Trial Discussion Thread #26 - 14.04.15, Day 23

[TipDog]

I was referring to OP.

My apologies, Shane. I misunderstood.

 

[shane13]

injured shoulder - pain.
not training - excess energy, no release.
dedicated athlete but not able to train - frustration.
second dentist appt due - did he have toothache?

additions to the column marked op likely to be on a short fuse.

Was anyone able to see a "medical pain patch"?

When on EIC, Roux showed the shirtless photo of OP, and said there was a medical pain patch on Oscar's back. Where he pointed on the back also is not the usual palce for shoulder pain.
Only problem is that it was mostly a side view. Was anyone able to see the patch??

Also such patches often contain corticosteroid drugs, and we do have the results from Feb 14t that said zero levels for drugs tested which included steroids.

So anyone see the alleged patch?

 

[sleuth-d-]

I just finished testimony....and have not read all comments....was toilette tested for urine? Obviously there was no toilette flush...

I hope alot more comes out.

there was only no toilet flush if you follow the op version.

think it has been stated she had an empty bladder.
not sure how many other toilets there are in the house.

no idea if there was a urine test.
there certainly was a whole lot of blood in the toilet.

 

[Madeleine74]

One 'fast' car ride would have me bolting to get away from this guy once and for all. That's a big no-no to me, unless I'm choosing to be on a racetrack with a professional driver. Someone who drives far beyond the speed limit (and I'm talking over 20mph over) with passengers in their car is not someone who thinks about the safety and comfort of others. The first time would indeed be the very last time.

Too bad RS didn't understand his lack of empathy before it was too late. And fortunate for his prior GF (Samantha) that she got dumped and away from him. Very fortunate for her.

 

[Chelly]

Considering he couldn't even see his target and was shooting through a door, I'd say Oscar is an excellent shooter, and shooting to kill. No wild firing there.

 

[minor4th]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

 

[minor4th]

It helps to listen to the direct, the cross, and the redirect.

Mrs. Stipp said that there was light coming from the toilet room window as well as the bathroom window.

Are you pretty sure it was Mrs Stipp? TIA

 

[sleuth-d-]

Well I posted the video in this thread that has him reading the card in court. I also pointed out at what time it started on the video. Please feel free to have a look/listen and see if he was or not. To me, and apparently many others, he was not crying at all. He was simply reading out what she wrote in the card as if it meant nothing special to him.

MOO

no visuals on the court filming, but i guess there would be tweets from court reports to say one way or the other.

i imagine it will also be mentioned in the press reports/round ups later too.

 

[molly333]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

Exactly. There's a big problem with the witnesses and dr. Stipp is right in the middle of it, because he hears two sets of 'gunshots' with a woman screaming [and a man's voice] in between. He is flabbergasted on the stand when he realizes all that noise must be coming from Oscar because Reeva wouldn't have made any noise after the 3am gunshots. She was dead.

But, he's sure he heard a man and a woman. So there you go.

 

[sleuth-d-]

I may be wrong, but I've always thought the cat was both dead and alive. MOO

only if you are not in the box.

 

[sleuth-d-]

It helps to listen to the direct, the cross, and the redirect.

Mrs. Stipp said that there was light coming from the toilet room window as well as the bathroom window.

and the expert today showed how light floods into the toilet only when the toilet door is open.
i.e. light in the toilet is wholly dependent on the light in the bathroom, and the state of the toilet door

 

[jilly]

I respect your opinion. You are in the majority.

I do think Oscar will make up outlandish excuses to try and lessen his culpability when he behaves badly. I just personally am not convinced that this wasn't a horrendous accident caused by his hotheadedness and his paranoia, made into something that it is not by his excuse making and inability to accept any imperfections in himself, or take personal responsibility for his actions.

One shot....maybe an accident, but 4 Black Talon bullets spells intent to murder, imo.

 

[Rumpole]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

Thanks. I do remember that exchange it was a critical moment. Well worth watching again.

Nicely played by Roux, getting Nel to state categorically that shooting was at 3:17. That they were the ONLY shots.
THAT is what I keep arguing makes a NONSENSE of the States case, given the times we know of events that must have occurred after the shooting, and the available time after 3:17. It goes way beyond the "Nel Test" Not only does it "not make sense" it is physically IMPOSSIBLE.

Nel: "Two sets of noises, shots at 3:17"

Judge clarifies ALL shots were at 3:17. Nel agrees.

The whole exchange is well worth watching NOW after all that we have heard. Nel is clearly talking nonsense?


I have always maintained that Stipps would have made a great STAR witness for the defense, if State had not already called him.

 

[sleuth-d-]

Was anyone able to see a "medical pain patch"?

When on EIC, Roux showed the shirtless photo of OP, and said there was a medical pain patch on Oscar's back. Where he pointed on the back also is not the usual palce for shoulder pain.
Only problem is that it was mostly a side view. Was anyone able to see the patch??

Also such patches often contain corticosteroid drugs, and we do have the results from Feb 14t that said zero levels for drugs tested which included steroids.

So anyone see the alleged patch?

yes, although i initially thought it looked like a huge tattoo

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-officers-crucial-hours-fatal-shooting.html

 

[Viper]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

I don't understand why you are still arguing this. Would you really prefer that OP killed Reeva at 3:00 rather than 3:17? He called for help at 3:19. What did OP do for 19 minutes?

BIB Is the use of "must have" inserted there is to explain that the statement is actually personal opinion and not really a fact, correct? I ask because the statement is not a fact.

 

[nastasya]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

You're wrong on two points.

First, both experts said that the only thing that could be determined was the wood was ripped from the door after the shots. Both experts said it would be impossible to know whether the bat hit the door before or after the shots. By the way, that's simply common sense.

Second, watch the video your posted. At precisely 28:38, Roux refers to the shots.

He says, "Not the first shots. The REAL shots."

Roux is confusing the defense version like OP did. Roux himself says the first shots were NOT the "real" shots.

If they claim that Reeva was shot earlier, then there is no arterial blood spurting from her body 17 minutes later. There's no way to explain how OP could shoot her and wait 19 minutes to call anybody. There's no way she was slumped over, but still alive, 17 minutes after taking a bullet through her brain. There is no large pool of blood on the flood from arterial bleeding for 17 minutes.

It doesn't matter who heard shots or cricket bats. What matters is the biology. Reeva wasn't bleeding out for 17 minutes, or even 10 minutes, in the bathroom.

 

[ShadyLady]

Considering he couldn't even see his target and was shooting through a door, I'd say Oscar is an excellent shooter, and shooting to kill. No wild firing there.

He obviously hit his target....and I am convinced he let her bleed out without wanting her to live. IMO

 

[Karmady]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsQaxImyQVA&feature=share

Watch this video starting at 26m54s - it should be cued to that point. This is the big weakness in the state's case. You can see that even the judge is confused by Nel's argument.

It simply makes no sense. Both sides agrees there are two set of sounds that everyone thinks are gunshots. One at 3:00 and another at 3:17. There were only 4 gunshots and they all happened at the same time.

Both sides agree that the gunshots must have happened before the cricket bat hit the door.

Both sides agree that Reeva could not have screamed after the gunshots.

So how can the gunshots have been at 3:17?

Nel tells the judge that he'll clear up the discrepancies between his witnesses, but he never does. He never offers an explanation at all for the first "shots" heard by the Stipps.

How is it possible that the prosecutor does not appreciate that this is fatal to his case? jmo

 

[Plumeria5]

This picture of OP haunts me. Tears seem to be flowing but his eyes...who is he looking at with this, should I say, evil look?

 

[Madeleine74]

That's really it. I think Jilly captured the essence of this case.

4 shots, with a pause in between. Not 1 shot, which could be an accident. 4 shots.

He knew. He had to know. He was intentionally killing someone. He claims he did intend to kill anyone. That is false.

Add to that the screams heard by more than 1 person, the changing of OP's story, his inconsistencies and to me it adds up to more than culpable homicide.

I have a feeling Milady will agree.