is happening in the court room and why. I make a point of looking out for your posts because I find them objective and informative. Thank you

Here Here.....I agree........always welcome an objective point of view.:loveyou:

 

[Really?]

So a police Colonel just happened to be on scene taking pictures for his personal use with a whacky time stamp that also just happens to coincide with the official photographer's time stamps?

That's a reach IMO

Any police officer taking pictures of a crime scene knows that those photos are evidence and have to be turned over to the defense. Even if they are just off hand photos they take from their cell phones.

Unless of course ...the "cell" phone pics are for personal use........and/or sensationalism...knowing the celebrity attached to OP.

On a side note and this may pertain.....I test my dog for diabetes twice a day....it is expensive...DH talked me into ordering from amazon to save moola.....dang if I have to add an hour every time I check the previous test for 12 hour schedule.........cheap cell?....not back dated...etc etc

 

[minor4th]

And did he find the watch when he searched everyone?

Nope, the wrong-doer had already escaped with the stolen goods

 

[minor4th]

Unless of course ...the "cell" phone pics are for personal use........and/or sensationalism...knowing the celebrity attached to OP.

On a side note and this may pertain.....I test my dog for diabetes twice a day....it is expensive...DH talked me into ordering from amazon to save moola.....dang if I have to add an hour every time I check the previous test for 12 hour schedule.........cheap cell?....not back dated...etc etc

Maybe SA is different, but in the US if a police officer takes crime scene photos - irrespective of what his intent is - those photos are evidence and have to be turned over to the defense. Withholding them would be prosecutorial misconduct and would result in an acquittal or a reversal of a conviction.

 

[minor4th]

In the U S of A....or....SA...where?..........lol

Should be everywhere - if that is not something the police in SA concern themselves with, then they are making easy work for defendants.

 

[minor4th]

I was surprised that the introduction of these photographs was allowed. What could possibly be gained by asking somebody about photographs you have never seen, were never taken by you, and were not in your possession? The judge should have seen that this was an obvious attempt to confuse the witness and overruled. You can make anyone appear incompetent if you introduce things to a witness in court that they have no prior knowledge of.

To impeach the witness' credibility. This was not an attempt to confuse the witness, it was a confrontation of the witness with a sworn statement and police photographs that directly contradict his testimony. The judge made the right ruling - she admitted them conditionally and for impeachment purposes.

 

[minor4th]

No watches have been found, although everybody had been searched. We've yet to hear evidence from OP's sister regarding the need to take a watch from the box so soon after OP shot Reeva. I guess having a watch is a priority to some people, minutes after a shooting?

The police in charge of the crime scene allowed it when they shouldn't have. That is not anyone's fault but the police - but it doesn't seem to be an issue, as they have admitted this happened and that the woman was accompanied by police.

As far as the other watches that subsequently went missing, those disappeared while the police were investigating the crime scene, which was shut off from all others.

 

[katydid23]

Nope, the wrong-doer had already escaped with the stolen goods

Maybe it was someone from OP's camp that strategically made the decision to steal watches, so they could tarnish the police during the later trial?

 

[minor4th]

Maybe it was someone from OP's camp that strategically made the decision to steal watches, so they could tarnish the police during the later trial?

Except they went missing when no one was allowed on the crime scene except police investigators.

 

[Really?]

Except they went missing when no one was allowed on the crime scene except police investigators.

It must have been tempting ......as hell.....OP has so many who will miss one.....OP can replace it.

 

[Trooper]

All I need to know is just who is running this far reaching conspiracy... and since the ear witnesses were in on it, according to the conspiracy poster, it's even more interesting.. Van Der Mewre, Burger, Johnson, Stipp, Baba.. private citizens, all working in concert with all the police.. it's not just the police who are in this proposed 'cover-up', no... Why a private citizen,, and a neighbor would suddenly join with the police in a cover up is the deepest conspiracy of all.

If you turn it inside out, you have Reeva sacrificing her life to expose this huge current of public and private conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.. its very clever.. She had to be 'in on it' otherwise no one would know the extent of it..

The really clever bit , is.. for this to work.. those very same neighbors, and responding police detectives and photographer, etc had to be awake an on duty at the very time Oscar chooses to fire the gun!... the whole plan depended on Reevas bladder!!

I call that co ordination to the maximum. I call it a lot of things, as well..mainly startging with the letter B .

 

[minor4th]

It must have been tempting ......as hell.....OP has so many who will miss one.....OP can replace it.

Right?!

 

[HauntsForHope]

Maybe it was someone from OP's camp that strategically made the decision to steal watches, so they could tarnish the police during the later trial?

The sister and brother were in the house collecting things. It's possible they took it?

 

[Cherwell]

Except they went missing when no one was allowed on the crime scene except police investigators.

Well, as you say the police are so incompetent, anybody could have got in, couldn't they?

 

[Trooper]

is the theory that in the US of A.. including Texas, that all police work is of the most exemplary and world first standard and never the slightest chance of slip up or , may god forgive me for even hinting at it, corruption and carelessness???


that is a huge claim. So huge that it beggars belief...

The fact that Roux suggests things, does not make it evidence.. it makes it theory.. When Roux puts his defence witnesses on the stand, ( lets see if he puts the picture happy MOtha on the stand )and these defence witnesses testify as to the veracity of their claims, a rational attorney would hardly make the claims ( and I only mention a few of the claims made).. of Lying, corruption, theft, conspiracy, incompetence, evasiveness, perverting the course of justice, etc.. be suspended until they are established as fact??

Until. and unless Roux has his witnesses to these claims testified to, under oath all attorneys I know would understand the difference between an established fact, and a theory, a supposition and a suggestion.. .