1446 users online (202 members and 1244 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 73 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1081
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    27,185
    R now talking about JubJub case: 'They consciously acted unlawfully, but if you look at thee facts of this case, accused did not act unlawfully. it's an important factor.'
    We 'embraced' the missing Bob Harrod case as requested but 6 years on, are still waiting for further guidance


    Flyers/FB/Case Overview&Media Links
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...2009-19/page22

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    windy city
    Posts
    1,123
    Quote Originally Posted by zwiebel View Post
    i've been trying to think of the word i wanted to use to describe that maverick article and i've just remembered - excoriating. That's what it is.
    Best. Article. Ever.
    You must be the change you wish to see in the world. - Gandhi

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    599
    This one works well for me:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbTHwPp3hFM

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    232
    R telling porkies again

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,358
    My Lady looks drugged up, chin in hand.
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    27,185
    R: When yyou look at the excessive force; the negligence...is it recklessness or a compromised person....when you come to seentence youu have to look at the actions within his frame of mind

    Now talking aabout how he (R) was approached on the bus by an attorney who asked him if he read a book: 'And it changed the perspective'...and now he's going on about humanity in general, legal system in general.....And. Stealing.Goats.
    We 'embraced' the missing Bob Harrod case as requested but 6 years on, are still waiting for further guidance


    Flyers/FB/Case Overview&Media Links
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...2009-19/page22

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    232
    story of 2 goats

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    27,185
    R: ...get him to give the goat back.....get him to do something, carry water....where that person stealing the goat is back in society

    He really is saying this folks.
    We 'embraced' the missing Bob Harrod case as requested but 6 years on, are still waiting for further guidance


    Flyers/FB/Case Overview&Media Links
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...2009-19/page22

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    2,954
    OP is a 'compromised' person. He sure is, but not in the text Roux suggested. Was he compromised when he fired out of the sunroof, or at Tasha's? No. Reeva's killing appears to be an extension of his already loathsome (and unpunished) behaviour.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,284
    Quote Originally Posted by katydid23 View Post
    My Lady looks drugged up, chin in hand.
    Birthday hangover or somebody has slipped her something !


  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    windy city
    Posts
    1,123
    Quote Originally Posted by zwiebel View Post
    R: When yyou look at the excessive force; the negligence...is it recklessness or a compromised person....when you come to seentence youu have to look at the actions within his frame of mind

    Now talking aabout how he (R) was approached on the bus by an attorney who asked him if he read a book: 'And it changed the perspective'...and now he's going on about humanity in general, legal system in general.....And. Stealing.Goats.

    Goats?

    Are you sure it wasn't polar bears??

    <sarcasm>
    You must be the change you wish to see in the world. - Gandhi

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Up Nel's Arse
    Posts
    1,460
    Quote Originally Posted by mirage1 View Post
    You claim to be good at reasoning, yet it is quite lacking here. I know you prefer to argue about uncertain debatable semantics like bullet holes, and bat strikes, noises, that can never be concluded 100%, and will remain questionable, but this issue is very black and while. We have clear photo evidence, vs Oscar's version of events. There is no doubt or muddy water here. It's fact.

    Now, you claim Oscar could simply be mistaken or forgotten details, it does not mean he is lying, or as you so eloquently put it 'whatever'. There is no 'whatever', we are talking about his version of events his explanation for how he shot dead a person, he can't be mistaken, his defence relies on his version being consistent with the evidence, and if it incompatible then it means its not true. It's not about him forgetting details, it's about the photo's making his version impossible, even according to Oscar himself, he admitted it.




    Complete nonsense. You can't just dismiss photographic evidence, or any evidence as unreliable without zero evidence, this is laughable. There is no evidence the scene photos was not accurate, no we must assume they are, especially considering the extremely implausible suggestion that 5 items were 'accidentally' placed in positions that make Oscars story impossible. There is much more than 1 fan being moved. Just a quick summary for you.

    1. Oscar claims he moved the large fan from the balcony door, placed it at the front of the bed, and closed the curtains. This MUST be true for his version to be true, there is no mistaken here. The only option is to believe not only did the police accidentally move these items, but actually reversed what Oscar did!! They must have moved the fan right in front of the door and opened the curtains wide! Why and how could this possibly happen? Please explain, and keep in mind this MUST be reasonably explained, not just 'whatever'. In combination with the following of course...because there is so much more in photo 55.

    2. Oscar claims the small fan was also in front of the door, which he moved, but the problem is there was no room for it to ever be plugged in where he claimed, because Nel showed evidence the adapter was full. Oscar was not mistaken he was ADAMANT he did this.

    3. The Duvet was on the floor right where he claimed the fan had been, which means the police must have accidentally dragged it off the bed and put it there AFTER they moved the fans.

    4. The jeans were on top of the duvet which means they must have accidentally dropped them on top AFTER they moved everything else. A major problem is that a blood trail on the carpet lines up perfectly with the duvet on the floor which basically proves it was there all along.


    Like I said before, these things must have happened. Oscar cannot be mistaken because his whole reason for getting out of bed, and not hearing reeva while moving the fans, relies on this. If you are as good at reasoning as you claim you will know the above is not only not reasonably possible, but practically impossible, and further more there is no evidence to suggest anything to the contrary, thus Oscar is 100% guilty based on this. I find your flippant dismissal of such damning evidence quite disturbing, almost as if you have a different agenda.

    I notice you also argued that this issue is not that important because the defence theory was dead by the apparently conflicting times lines, noises etc, but actually the above proves Oscars story was dead from the very beginning. The above is what commenced the entire sequence, and if its invalid then everything that follows is irrelevant.
    Hear hear.

    What has stunned so many legal people is that the Court approached the evidence in a wholly artificial way.

    Here is what we would expect

    1. OP shot Reeva. This is conceded. Therefore he must show lawful justification

    2. The only evidence of lawful justification comes from the testimony of OP

    3. The testimony did not make out any case for self defence even if true.

    4. The testimony was clearly unreliable and false

    5. Normally a Court would thus reject the reject the evidence of OP in toto except where independently verfified

    6. If there is no reliable evidence of a mistake, the logical inference is that OP intentionally shot Reeva

    7. This is supported by direct evidence from witnesses

    8. This is supported by forensic evidence from the crime scene.

    Therefore murder.

    The focus on "the bullet wholes prove OPs version is true" is pure nonsense.

    Anyone who thinks Nel "ignored the key evidence" lacks experience of how trial procedure works in my view.

    As a question of logic, it is of course laughable that the witnesses all mistakenly heard a shooting with 4 bangs & screaming at 3.17 but wouldn't you know it, OP did in fact really shoot Reeva with 4 shots only 5 mins earlier!

    There is no evidence that there were 4 cricket bat bangs.

    In fact the bathroom discloses significantly more damage than that.

    All this arises simply because OP gets to testify second and thus adjusted all his banging and screaming to try to match what everyone heard.

    But as his version was obviously fabricated, it ought to have been dismissed.

    Common sense really did not prevail.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    232
    did R just compare Reeva to a goat?

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,705
    G'day all from the Blue Mountains of Sydney.

    I'm really glad that we're almost at the end of this trial ... for the time being at least. Yesterday Nel had his last two witnesses in court and ready to go. I can't help but wonder if he's he dispensed with them on short notice because he's finally decided he will appeal. I certainly hope so for so many reasons.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    27,185
    R: Maybe there are cases where we must just sit back and say, 'Is that what the law's all about?'

    Into rhetoric now: 'Society, society', again and again.
    We 'embraced' the missing Bob Harrod case as requested but 6 years on, are still waiting for further guidance


    Flyers/FB/Case Overview&Media Links
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...2009-19/page22

Page 3 of 73 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 799
    Last Post: 12-09-2014, 02:20 AM
  2. Replies: 1503
    Last Post: 10-23-2014, 08:26 AM
  3. Replies: 836
    Last Post: 10-17-2014, 03:14 AM
  4. Replies: 662
    Last Post: 10-15-2014, 07:52 AM
  5. Replies: 794
    Last Post: 10-14-2014, 03:51 AM

Tags for this Thread