There is no ambiguity for the Defence, though.. the Screaming Woman has to, and must be eliminated. With the Screaming Woman, all hopes of a defence against the charge of murder are permanently eradicated, never to be resuscitated again in Oscars lifetime.
Because.. the Screaming Woman says everything about this murder. Every. Single. Thing.
I am so, so sorry for the length of this, once I got started, I couldn't stop.
---------
I so agree. It was my 'guilty' moment but I've tried to keep an open mind so really waited for something tangible and logical from the defence. To date:
- Roux implied Burger couldn't have heard a woman screaming during the shots because Reeva's injuries precluded it. In the same exchange, he stated Reeva's final scream (the one that died off with the final shot) was actually Oscar realising it was Reeva. This scream was across the shots and stopped after the last bang. Then silence (except for van der Merwe's commotion and crying). We'll address this again below.
- Saayman testified it would be unlikely she wouldn't have screamed and Botha, somewhat begrudgingly imo, conceded that.
- Roux has stated the closest neighbours heard no screaming at all - they haven't testified yet though. This was, it would seem, put forth to discredit the State's witnesses but in turn also calls into question Oscar's testimony of screaming, shouting, yelling for help and 'never screamed like that in his life'.
- A male was yelling for help - but this is before the bangs heard at 3:17. An earlier shooting time than this isn't supported by blood splatter or pathology testimonies.
- Screaming was heard before 3:17 and becomes more distressed. If the pathology and blood splatter preclude an earlier shooting time, and Oscar was the one screaming it's a very big problem. Either he was screaming at Reeva and knew it was her or he was screaming at an intruder for several minutes when he 'didn't have time to think' and 'didn't intend to shoot'.
- If the shooting time was before 3:17, as the defence contends, it will explain the man yelling for help but leaves open how a man yelling also sounds like a woman screaming, perhaps intermingled, and shortly thereafter is a woman crying who is in fact Oscar.
- The alleged recording was never played for State's witnesses. And while the defence obviously wouldn't want their evidence refuted not doing so also doesn't bolster such a claim. We're left with no context but personal interpretation and opinion. Even if Oscar screaming does sound like a woman how did the 'woman' screaming 'bloodcurdling' screams sound that night? We will never have that reference.
- He was screaming while hitting the door at 3:17 (remember Burger's tesimony) but once the door is broken down, his worst fear realised, he doesn't see the 'point' in screaming.
In order to believe Oscar's account I have to accept the crime scene was contaminated, tampered, and disturbed; that Oscar's 'fearful and vulnerable' is consistent with 'combat mode'; that 4 articulate and intelligent witnesses heard a man screaming that sounds like a woman, presumably because a high-pitched scream is by human nature associated with a woman, without any evidence presented in court to confirm such a natural assumption; disregard that the man screaming like a woman was yelling like a man as well or disregard entirely the testimony of Dr. Stipp (who has been called a great witness even by those who doubt Oscar's guilt) who has stated he heard two voices at the same time; conclude Oscar's memory loss over key events, while correcting the State on benign and inane minutiae, is reasonable presumably because of a varying human responce to trauma, despite no evidence being put forth in court to establish that; dismiss my own experience of living with someone who has limited mobility; compensate the fact that Oscar behaved differently the night he shot Reeva as to past events with the knowledge that humans don't always have the same responce to heart-stopping fear, in the same circumstances, despite no evidence presented in court; ignore the defence ever claiming double taps; accept that Oscar deeply loved Reeva and getting her birthday wrong is understandable; dismiss the many reasons he doesn't appear to be all that security-conscious; believe 20 people are either inept, corrupt, lying, mistaken, or for some bizarre reason have a vendetta against Oscar; accept that no one heard gunshots at 3:12; ignore that his own expert contradicted his testimony; disregard the pathology and blood splatter testimony that appear to refute the defence timeline and defendant's testimony alike; I can't question calling Stander before netcare; further, I can't surmise why Oscar would even consider picking Reeva up before the call to netcare or why he didn't actually require Stander's help to lift her or why a highly athletic, physically fit young man would need help anyway; allow he didn't know if Reeva knew the security code; swallow that his testimony is markedly different than his affidavit as confusion; stomach him blaming the very defence team fighting for him; acquiesce his adamance that Reeva couldn't have gone downstairs despite the appearance he is tailoring testimony to be consistent with the defence pathologist; conclude Reeva remained mute despite whispering, soft speaking, screaming, yelling, and shouting; believe Sam Taylor is a woman scorned rather than providing evidence of Oscar in a relationship; and, suspend all personal common sense, to accept it is reasonable for anyone to fire four highly lethal bullets into a closed door. To that end, without aiming or intending to fire, managed four shots in such close proximity.
But apparently it is stretching reality, or proposing wild and outlandish theories, to speculate about actual evidence put forth by the State? (e.g. argument, locked doors, bat strikes to scare, etc.)
(Apologies again, for the novel above and any small errors. Writing this from memory, while on my phone.) MOO
Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.
