Trial Discussion Thread #27 - 14.04.16, Day 24

[molly333]

I've attempted to put together a timeline of sorts, it might be helpful. I tried not to cram in too much info so the times would stand out. I've mostly used juror13 as a source (if this is not ok, please let me know), along with other reports from the individual court dates.

Question : Who is Mr Nhlengethwa? I've read his name in the reports but that's it....

--------------------------------​

Phone records - Calls to security on 14th Feb

Silverwood Security land line:

3:15:51am - Dr. Stipp (army training - assult rifle & pistol). Reported gunshots.
3:16:16am - Mr Nhlengethwa. No answer.
3:16:36am - Mr Nhlengethwa. Reported gunshots.

Silverwood Security cell phone:

3:21:33am - Op to Baba. OP cries.
3:22:05am - Baba to OP. OP says “everything is fine”.

Security other:

3:16am - Mr. Johnson (gun owner). Heard gunshots - backed up by security phone records.

Silverwood Security:

3:19:50am - OP to Stander

Gunshots/bangs & screams reported to security on 14th Feb

1:56am - Mrs. van der Merwe (very loud woman's voice over an hour)

3:00am (approx) - Mrs. van der Merwe (gunshots/bangs)
3:00am (shortly after)- Security guard on bike. (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mrs. Burger (gunshots)
3:00am (approx) - Mr. Johnson (gunshots)
3:04am - Dr. Stipp. (gunshots)
3:04am - Mrs. Stipp (gunshots)
3:16am (before) - Mr Nhlengethwa (gunshots)

-------------------------------------------​

Dr. Stipp - hears fearful female screaming, sees lights in OP's bathroom.
Mr. Johnson - male & female yelling for help, female and male screams intermingled.
Mrs. Burger - male & female yelling for help, woman screaming with scream escalating.
Mrs. van der Merwe - loud woman's voice, screams.

-------------------------------------------​

3:12am OP reports firing his gun


3:17am (approx) - Mr. Johnson (gunshots)
3:17am - Dr. Stipp (gunshots)

-------------------------------------------​

I can make changes if needs be....

yeah,but the witnesses who just heard one set of 'gunshots' heard the screams before the 'gunshots.'

This means by definition that they are hearing Stipp's second set of 'gunshots,' regardless of what time they are giving.

Hope that made sense.

 

[aoibhinn]

So, according to the defense version, the shots would have been the first 'bangs' heard, approximately 3:00 to 3:04 am, and the bat would have been the second set of bangs, heard around 3:17?

So if OP shot RS at 3:00-3:04 am, what did he do in those precious 13 minutes, before calling for medical help ? Were those things more important than getting an ambulance to the home?

If we believe the ear witnesses, he screamed and cried and fussed for much of that time.

Katydid, I retrieved all the relevant times from the witness statements and official phone records, with the exception of OP's stated time of shooting. So I guess that's neither the DT or PT version. It's just a record of what was said in court by each party/revealed by phone records. I thought it might be a good idea to set it out, timeline fashion. I was searching for one, couldn't find, so compiled one myself...

 

[katydid23]

Well if someone is in such an in insane rage, that they are so outraged it results in a horrific murder, then I think making mocking sounds during their frenzy kind of trivializes the depth of their outrage. It is possible, but I just can't see it.

Mocking behavior fits perfectly with 'rageful' behavior, in my experience. It is part of the controlling, rude and mean persona. He has the gun and has all of the control. So her screams are useless, and he mocks them, in a very cruel way. I can see it quite easily. Look at the way he acted when he drove recklessly and dangerously that time, holding her captive in his car. He was mocking her that day as well.

 

[fox1lady]

Someone said this witness reminded them of the 3 stooges.
But I think "Who's on first" skit from Abbott and Costello is more like him.
Lou even holds a bat throughout.

Starts at about 2:00

Abbott & Costello Who's On First - YouTube

Forgot to check for 2.00 I watched all the way through wetting myself laughing... love A&C

 

[katydid23]

Katydid, I retrieved all the relevant times from the witness statements and official phone records, with the exception of OP's stated time of shooting. So I guess that's neither the DT or PT version. It's just a record of what was said in court by each party/revealed by phone records. I thought it might be a good idea to set it out, timeline fashion. I was searching for one, couldn't find, so compiled one myself...

Yes, I understand that you were not saying which time was which.

I was just going by what Roux said previously. He stated that Stipp heard the bat strikes, not the shots, at 3: 15 or whatever. I was going by that DT version then.

 

[aoibhinn]

yeah,but the witnesses who just heard one set of 'gunshots' heard the screams before the 'gunshots.'

This means by definition that they are hearing Stipp's second set of 'gunshots,' regardless of what time they are giving.

Hope that made sense.

With the exception of Mr Nhlengethwa and the security guard on the bike (who haven't testified), every witness listed heard two sets of sounds.

 

[soozieqtips]

Thankyou

The lack of any data on that really does trouble me then. Not what she was doing on it during the evening, but why she didn't attempt to call the police once she had her phone with her in that cubicle. If it was me and my partner was screaming at me to phone the police and alerting me to the danger of intruders I'm pretty certain I'd phone them. I'm not dogmatic about it but that she did not do so causes me to somewhat doubt Pistorius' series of events.

She may not have been able to get a signal in the toilet.

 

[fox1lady]

The good news for Oscar is when he is found guilty, he will have a lot of people to blame.

bet you he starts with his two fans

 

[weeeva]

And that's your right, of course. Thing is a witness testified to it so it either did actually happen or you have to kinda discount the witness entirely.

Remember though this occurred before shots were fired in the State's version. But if the defence version is to be believed that the shots occurred at 3am one must also explain the 20 minutes before the call to netcare.

I am hopeless at remembering the details but did this witness volunteer this information in her original account, or did Roux badger her into it, when he was trying to put across that the person screaming was in fact a man? I honestly can't remember, does anyone else remember this.

 

[TrueDetective]

I'm glad this is getting brought up today as I'd almost forgotten it. But when OP said he "kneeled" (I need to go back and listen again, but I could swear that was the word he used), I immediately thought to myself - how does one who is on stumps kneel? (or crouch for that matter, as I may have interpreted the word "crouch" as kneeling; again, I need to go back and listen).

It made zero sense to me. I've long wondered if he had his legs on the entire evening and was never on his stumps.

(Oh, and apologies if someone else in this thread has said something similarly already as I'm just now joining.)

Hi tip. It was me who stated the belief that he was on his legs the whole time. I am still confused at the state's version / true belief on this, although they did change from their first statements - on his legs to on his stumps for trial.

It will be interesting to see if there's anything further on it. Nels focus on the kneeling/crouching was certainly interesting but I suspect its too late to go changing your version as it does not go down well! I think they stuck with the most provable scenario. I don't like the idea of that at all but it may be true so I could be being unfair.

It's just always been my gut feeling that he was on his legs. To me, the evidence neither proves or disproves it. It's entirely possible evidentially and for me it's entirely probable circumstantially.

 

[G.bng]

The state has not conceded that the gunshots were the first sounds heard by the Stipps. The state gives no explanation for what those sounds were, but argues that the second sounds were the gunshots.

You are correct. I remember Nel hedging at the time not wanting to give State's case away, saying that all he was prepared to say was that at that time State's case was "shots" at 3:17 killed Reeva, t'was my assumption second were bats.

I also recall Nel inferring in that same exchange with Roux and Judge that State's case was adapting to new evidence being disclosed by defence, e.g. OP screaming, and like a women, so I don't rely on the State's case being static and with Nel's reluctance to show the cards I would not be surprised at time of pleas it will be different to what we started with. And it appears the charging doc can be changed any time during the trial... I think by any party including judge, another surprise maybe. And why not, it appears OP's defence may have changed too if his cross was anything to go by. Here an interesting article by constitutional lawyer Pierre de Vos I posted earlier precisely in respect of that. http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...ry-action-thin-ice-mr-pistorius/#.U07Py7sUF63

 

[fox1lady]

Why would the conditions change how one sounds relative to the other?

If they are both under the same changed conditions, then they would still sound the same relative to each other.

The only time you would have a problem is if the gunshots are heard under one set of conditions and the bat strike under another.

But that is not the case--it was same set of conditions for both, 10 to 15 minutes apart.

Did you listen to the video? They sound very much alike to the point where you probably couldn't tell them apart, given a 10 minute break between the two sets of sounds.

But the validity of the test also depends on whether the sound "expert" manipulated it to sound the same

 

[shane13]

Forgot to check for 2.00 I watched all the way through wetting myself laughing... love A&C

Well glad about that.

 

[Really?]

After Nel's cross of Mr. Dixon, I wonder if the judge and her assessors feel that they wasted time and paper taking notes of this "experts" testimony. I know I am having a difficult time believing any of his opinions because of the non expert aspect of his testimony.

I bet they have big red ink marks on them...

she really did have a nice smile (close to a giggle) when admonishing the astute Mr. Nel.

 

[G.bng]

Mr. Nel said it was [Correction: I originally wrote "wasn't"] his case that OP was on his stumps when he fired.

Nel also stated very clearly (during an objection to Roux's cross examination of a witness) that it was the state's case that the shots were fired around 03:17, that Reeva was alive before that time.

Found a link:
Nel: There were two sets of noises. "Our case is there were four shots in the region of 03:17." She was screaming before 03:17.
and then later...
Nel: I agree that after 3.17 the deceased would not have been able to scream...

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/O...PDATES-Pistoriual-trial-day-4-part-2-20140306

I transcribed that curious exchange of "shots" and shots myself so I recall it well. I should have said Nel said "shots at 3:17 were the ones that killed Reeva, was my assumption that meant the bats came first. OK

 

[soozieqtips]

For those who say that Reeva is gone forever, that is not the case in my opinion. I believe in the afterlife and I believe that she and her family will be reunited there. What happened is a tragedy, but the separation is only temporary nonetheless.

"O thou beloved maidservant of God, although the loss of a son [or daughter] is indeed heart-breaking and beyond the limits of human endurance, yet one who knoweth and understandeth is assured that the son [or daughter] hath not been lost but, rather, hath stepped from this world into another, and she will find him [her] in the divine realm. That reunion shall be for eternity, while in this world separation is inevitable and bringeth with it a burning grief." Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 200

BBM - That's a comforting thing to believe... but if Reeva's family don't believe in it, then she is gone from their lives forever. And they'll never erase the memory of her last moments when she was bleeding to death, alone in a toilet. That's the life sentence OP has handed to them, and they did nothing wrong.

 

[TipDog]

Hi tip. It was me who stated the belief that he was on his legs the whole time. I am still confused at the state's version / true belief on this, although they did change from their first statements - on his legs to on his stumps for trial.

It will be interesting to see if there's anything further on it. Nels focus on the kneeling/crouching was certainly interesting but I suspect its too late to go changing your version as it does not go down well! I think they stuck with the most provable scenario. I don't like the idea of that at all but it may be true so I could be being unfair.

It's just always been my gut feeling that he was on his legs. To me, the evidence neither proves or disproves it. It's entirely possible evidentially and for me it's entirely probable circumstantially.

BIB 1

Me too. And, truthfully, I think they made a mistake (although, I'm in no position to judge).

BIB 2

What I think is most important is that OP did use "kneel/crouch" and that will not get past the judge, she's too bright. If my brain is stuck on that, I bet she will give it more than a passing thought. After all, OP never being on his stumps 100% supports the state's case against him.

Odd thing to me is how OP just kept describing all the running around and rushing, etc. on his stumps (well, except when he switched back into "limited mobility" mode again). I don't think that will get by the judge either.

He can't have it both ways and be telling the truth. He can't be swaying around on his stumps, unstable, yet then rushing about, running, etc. He can't be on his stumps and kneel or crouch, at least as far as I know.

Maybe someone disagrees?

 

[rachael123]

It was kinda funny just to watch Nel face and then the guy got snippy with him-Ha

Lmao @ chemist!

Those were fun times


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[katydid23]

I transcribed that curious exchange of "shots" and shots myself so I recall it well. I should have said Nel said "shots at 3:17 were the ones that killed Reeva, was my assumption that meant the bats came first. OK

I will be curious to hear Nel lay the case out that way. It makes sense to me, that she locked herself in the toilet and he grabbed the bat and hit the door, yelling at her to come out. And she threatens to call the cops, so he returns with his gun. That makes the most sense to me.

But I have to better understand the DT's reason for debunking that possibility. It has to do with the panels of the door and the splinters in reeve, but I am not clear on the credibility or validity of their reasoning.

eta:

It is hard for me to accept their timeline. Why would he shoot her at 3:00 am, and then take 15 to 17 minutes to bat down the door, and a few more minutes to call for medical help? Their version has problems for OP as well.

 

[dianebowen]

Very much so.

Anything that could be important physical or circumstantial evidence that is not examined and not used to question witnesses is in my opinion not merely an oversight, but negligent.

Considering the fine detail and exhaustive nature of other areas, I cannot believe tat this (and bedroom door damage) have been almost completely ignored.

Briefly mentioned during photo walkthroughs yes, but IIRC there have been absolutely no follow ups which I find shocking and inexplicable. I'm sure there are logical reasons for this - there must be. But I really want to understand them as they remain huge red flags for me.

As Shane keeps telling us "this one runs deep"

I'd like to know how. And why.

I went back to the testimony and read that they were unable to identify an object that would make the scratchs and indentations in the steel plate. So that is likely why they did not pursue it.