Trial Discussion Thread #4 - 14.03.10, Day 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
...just wanted to point out that this is not a proven fact yet that we know for sure. This is what Oscar says occurred.

.

That's the whole point from today. Dr. Gert S' testimony re when Reeva last ate impugns his affidavit. That part is supposed to be fairly proven forensic science--when she last ate. thus proving the lie in the affidavit of both sleeping from 10-3.
 
Truth be told, I don't think OP needed to include in his affidavit that they went to bed and had passionate sex, (if they did).. He actually might have thought that was not relevant at the time and a detail the general public didn't need to know...So in fact, we know they went to bed at 10... Put the lights off...and who knows what they did next although I'm sure that is something roux might bring up to show they were attracted to each other and happy enough at that time. (Again, if they did have sex)

He surely didn't need to add that in his affi but what made them jump out of bed at the very same minute one to the balcony, the other to the loo without noticing each other (!) seems quite relevant and that is why he put it there as
'we both fell asleep ' . ( 'we' highlighted with the word 'both ' also )
 
I'm sorry, but the *advertiser censored* on his phone means nothing to me. Men watch *advertiser censored*. Whether they're in a relationship, whether they're in love, whether they're married. I've never met a single man that didn't. There's *advertiser censored* on my husband's phone. X rated! It is just what it is. This doesn't mean anything in relation to Oscar's feelings for Reeva or his having "violent" tendencies. It means he's a man with a phone that has internet.

Well I have had a different experience in the circles that I mix in. No one I know ever watches *advertiser censored*. If they do, they have never told me. I have been divorced for some time, I meet lots of men, date some, have had long-term relationships with others and have an active social life. IMO *advertiser censored* is detrimental to healthy relationships because instead of making love with your lover, it often becomes a quick fix so intimacy can deteriorate over time. In the end, *advertiser censored* is often chosen rather than making love with one's partner. I agree that soft *advertiser censored* can be educational for some and stimulating if couples watch it together but it can be very addictive. Why would OP be watching *advertiser censored* alone on a small mobile phone screen when he had a beautiful woman like Reeva he could have been making love to all night? Personally, I prefer the real thing.
 
Truth be told, I don't think OP needed to include in his affidavit that they went to bed and had passionate sex, (if they did).. He actually might have thought that was not relevant at the time and a detail the general public didn't need to know...So in fact, we know they went to bed at 10... Put the lights off...and who knows what they did next although I'm sure that is something roux might bring up to show they were attracted to each other and happy enough at that time. (Again, if they did have sex)
Well "next" appears to be "fell asleep". Why else say "After Reeva finished her yoga exercises she got into bed and we both fell asleep"?
 
Will Oscar Testify?

If he reacts so badly to someone else testifying about the actual event, wouldn't he fare far worse being asked himself about the event?
(And again earlier, I opined that it is not an act.)

"Verdict": Another bluff from Roux. No way [or only 1 way] do I see OP testifying.
 
Grief, just noticed its 1am, I'm off to bed..hopefully tomorrow we can get some better details!! Today has been an absolute circus with regards to the SA justice system and a complete mockery to every murdered woman in this country. I see the race debates are in full swing on some of the SA boards- cry the beloved country indeed!!

Sleep tight.
 
Some interesting reading:

In the final analysis, though, the evidence Saayman presented is almost sure to be widely misunderstood. It may have been less misunderstood had it been reported directly, and it may have been less misunderstood had those most intensely interested in the trial been allowed to see him deliver it. Yet by its very nature, the kind of testimony he provided is packed with caveats and uncertainty, of the kind that easily falls by the wayside, and also needs to be broadly interpreted within a trial rather than in isolation.

For instance, Saayman said Reeva Steenkamp probably last ate less than two hours before she died. That is of enormous importance considering that Pistorius claims the couple were already asleep by that time. Or perhaps not.

What Saayman actually said was complex. Asked what the state of Steenkamp's stomach indicated in terms of time of death, he first delivered what amounted to a mini lecture about the imprecision of any measure he could provide. He noted that this problem had been closely studied because it is both important in investigating murders and particularly fraught with difficulty. He described the imprecision of the science involved. He cited the possibility of very large meals, or very small meals, affecting the time taken to digest food. He cautioned that different types of food are digested at different speeds, that different people digest food at different speeds, and that the same person could digest food at different rates from one day to the next.

That done, and with the weight of his considerable expertise behind it, he finally allowed that Steenkamp, by his best estimate, died within two hours of last eating anything.

How will the court interpret that? If history is any guide, it will not take Saayman's evidence as either bolstering or undermining Pistorius's version of events in itself. Instead it will consider the information for what it is: another piece in a complex puzzle to be considered alongside all the other pieces in trying to determine a sequence of events.

Read more
http://mg.co.za/article/2014-03-10-pistorius-trial-the-trouble-with-expert-witnesses

Thank you for this, Carol!

Another thing that affects digestion is stress. The parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) is responsible for "rest and digest" activity. During extreme stress, this PNS "rest and digest" activity is suppressed as the sympathetic nervous system takes over for fight or flight mode.

I don't know if the stomach contents are relevant or not, since there are so many factors that affect digestion, but I do think it's highly possible that Reeva had not digested her meal due to a state of extreme stress, which escalated to fear, etc.

I went to bed last night after the Judge's ruling came down because I didn't expect there to be any news. Boy howdy was I wrong! I missed a lot of action!

Hi all! :seeya:
 
Well I have had a different experience in the circles that I mix in. No one I know ever watches *advertiser censored*. If they do, they have never told me. I have been divorced for some time, I meet lots of men, date some, have had long-term relationships with others and have an active social life. IMO *advertiser censored* is detrimental to healthy relationships because instead of making love with your lover, it often becomes a quick fix so intimacy can deteriorate over time. In the end, *advertiser censored* is often chosen rather than making love with one's partner. I agree that soft *advertiser censored* can be educational for some and stimulating if couples watch it together but it can be very addictive. Why would OP be watching *advertiser censored* alone on a small mobile phone screen when he had a beautiful woman like Reeva he could have been making love to all night? Personally, I prefer the real thing.

Perhaps it's a generational thing. My husband watches it and I can assure you we have a very healthy and wonderful relationship. It's not something that has ever bothered me and it still doesn't. It's not about shunning your partner. It's just something different. Perhaps they'd already fooled around and he was feeling frisky. Like I said, I never knew a single man who doesn't watch it though I'm young and things may have changed. I think it's kind of naive to think not one man you've ever known has watched or looked at *advertiser censored*. I think that's almost impossible, given the statistics.
 
Thank you for this, Carol!

Another thing that affects digestion is stress. The parasympathetic nervous system (PNS) is responsible for "rest and digest" activity. During extreme stress, this PNS "rest and digest" activity is suppressed as the sympathetic nervous system takes over for fight or flight mode.

I don't know if the stomach contents are relevant or not, since there are so many factors that affect digestion, but I do think it's highly possible that Reeva had not digested her meal due to a state of extreme stress, which escalated to fear, etc.

I went to bed last night after the Judge's ruling came down because I didn't expect there to be any news. Boy howdy was I wrong! I missed a lot of action!

Hi all! :seeya:

Good points.But don't you think the pathologist would have taken all that into account in his conclusion of 2 hours?

Since it "proves" the lie of OP's affidavit, he will likely get a stern cross tmow.

He may Roux the day he was born.
 
For Carol or anyone in SA....I simply don't understand this going to balcony to get "fans". This was no doubt a very expensive home ....don't people have air conditioning?? And also sleeping with the windows open is not something I do here in Minnesota in a suburb with very little crime. I know there is security but why sleep with windows open. I would like to know if I am crazy or what?
 
I can't help but wonder if they are going to find the reporting of this testimony and probably all the incorrect info coming out more problematic than just letting whoever wants to listen..listen. I can understand no photos but not seeing where this helped much.
 


To me it looks like a wound/scratch that inflamed days later. Scratches with fingernails often inflames few days later ;)
.
.

GOOD POSTS. I think you are very observant in noticing these scratch marks on your previous post and this one of Pistorius which occurred days later. It's a wonder that the MSM did not pick this up before as I have not seen it in the MSM.

While many here will probably be sceptical that they are scratch marks, it is quite possible that they had a fist fight while they were arguing and Reeva stuck her long nails into him. It will be interesting if they bring these up in court as if they really are scratch marks, it could help to prove that they were fighting unless OP has a more credible explanation.
 
For Carol or anyone in SA....I simply don't understand this going to balcony to get "fans". This was no doubt a very expensive home ....don't people have air conditioning?? And also sleeping with the windows open is not something I do here in Minnesota in a suburb with very little crime. I know there is security but why sleep with windows open. I would like to know if I am crazy or what?

I don't know about SA but when I lived in Europe it wasn't as common to have central air as it is here and AC was also not common, even though it got hot in Poland. You could get units yourself but I never knew anyone that did. Things are simpler.
 
I am mortified to read this part of the testimony.
Professor Saayman said the bullets used by Pistorius are known as Black Talon or Ranger bullets, ammunition designed to “mushroom” and disintegrate on impact with human tissue.
He said even doctors and surgeons were warned to be careful when removing the tiny fragments from a wound because they can cut the skin.
Winchester, who manufactured Black Talon ammunition, ceased all production of the bullets in 2000 but the company's Ranger line is very similar in design. Both are banned in many countries.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/oscar-p...s-presented-20140310-hvh5j.html#ixzz2vbeLxRvz

This male, Oscar Leonard Carl Pistorius disgusts me by his behaviour. I refuse to refer to him as a man.
 
From OP's affidavit

On the 13th of February 2013 Reeva would have gone out with her friends and I with my friends. Reeva then called me and asked that we rather spend the evening at home. I agreed and we were content to have a quiet dinner together at home. By about 22h00 on 13 February 2013 we were in our bedroom.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/in-full-oscar-pistoriuss-defence-affidavit-8501265.html


From Prof Saayman's testimony

Another interesting detail from the pathologist was the time he estimated Steenkamp ate her last meal. Prof Saayman said it consisted mainly of vegetables and would have been consumed around two to three hours before her death.


18:00 - Reeva arrived

18:10 - OP arrived

18:30 - OP on the phone with friend Alex Pilakoutas

??? OP surfed internet (porns ?)

20:10 - OP and cousin + friend Graham Binge exchanged various messages on the phone

20.25 – 20.45 - OP on the phone with cousin + friend Graham Binge (they talked about cars)

[During his phone calls OP didn't mention that Reeva was with him !]

??? OP surfed internet (cars ?)

??? Reeva did yoga while OP watched TV

22:00 - OP claimes they went to sleep

03:00/03:17 Reeva was killed

When they had time for the *quiet dinner together* in this timeline ?

 
BBM - and yet he thought it relevant to put in his affidavit (sandwiched in between the actual events of that night) that they were deeply in love and he knew she felt the same way. He thought it relevant to speak on his dead girlfriend's behalf.

Yes - and Dr. Stipp testified that he observed OP promising God that if Reeva lived, OP would dedicate his life and Reeva's life to God.

He claimed ownership of Reeva when he made that declaration. This, to me, demonstrates his mindset. IMO, he did not perceive Reeva as an autonomous person, but as an object of which he possessed ultimate control.

This is a very common attribute of perpetrators of domestic violence assaults and domestic violence homicides.
 
Grief, just noticed its 1am, I'm off to bed..hopefully tomorrow we can get some better details!! Today has been an absolute circus with regards to the SA justice system and a complete mockery to every murdered woman in this country. I see the race debates are in full swing on some of the SA boards- cry the beloved country indeed!!

Sleep tight.

BB1 Carol , I couldn't understand what you meant here.. do you mean that today's circus was a privilege given to Reeva and her parents which the other murdered women didn't get? I think the contrary it had nothing to do with respect to Reeava .. That is a big lie and apparently is a privilege gained by his DT to lessen the public reaction toward OP.. and he performed the best of it...
Pardon me if I mistook what you meant..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
1,889
Total visitors
1,994

Forum statistics

Threads
594,859
Messages
18,013,952
Members
229,532
Latest member
Sarti
Back
Top