1048 users online (164 members and 884 guests)  


Websleuths News

View Poll Results: Do you think the prosecutor proved the case?

Voters
248. You may not vote on this poll
  • The case for murder was demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt

    74 29.84%
  • Murder directus -OP fired shots knowing it was RS and intended to kill her

    141 56.85%
  • Murder eventualis- OP believed it was a burglar, foresaw he would kill by shooting

    18 7.26%
  • The case for culpable homicide was proven

    33 13.31%
  • There are many holes in the case Ė too many unanswered questions

    20 8.06%
  • Prosecutorís evidence and witness testimony verify OPís version

    3 1.21%
  • The firearm charges were substantiated

    38 15.32%
  • None of the above

    1 0.40%
Multiple Choice Poll.

Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 158
  1. #1

    Do you think the prosecutor proved the case?

    List 5 facts or pieces of evidence that validate your opinion from the above...
    Last edited by Harmony2; 04-27-2014 at 12:28 AM.

  2. #2
    BritsKate's Avatar
    BritsKate is offline Past mistakes should teach you to create a wonderful future.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    American Expat living in England
    Posts
    5,328
    1. An impossible timeline provided by the defence.
    2. OP providing explanations consistent with what the ear-witnesses heard, thereby also conceding their testimony.
    3. Absolutely no solid evidence of a history of fearful, paranoid behaviour on the part of OP.
    4. Mangena, Saayman, and Botha's testimony, allowing for Reeva to have screamed.
    5. OP himself stating a woman never screamed that night...when he also said he couldn't hear.

    (Am I really limited to just 5?)

    6. Calling Stander before netcare. Wanting help to lift Reeva though he hadn't called netcare yet and ultimately didn't need assistance anyway.
    7. By defence timeline, allowing Reeva to lay on the toilet floor, without seeking medical assistance for (at least) 8 minutes.
    8. No witnesses hearing gunshots at approximately 3:12, when Oscar estimates he fired.
    9. No evidence provided that Reeva had the ability to leave his bedroom that evening. In fact, the opposite, OP was adamant she absolutely could not have.
    10. Screaming at an intruder to get out but allowing no time for that intruder to escape. According to SA law, one cannot seek a putative self-defence claim when one kills an intruder who is in the process of fleeing.
    11. No visual assessment of where Reeva was. No verbal acknowledgement from Reeva - ever - which is highly suspect.
    12. Continually changing his account, sometimes even mid-sentence, in an apparent attempt to explain away damaging evidence.
    13. Deeply loving Reeva - and then getting her birthday wrong on the stand.
    14. 'Contamination, tampering, and disturbance' by crime scene investigators who would have needed to know OP's version (which wasn't fully fleshed out until trial).
    15. Firing 4 highly lethal bullets, without aiming, in a close cluster, without intending to shoot at a door, without ever establishing who was beyond that door.

    (In no particular order. Limiting myself so I can serve up a late tea...I could very easily carry on...)

    ETA: Murder, dolus directus. It's my very firm belief he knew exactly whom he was shooting at.
    Last edited by BritsKate; 04-26-2014 at 05:27 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,954
    Yes. I think the PT has proved their case.

    1. No history of crime against OP to bolster his vulnerability claim.

    2. Called a friend after murdering Reeva instead of calling for medical help.

    3. Proof that he is prepared to lie under oath when he denied firing a gun in Tasha's when it was impossible for the gun to have discharged itself.

    4. Leaving out significant details from his affidavit and then adding ones that conveniently explained what witnesses heard - screaming and crying for example.

    5. His need to discredit each and every witness, including Dr Stipp. His need to shift blame for his own misdeeds. His refusal to accept any blame for anything at all.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    south Wales uk
    Posts
    203
    1. How he fails to never see reeva leave bedroom
    2. Telling someone or person to get out mtime house then shoot through a door
    3. Lies all the time
    4. Witness heard argument
    5. After the shooting calls friends and lawyers

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom, Shropshire
    Posts
    260
    I actually voted Murder eventualis because of the reasons you gave for it. However, I'm wondering why it can't be Murder directus using my theory.

    I believe that OP intended to kill whoever was in the toilet.

    He gave no warning shots, although he claimed that by shouting "Get the **** out of my house" and shouting to Reeva to phone the police was in his way a warning. However, he shot as soon as he heard another noise which he thought was wood moving. He claimed that the only ways out would be the window or the door. The fact that the door handle didn't move meaning the door wasn't opening would suggest that the "intruders" would have perhaps been trying to flee through the window as he had hoped. He shot four times at that point so didn't give them a chance.

    Also he claimed that he didn't check with Reeva whether she had heard anything because "he was sure of what he heard", this could suggest he was sure it was an intruder and so he reached for his gun, walked to the bathroom in order to deliberately confront the intruders and then fired the 4 shots using black talon ammo into the toilet door.

    It could be argued that he had planned the murder of an intruder by purchasing deadly ammunition which wasn't just going to harm, it was going to cause "maximum damage". He didn't use the gun in self defence, that is obvious. Shooting 4 times at a door of a room that size with those bullets would have to either kill or seriously injure whoever was in there as he is a trained shooter.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts. Could be either pre-meditated (dependant on which definition is used) or murder.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom, Shropshire
    Posts
    260
    It might help if you gave a definition of each. What would it mean if he deliberately shot to kill the intruders but it turned out to be someone else. It's still murder surely but what would it be classified as?

    He seems to be saying sorry Milady I made a mistake, my mistake was taking Reeva's life. I didn't want to kill anyone really but there was someone in my bathroom being noisy and it bothered me as I was tired so I had to shoot them 4 times although I couldn't see who they were or if in fact they were even posing a danger to myself or Reeva. I'm sorry and it won't happen again, will you let me go home now please.

  7. #7
    BritsKate's Avatar
    BritsKate is offline Past mistakes should teach you to create a wonderful future.
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    American Expat living in England
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by fox1lady View Post
    It might help if you gave a definition of each. What would it mean if he deliberately shot to kill the intruders but it turned out to be someone else. It's still murder surely but what would it be classified as?

    He seems to be saying sorry Milady I made a mistake, my mistake was taking Reeva's life. I didn't want to kill anyone really but there was someone in my bathroom being noisy and it bothered me as I was tired so I had to shoot them 4 times although I couldn't see who they were or if in fact they were even posing a danger to myself or Reeva. I'm sorry and it won't happen again, will you let me go home now please.
    Murder requires intent. Intent can be proven through one of the following:
    Murder, dolus directus - intended to kill the victim.
    Murder, dolus indirectus - A more serious form of dolus eventualis. Intended to kill an unidentified person.
    Murder, dolus eventualis - did not intend to kill, but does so out of recklessness. Should have foreseen his actions could culminate in the victim's death and proceeded anyway. Objective factors are used to determine forseeability, such as number of shots, type of ammunition, type of weapon, shooting into a closed door, not getting a verbal responce from Reeva, etc. The more combined factors, the more the defendant should have been able to foresee the consequences of his actions.

    Culpable homicide - Unlawful, negligent killing of a human being. If acquitted of murder, the reasonable person test is applied to determine guilt of CH. The conduct of OP is weighed against what a reasonable person, in the same circumstances, would have foreseen and what they would have done to avoid the consequences.

    *IANAL but this is my understanding of SA law. HTH*

    ETA: Sorry to be repetitive...see the poll was updated with legal definitions while I was typing.
    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/oscar-p...141748433.html
    http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.z...minal-law-101/

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    434
    I’m still on the fence regarding whether OP intentionally killed RS or thought there was an intruder. I want to hear the Prosecution's closing arguments and see how Nel makes sense of all the evidence presented. Presently I’m somewhere between directus and eventualis and fluctuating with every intelligent post I read here.

    I thought OP was fairly consistent with his testimony and his version of events. I thought his emotions seemed congruent and generally I believed him. Unfortunately, some of his testimony gave pause for thought, especially regarding the secondary charges, and I believe him to be guilty of these.

    The testimony he gave regarding the moment he fired at the intruder seemed a desperate attempt to shirk all responsibility and displace all blame. There is some pretty damning evidence that suggests he may be lying. Even though it's the Defence who are now calling witnesses, it seems to be the Prosecution’s case which is strengthening.

    However, I still want to hear the rest of the Defence’s case before deciding. I would like some psychological insight into the mind of OP; could his disability make his version more plausible and believable? Also, what does Oscar sound like when he screams? Are there other ear-witnesses who can help clarify what was heard and when? To what extent did Police tamper with the crime scene, if at all? Does Roux have something up his sleeve?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,919
    1. Controlling and jealous re: the engagement party. She touched a dudes arm.

    2: he doesn't 'think' before he 'acts'. Re: he could have killed her really by accident in a car crash, speeding. Maybe he has a death wish?

    3: he speaks 'Oscar speak' (coined by Shane13) when he is fibbing to save his Life

    4: lovers holiday= lovers murder. True

    5: he didn't really like or love her, but instead he used her for his own public image. That night he grew to hate her.

    Moo....oh yeah. I picked #2
    ~ shine on you crAzy diamond ~ Pink Floyd, Wish You Were Here

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Giles View Post
    Iím still on the fence regarding whether OP intentionally killed RS or thought there was an intruder. I want to hear the Prosecution's closing arguments and see how Nel makes sense of all the evidence presented. Presently Iím somewhere between directus and eventualisand fluctuating with every intelligent post I read here.

    I thought OP was fairly consistent with his testimony and his version of events. I thought his emotions seemed congruent and generally I believed him. Unfortunately, some of his testimony gave pause for thought, especially regarding the secondary charges, and I believe him to be guilty of these.

    The testimony he gave regarding the moment he fired at the intruder seemed a desperate attempt to shirk all responsibility and displace all blame. There is some pretty damning evidence that suggests he may be lying. Even though it's the Defence who are now calling witnesses, it seems to be the Prosecutionís case which is strengthening.

    However, I still want to hear the rest of the Defenceís case before deciding. I would like some psychological insight into the mind of OP; could his disability make his version more plausible and believable? Also, what does Oscar sound like when he screams? Are there other ear-witnesses who can help clarify what was heard and when? To what extent did Police tamper with the crime scene, if at all? Does Roux have something up his sleeve?
    BBM

    An interesting point mentioned there.

    I think that struck a chord with most people, regardless of their belief of whether OP intentionally killed Reeva or not.

    You could certainly see the 'self-preservation' instinct come from OP at this point in the testimony. It never sits well when a person we expect to be showing remorse clearly demonstrates to us that self-interest is still one of their highest priorities.

    I'm not sure what Judge Masipa will read into this, but it certainly didn't help his cause regarding public opinion.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    541
    1. Dead body
    2. Admitted killer
    3. Killer pursued victim
    4. Killer told victim to leave
    5. Victim retreated, killer fired 4 shots at retreating victim.

    This is a prima facie case. This means the state has prima facie evidence of murder.

    The burden of proof shifts to the defendant to show why his killing of victim was allowed by South African law.

    Killer has has only presented self-contradictory and unreasonable testimony from himself in an effort to prove his case.

    Guilty on all counts. 25 years to life.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    4,386
    My five reasons for voting for Murder Directus have already been listed above in other posts. I also believe that the other weapons charges have been proven as well.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,545
    Quote Originally Posted by TorisMom003 View Post
    My five reasons for voting for Murder Directus have already been listed above in other posts. I also believe that the other weapons charges have been proven as well.
    Same.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom, Shropshire
    Posts
    260
    I like this poll. Can we have a new one once all witnesses have been heard please

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom, Shropshire
    Posts
    260
    This article has helped me to understand it so much more

    http://everyafricanwoman.com/?p=1608

    With that said, I'd like to change my vote to Murder directus as there is no need for motive. I was waiting for the State to prove motive but as it isn't necessary for them to do that I feel I can go straight to MD.

Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. FL - Casey Anthony prosecutor Jeff Ashton to defend son in DUI case
    By Reality Orlando in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-22-2012, 05:01 PM
  2. IL - Prosecutor buys alcohol for underage girl at center of case
    By peeples in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 09:41 AM
  3. Fmr. Prosecutor Robin Sax on the Anthony Case
    By Levi in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-29-2009, 01:57 PM
  4. Judge throws out rape case after prosecutor late to court
    By Paladin in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-26-2006, 03:13 PM