Trial Discussion Thread #23 - 14.04.11, Day 21

[shane13]

Hello all,

This is my first post on this site so thought I’d introduce myself. I am a criminology graduate, currently on maternity leave and in that time this trial has gripped me! It was through searching for discussion on the trial that I came across this fabulous website.

I’m just going to get straight in to it and the way yesterday's questioning ended really got me thinking. OP said yesterday that the fan was not blocking the exit on to the balcony and that the police had moved it there. He stated that the fan, in relation to the police photo was further towards where the bed sheet is on the floor and I'm sure he said it would have been sitting on top of the quilt, although in his version the quilt was not there. However to me, this contradicts OP’s previous statement that the hind leg of the fan’s tripod stand was actually out on the balcony. From my perspective of the photograph if the fan was sitting where the quilt was on the floor, then the hind leg could not reach on to the balcony. However the fact that Nel did not pick up on this as soon as OP said it surprised me. Maybe it’s just my perspective.

I look forward to further discussing proceedings with you all.

Welcome!

Well as a recent grad, you've come to a case that is one-off for many reasons IMO.
What you cited could be an innocent slip up. Or as I've said many times, "this one runs deep."

Part of that is about possible corruption and collusion.
One part of this is that I've said that both sides' versions of the actual killing may not be what happened which IMO is much worse than they want the people to know.

 

[lisasalinger]

The other thing I noticed about the LED light thing is that Nel said to him "when did you notice it" and OP said something about it being when he closed the curtains and turned back to the fans (what??!) .. but anyhow .. the bit I didn't get was .. and I know this myself because I don't like LED lights either and I find them really bright if the room is in darkness so I switch off at the plug point instead of having on standby .. but, you already know that this is something which annoys you when you are trying to sleep .. you sleep in that room every night and it isn't something which you just happen to notice on one particular night after having slept like that in that same room with the same LED light for months/years. How come OP only just noticed that LED on that particular night in question? That's just total nonsense.

BBM

Yes, thank you. Common sense.

The complexities of Oscar's life astound me...

Alarm systems that do and don't work, doors that are not reliable, all of his friends and neighbors lie, the one doctor who shows up at the scene doesn't know what he's doing, he has amnesia at the very moment he tells security everything is fine, his lawyers are grossly negligent in court...

I mean my god... poor guy has really had a tough go of it. Let's give him a pass because he's crying on the stand.

 

[Magdalyn]

He is absolutely positive Reeva did not scream when he shattered her hip? Even though just fired a gun in close confines with no ear protection. Amazing.

So she pressed herself to the door, no idea that the 'intruder' had a gun, (from her perspective in OP's 'story') as she can't see anything outside the door...is totally stunned/taken off guard by a bullet blowing apart her hip, collapsing on a magazine rack....no inadvertent scream at the instantaneous burst of pain and hard landing?

He's sure. Even though he had no time to think, he had time (and the ability!) to be certain there was no screaming after shot one. Wow.

Was her continued silence then so she could further hide from the intruder who--if we are to believe the reasons offered on why she remained silent in the toilet to begin with-- was now just randomly shooting at doors for no apparent reason?

So Reeva suddenly had her hip blown apart when she didn't even know there was a gun aimed at her at the other side of the door, and she had the presence of mind and had the time to think "I'd better be quiet!" to save herself....

She had even less time to think than Oscar...Bang.....bangbangbang.

 

[steveml]

Can you please refer to a link? Thank you

Attachment from Sky News transcript showing Nel/OP door info.


Complete transcript link

 

[sorrell skye]

I couldn't get straight today - Nel asked and asked about the home security. OP gave a lot of info, especially about what builders did to the sensors before in 2010, when he had to get them tested, and what builders MIGHT have done to them that week. But did he say there was any part of the alarm he knew wasn't working that night?

All I can work out is he said he set it, and then deactivated it out of habit when he left the bedroom. Maybe I missed something.

Also, he said he didn't run out of the bedroom door as he was afraid he'd slip on tiles. Are there tiles outside the bedroom door?

BBM

Yes, the floor outside the main bedroom is tiled.

http://juror13lw.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/oscar-pistorius-trial-days-9-and-10-crime-scene-photos/

 

[jay-jay]

IIRC OP used the phrase "the gunshot went off"... as if he had no part in it. No intention to shoot, no pulling the trigger accidentally, just standing there in terror and somehow the gun "went off".

.. just like how the safe possessed the ammunition!

 

[IfIMay]

...the best defence team in the world can't make the witness statements fit the timeline after OP has given his statement. Not unless hypnotism was involved.

I'd love to know the timeline of when Roux (or whomever was his initial lawyer if not Roux) received the witness statements. We know that Roux didn't submit his.. er Oscar's bail statement until days later. We also know other facts were conveniently filled in... er disclosed in the plea. And they fit the witness statements. Quite convenient. After hours of "pouring over" photos and witness statements.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

What also (most?) concerned me today, was OP's statement, that he suddenly had thrown SamT out of HIS house. He returned home from an event, SamT meanwhile had learned about OP and Mr. vdB and "defended" Mr. vdB. Then OP immediately ended the relationship, "offered" SamT his Jeep and she had to drive home.
With MR, his ex, he made the same way and threw her and her drunken girlfriend (OP's neighbour) out of HIS house, after a violent quarrel on his party.
I could imagine, that OP had once again enough and wanted Reeva out of HIS house, also after a violent arguement. She was already safe in the toilet cubicle and hadn't the courage, to get out and to really leave the house.

"Get out of my house!" was probably meant in direction to Reeva and not to an intruder. Because OP didn't know, who had heard this command (neighbours), he used the phrase once more in his affi (and today).

Also I could imagine, that Reeva and OP never had sex because Reeva wanted to take these things slow. Maybe this evening should be the first ever. (She wanted to tell him about her love this evening - said sms.) OP behaved once again badly towards her and she refused thereupon.

Reeva had texted "... and when you have me, then ..." and I think, she meant the thing with sex and had concerns.

 

[shane13]

ON the Premeditated Murder Charge

I am not an atty, but am going on what Nel has said.

Now some say this is so hard to prove or win on. But again from Nel, what I think is his case is the following.

Oscar & Reeva had that loud argument for an hour or so leading into the shooting. But when they were in the bedtoom arguing, it escalated (either just verbally or possibly with a minor assault) and Reeva fled to the loo.

At that point State alleges, Oscar could have done many other things,
such as break up with her and tell her to leave, go watch TV, take a drug or homeopathic remedy, go for a drive, go to shooting range, etc. etc.

But instead he "chose" to get his gun and go after her in the other room to kill her. The PM charge only needs minutes or even seconds to be a "plan" to kill. And it exists here because OP could have done all those other things when Reeva went to escape him and hide.

That's the gist of it.
But there is another aspect, a few of us discussed a year ago here, that given Reeva's nature of never wanting to argue or such, she may have been held captive and prevented from leaving--hence the hour long intense arguing which was against her nature, basically all who knew have said. Indeed I might speculate that the locked bedroom door Oscar cites could have been to prevent Reeva from leaving. (If it works that way.)

 

[dodie20]

Boy....the more I hear OP pathetic voice and hear about his past, the more I detest him. Finally, this man need to be accountable for his actions!!

I really hope fame and money don't buy innocence in SA, like it does in LA.

He is sad because he has been caught. And Bail should never have been given. IMO

I agree about the bail. I don't know anything about their court system, but I wonder if they're used to hearing so many lies, so many changed stories...because I can see how this would be mentally draining on a judge. This may be normal when the accused speaks so much? What it seems like to me, is he thinks he has a chance of getting completely off, so he's tailoring his story to distance himself as far away from the evidence as he can. Now, according to him, his finger wasn't even on the trigger! and he doesn't know how the gun went off. And IMO, he very passive aggressively blames anything and everything but himself. I've never seen anything like it. Like him saying he didn't know the pass code to her phone. If he 'did', the implication was he would've called for help sooner. IMO, this was him passive aggressively blaming the victim, for him wasting time. And I don't believe this story. Most people dating to the point of spending nights with each other, keep their secrets yes, but the pass code is the 1st thing to go-because they don't want to look like they are deliberately hiding things. And if he didn't know her pass code, then he already knew he didn't know the code-so no need to think he could use her phone-unless we're supposed to think that's what she was doing in the bathroom? changing her code? moo

 

[minor4th]

I'm about half way through today's testimony. Oscar is doing much better on the stand today than in the two previous days IMO. He's much better about saying he doesn't understand the question and not just going along with whatever Nel is saying.

Still his emotions seem to be very close to the surface at all times - that I attribute to stress more than remorse or emotion over the incident.

 

[Feynman]

My parents were attacked by three intruders on their plot a few years ago. Regardless of the details I thank God that my dad somehow managed to get to his hidden gun under his bed while both his hands were tied, my mother being held down by one of them. And shoot one of them before they all three made a run for it.

To shoot at danger in this country becomes a matter of life and death.

Maybe that is why, despite everything else, I 'get' that night with them alone at his home. That he reacted in a fight mode and not in a flight mode. And it is so very very sad that she was the person behind that door. And not an intruder as he perceived it to be.

But your dad was not shooting just at danger. He was shooting at serious criminals, clearly, who had already committed a terrible crime against him and your mom, and who were going to commit more. Your dad's a hero. But he wouldn't have been a hero if he had thought the noise in the other room was an intruder and shot your mother to death by mistake.

 

[whiterum]

Speaking of that bedroom------how did Reeva manage to get out of bed, make her way to the door in the dark and with all that mess on the floor, open the door and leave, without OP noticing she had left?

I know, if I accidentally stand or trip over an object without my slippers on everyone in the vicinity is going to hear about it :tantrum:

 

[weeeva]

Perhaps all those who think OP is "innocent" of knowing it was Reeva would consider the following:

Reeva's bladder was just about empty when she died.

By his own statement, OP spoke to her just before getting up and moving the fans.

He then heard a noise - the window opening. (heard despite the fans).

Grabbed his gun - no time to think - whispered to Reeva, then hurtled down passage screaming, then stopped screaming, heard toilet door slamming, slowed down and went into bathroom quietly.

Heard a noise he perceived as somebody coming out of the toilet and plugged the door with four shots.




So at what time did she actually have a chance to pee?

If the door opened outwards, she could not have reached it to pull it shut if she'd been sitting down on the toilet.

She would not have had time to pee beforehand, and if she had done and had time to flush, he would have heard the flush and/or the cistern refilling.

If she had peed, then stood up and pulled up her shorts, but not flushed, there would have been evidence in the toilet (toilet paper).

But if he heard the window sliding open (which presumably was Reeva in his version), there would not have been time for her to pee AT ALL.

So, if her bladder was empty, why would she have got up in the night and gone to the toilet at all?

Just looking logically at all the above, it makes complete sense that his version is a total and utter fabrication.

As one of the posters who has been trying to keep an open mind and giving OP the benefit of the doubt, I have been thinking about that very point. I am not as quick witted as I used to be so I would like to know if anyone else can fathom it out.
Something else has been bothering me too, something I find a bit odd. These are two young lovebirds at the start of their relationship when most young couples can hardly keep their hands off each other. Why would Reeva be wearing her pyjamas and knickers at that time of the night, in a hot and clammy room?
I do not want to disrespect Reeva in any way and it is possible that she/they had decided not to start a sexual relationship too soon, so that would explain why they had not gone to sleep naked. I hope I am not speaking out of turn here. It is something that has popped in and out of my mind quite frequently.

 

[minor4th]

I'm still adjusting to the SA way of conducting criminal trials. In some ways I like it because it seems like there's an opportunity for the judge to have more information than in a US jury trial.

e.g., there's apparently no hearsay rule in SA and there aren't all the evidentiary rules that there are in the US. That makes so much sense because the judge is the trier of fact and the judge can properly attribute weight to evidence and decide what's reliable and what's not without being unduly prejudiced.

On the other hand, the attorneys are given so much leeway to engage in badgering and tricky questioning and a manner of questioning that is so foreign to me - and which really seems unfair to the witness much of the time. However, since it is a judge and not a jury weighing all this, I suppose it's not such a problem even though it makes me uncomfortable for the witness.

It seems like the manner of questioning is often designed to shake the witness or make the witness vulnerable, as opposed to actually eliciting information --and I'm not used to that. But it does sort of make sense in a bench trial because it tends to show something about the witnesses' credibility and the strength of their testimony.

Very interesting to watch this process and try to figure out how and why things are done as they are.

 

[steveml]

I'd love to know the timeline of when Roux (or whomever was his initial lawyer if not Roux) received the witness statements. We know that Roux didn't submit his.. er Oscar's bail statement until days later. We also know other facts were conveniently filled in... er disclosed in the plea. And they fit the witness statements. Quite convenient. After hours of "pouring over" photos and witness statements.

I presume you're suggesting that defense received prosecution witness statements before OP made his statement

That aside, it would be helpful if you could tell me what amendment/s have been made to OP's statement that have a direct impact on the information contained within any of the witness statements.

 

[ShadyLady]

FromGermany...I agree that he probably did shout at Reeva..."get out of my house"...and that is why a women's jeans were found outside of the bathroom window. OP threw them out.

Shane13....I too think they were arguing for a while....and Reeva might have tried at first to lock herself in bedroom and that is why there is damage to the bedroom door, OP broke it open with bat....so then Reeva runs to toilette...and OP gets his gun, he might have used bat on toilette door first...or gun first, I think noises could sound the same from distance.

And I am convinced there were sexual problems in that relationship. Shrinking OP, bet he was just as selfish in and out of bed...or maybe had other problems. I saw no passion in texts, no plans/gift from OP for Valentine Day, no sex on VD Eve...but he was looking at *advertiser censored* and cars??

OP=guns, cars, *advertiser censored*. A live women that is his equal might be too threatening...she had new contract....he had business problems. She was always having to placate him...why?

 

[steveml]

I know, if I accidentally stand or trip over an object without my slippers on everyone in the vicinity is going to hear about it :tantrum:

Reeva could quite easily have got out the other side.

If the bed was empty, I'd do that without anything being on the floor. If I was going to the loo I wouldn't get out towards the patio, and walk *all the way around the bed. I'd do the shortcut and get out the other side.

*'all the way'...lol...I know, it's not a long way, and it makes me sound sooo lazy. :doh:

 

[molly333]

This prosecutor is very good, and I think this was his best day so far, as he stood looking at the door and said that Reeva was standing there, facing OP, 3 feet away, talking to him through the door. I could picture that. He would have had a jury eating out of his hands.

However, none of this can be proved. We can piece it together for ourselves and say one thing makes more sense than another, but that's not proof. Maybe in the heat of the moment, or in the game of chance, the other thing did happen.

The pictures contradict OP's story if the Prosecutor could prove they were accurate, but I doubt he can. I have even seen one that contradicts and I haven't looked at many of the pictures. It was a sloppy investigation and the pictures can't be relied on.

And, this is a Judge, not a Jury, and more likely to understand the nature of evidence and the high standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.

That said, another question I have, why didn't he or Reeva turn on the bathroom light where the sink and bathtub are? Are these people accustomed to doing everything in the dark?

 

[weeeva]

I don't think Nel needs the part about RS talking to him. Because OP's version has him 3 m away screaming at her. Surely knowing his voice, if he did that, she would tell him "It's only me Oscar [or Boo or Baba], relax."

Reeva would not know that OP was mistaking her for an intruder. For all Reeva knew the intruder could have been on the balcony or in the bedroom. Also she would not want an intruder to know where she was, so would keep quiet.