Trial Discussion weekend Thread #24

[BritsKate]

Incidentally, though I neglected to say so in my post, I thank many people born with a physical impairment would take great offence at the implication they must be mentally impaired as well. And rightly so.

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[Viper]

I don’t think you understand the point of my post:

In both defense and prosecution cases Steenkamp is dying on the floor when Dr Stipp see’s a figure moving from right to left in the window. It’s not her figure in the window.

The defense has intimated that Dr Stipp seeing a figure walking past the window, shows that Pistorious was on his prosthetic legs when he is breaking down the toilet door with cricket bat.

While the prosecution says that in the second set of “sounds” there’s the final shot to Steenkamp’s head. Defense expert says Pistorius was not on his prosthetics at the time.

Whether Dr Stipp saw a taller or shorter person may be relevant to help with either sides case.

My post meant: I don’t think Dr Stipp seeing a person walk across the window, definitely shows that he saw Pistorius wearing his prosthetics walking past window at that time.

The window is relatively low and from Dr Stipp’s angle, and his own subjective perception of the height of the window, he may have just seen a form –
IMO it means you can’t prove prosthetics were on or off.


Adding quote from Jurer13 about the figure:


http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/08/oscar-pistorius-trial-day-4/

Hey KT! It's been a while now and there has been so much testimony that my mind is unclear on this issue, but IIRC Pistorius testified that he is so short on his stumps that when he walks past the window Dr. Stipps would not have been able to see him, or if he did he would only see OPs head - something like that. In other words OP was directly refuting that Dr. Stipps saw anyone walk ftom right to left when the gunshots were fired and the light was on. OPs word versus Dr. Stipp's word, like every other issue in this trial. :facepalm:

 

[molly333]

Reeva would, and in fact was going to on April 15th, talk about her own personal dealings with domestic violence. If Reeva was going to use her time with OP in her speech then you can bet that the media would have gotten wind of it. Perhaps OP was unhappy with Reeva talking about her own history of dealing with domestic violence, especially since he had been pretty brutal to her himself.

MOO

Use him as an example? Why would she do that? We just read an article where Reeva was begging a reporter not to publish something that might hurt Oscar's career. A nice person wouldn't do something like that to a friend.

This fight on V-day blindsided Reeva. Her mother said she was not a confrontational person. Her friends said she was a peacemaker. But, we see in the emails, Reeva repeatedly tells him, I'm a person, too, you can't treat someone this way, you just ruined two of my days with your tantrums, stop putting me down. She is sensitive to verbal abuse because of her high self esteem. She was not going to be in an abusive relationship for the same reason. I'm completely convinced she had decided to break it off with him and did it that night.

Her only mistake--don't break off with an abuser when you are alone with them, and especially not at night or after drinks.

 

[BritsKate]

It is at this point in the case that I believe this was domestic violence, and murder in the first degree. Since he walked so slowly to that door, he had plenty of time to change his mind. He wanted to get at her so badly he broke dwn the door w his cricket bat. I do not believe one word op has uttered on the stand. In fact at this point I believe he is quite the fool to take the stand and even a bigger fool that he would think the world would believe his sniveling and dry crying excuses. He is trying to save his Olympiad status but IMHO it is dead in the water. I hope he spends many yrs in. Prison. Many.

From a legal perspective, testifying is really Oscar's only hope of avoiding a murder conviction. To establish state of mind to prove putative self-defence. He was neither foolish nor wise for taking the stand - it was pure self-preservation. He is an utter fool for not adhering to his attorney's instructions though.

JMO

Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[kittychi]

No, but he is highly manipulative to attempt to cry in court and make his voice sound like a chick. I cannot overlook how manipulative he truly is.

I was just watching the highlights from the link posted a page or two back.

http://oscartrial.dstv.com/video/509534/category/0

One highlight was Nel drumming Oscar about the fans, whether one was in his way, etc. Oscar started to get a bit emotional. Nel asked why the discussion about the fans was making him emotional.

OP then started whine/crying so you could barely make out what he was saying about losing someone he cared about and he doesn't know why people don't understand that. I do think Nel's eyes rolled when the whine started, he certainly tilted his head as you would when you roll your eyes. I know my eyes would roll to the back of my head if I was Nel.

 

[soozieqtips]

No, but he is highly manipulative to attempt to cry in court and make his voice sound like a chick. I cannot overlook how manipulative he truly is.

Highly manipulative is an understatement! But that's a personality trait of his, nothing to do with his disability. Someone had posted earlier that his physical disability could affect his mental state, hence the strange goings on in court. But that's just OP being who he is. Evasive. Dishonest. Add to the list...

 

[fox1lady]

Reeva wouldn't do that [release or threaten to release stuff about him to the media]. Reeva was a really nice person, according to friends and family.

She wouldn't threaten him. And, this wasn't a run of the mill argument.

It ended in death.

I know, I'm clutching at straws. Something must have made OP flip enough to shoot her though

 

[soozieqtips]

I think that 'normal' disabled people have to struggle with a lot. My husband has battled depression and anxiety since becoming disabled - you have to accept that in a sense your body has betrayed you, you're not capable any longer - which has ravishing consequences to self-esteem, etc. He's very often treated or perceived to be mentally incompetent because his physical disability is quite apparent - even sometimes by the medical community. He's brilliant, witty, and very psychologically sound but he does have mental issues, now, that arise directly from his disability. Obviously nothing that impinges his mental aptitude apart from a worryingly high dosage of pain medication from time to time.

All that said, Oscar Pistorius held in the palm of his hand what the overwhelming majority of disabled people could only ever dream of. I hardly think he is a fair comparison to other people who are disabled - some of whom are much more severely disabled than him - because of that anyway.

MOO and FWIW

Good post. I don't compare OP's disability with others because a physical disability doesn't have to make you dishonest or someone who needs to lay blame at other people's door, or someone who thinks they're the only one that matters. The people I've known have had some stress issues, but they're all basically kind and honest people. Not like OP at all!

 

[jay-jay]

Though wouldn't most of us try to avoid 35yrs in jail, no matter how guilty we knew ourselves to be? I would anyway lol.

But we wouldn't have got ourselves into that position in the first place

 

[BritsKate]

Reeva would, and in fact was going to on April 15th, talk about her own personal dealings with domestic violence. If Reeva was going to use her time with OP in her speech then you can bet that the media would have gotten wind of it. Perhaps OP was unhappy with Reeva talking about her own history of dealing with domestic violence, especially since he had been pretty brutal to her himself.



MOO

She was due to give her speech on Valentine's Day. I'd thought when they argued that night, the impending speech may have helped her begin to recognize some patterns with which she was familiar, and may have been a catalyst.

Many contend this wasn't connected to domestic violence but it fits too many pieces, to me, for it to not be. How truly horrific, the very day she was due to speak out on violence against women, she was murdered by her significant other.


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[Chelly]

Use him as an example? Why would she do that? We just read an article where Reeva was begging a reporter not to publish something that might hurt Oscar's career. A nice person wouldn't do something like that to a friend.

This fight on V-day blindsided Reeva. Her mother said she was not a confrontational person. Her friends said she was a peacemaker. But, we see in the emails, Reeva repeatedly tells him, I'm a person, too, you can't treat someone this way, you just ruined two of my days with your tantrums, stop putting me down. She is sensitive to verbal abuse because of her high self esteem. She was not going to be in an abusive relationship for the same reason. I'm completely convinced she had decided to break it off with him and did it that night.

Her only mistake--don't break off with an abuser when you are alone with them, and especially not at night or after drinks.

Has evidence been entered to support your theory that Reeva broke up with OP that night?

Seems odd that she would bring a gift, cook a stir-fry, and possibly go to bed with him after breaking up. More reasonable is that the evening started off peaceful then turned into an out of control flight. In any case, OP certainly broke up with Reeva that night.

 

[molly333]

I know, I'm clutching at straws. Something must have made OP flip enough to shoot her though

Agreed. What would make a fight escalate to death? [assuming this wasn't an accident].

He's not going to shoot her over a disagreement about wallpaper.

She would never threaten him with exposure. She was not that kind of person--as beautiful inside, as outside, said all her friends.

Nor was she confrontational.

But, let's say she says to him, Oscar, I think we should cool this down a bit.

And, then with his pressuring her, she tells him why--you are too controlling, I can't live like this, etc.

This would be a huge blow to him, following on the heels of the break-off with the other girlfriend, and combined with whatever other pressures he was feeling from other problems in his life.

So they argue back and forth and she tells him more things about himself he doesn't want to hear to justify her position. She wouldn't want to hurt him, but this is going on all night and escalates. She said too much. Big mistake.

IMO

 

[Viper]

Reeva wouldn't do that [release or threaten to release stuff about him to the media]. Reeva was a really nice person, according to friends and family.

She wouldn't threaten him. And, this wasn't a run of the mill argument.

It ended in death.

I agree with everything in your post.

I have no idea what caused OP to kill Reeva. I don't believe that it was that she was breaking up with him that caused this. That carefully chosen gift that she had put together had photos of she and him; that is not the gift she would give to the man she was about to leave behind IMO. That he had nothing for her screams trouble to me, especially given his history of going all out on Valentines Day.

Reeva's bag was packed, except her jeans and sandals (house shoes that she probably left there anyway). So she was leaving IMO. Obviously they argued that night and they never settled it to the point that they just dropped it and went to sleep.

Mr. Nel keeps pointing to OPs obsession with his own needs and wants and him treating Reeva poorly. So I guess I am leaning towards an argument related to that which OP just freaked out about. My other thought is of course his brand, his image, those things are valuable and are equal to money. Even if it was not in Reeva's character to share things about another person with others because she would not want that person to be hurt, OP may not have had trust in her to let her leave after learning of some dark secret of his.

 

[K.T]

Hey KT! It's been a while now and there has been so much testimony that my mind is unclear on this issue, but IIRC Pistorius testified that he is so short on his stumps that when he walks past the window Dr. Stipps would not have been able to see him, or if he did he would only see OPs head - something like that. In other words OP was directly refuting that Dr. Stipps saw anyone walk ftom right to left when the gunshots were fired and the light was on. OPs word versus Dr. Stipp's word, like every other issue in this trial. :facepalm:

Darn it, Pistorius maybe right.

I went back to look at a few more pictures of the window and perhaps it's higher than I thought...I'm now estimating bottom window ledge to floor to be around 100ish cm. So without pros.legs you might see 55cm...so, probably you would see the head and shoulders of Pistorius. Oh, well...look forward to the trial tomorrow

 

[bajas]

I still have compassion for Oscar. I think he is a lost soul who has triumphed over a lot of adversity. I don't see that a jail term will benefit either him or society, especially when one considers the many malicious murderers and rapists in SA who don't even stand trial due to lack of evidence....the way I see it, the evidence does not dispute his version of events to the extent that he should be found guilty. His life willl never be the same and he will have to live with this forever. That is punishment enough. <modsnip> MHOO.

 

[weeeva]

Yes I know, but i mean if challenged as to what was the sound he heard, because it obviously wasn't the door....He might say that. The first thing I thought of when he said wood moving was the magazine rack.

If we did believe his story, that could account for such a sound.

The only problem with this Freya is that he would have already fired the shot that threw Reeva to the magazine rack.

 

[soozieqtips]

Another reason why I think it's unlikely Reeva was about to dump OP is because she'd already mentioned in a text that she was scared of him sometimes and how he would react to her. Reeva wasn't stupid. I'm sure she knew that dumping him after a) giving him a Valentine's Day gift, b) cooking him dinner (if that's what happened) and c) changing her plans to go home - was going to invoke some sort of unpleasant response from OP. Why would she risk that when we know she was always on tiptoes round him to avoid offending him about anything, chewing gum, hair in a ponytail, talking to a waiter for too long, dressed too casually etc etc. It's just not feasible that she'd risk a negative reaction to such a significant issue when she was on her own with him.

 

[molly333]

Has evidence been entered to support your theory that Reeva broke up with OP that night?

Seems odd that she would bring a gift, cook a stir-fry, and possibly go to bed with him after breaking up. More reasonable is that the evening started off peaceful then turned into an out of control flight. In any case, OP certainly broke up with Reeva that night.

No. I'm deducing it from circumstantial evidence.

An out of control fight about what? Where to go to dinner the next night?

This ended in her death. That's a DV fight over a big issue, like leaving him.

Or, it was an accident.

They never went to bed that night.

 

[kittychi]

Have I missed something or has there not yet been any questions or testimony about the Netcare call that OP says he made. IIRC, in his bail affi he says he called them, they told them to bring her in rather than wait for them. He then went downstairs and opened the door, then went back up to get her.

He says in court testimony that he sat with her body crying for he didn't know how long.

Has Netcare ever confirmed that they advised him to bring her in rather than wait for an ambulance?

Also: there were several reports of his car running in the driveway. Has that ever been confirmed or thrown out?

TIA, smart people!

 

[Harmony 2]

fyi I just posted this new article in the media links thread...

'I Am Reeva': South African Women See Pistorius Trial as Litmus Test

Statistics compiled by the Medical Research Council at the University of Cape Town show that three women a day are killed by their domestic partners. Rates of "intimate femicide" – the term used to describe a category of murder – are five times higher in South Africa than the world average.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/pi...rican-women-see-pistorius-trial-litmus-n77546

much more at link...