Trial Discussion Thread #32

[Fuskier]

The previous thread closed before I was able to post this, so I'm bringing it over to this thread. Apologies for the long post.

Yes - Oscar-I'll-try-not-to-lie-Pistorius stated that he didn't look in Reeva's handbag when he retrieved it for the paramedics. During testimony, he hadn't been asked if he'd looked in her purse, so there was no reason for him to offer that curious bit of unsolicited information. Many of us here were taken aback when he said that and some compared it a child who announces "I didn't do it!" before they're even confronted with questions or blamed for a misdeed.

I, too, think he may have planted his 2nd (business) phone in the bathroom. According to phone logs, that phone hadn't been used to call Netcare that morning, so there was no reason for it to be on the bathroom floor.

Oddly enough, as we have learned, the one phone that he'd used after the shooting mysteriously disappeared from the crime scene.

If Reeva's phone was the one that was later found by Van Staden (crime scene photographer) beneath the bloody towels, I wonder if OP had gone upstairs to retrieve it, along with his personal phone, to remove it from the crime scene, as well. If so, he may not have been able to find it because it was covered by the towels.

On a side note, I don't believe OP's claim that he tried to call for an ambulance from Reeva's phone (but couldn't because he didn't know the passcode). As many other astute posters have pointed out - if that were true, why was his very first call (from his own phone) made to Stander, and not for an ambulance? If his primary concern was to phone for an ambulance, I think that would have been his first call from his phone - not a call to estate manager Stander.

IMO, OP's phone was smuggled from the crime scene due to his possible ignorance regarding technology and information retrieval. I think he believed that he could delete everything from his phone and that would be that (just as some criminals erroneously believe that deleted computer history takes care of any incriminating evidence).

I have no doubt that OP didn't want those incriminating whatsapp text messages between he and Reeva to be discovered, as they revealed that all was not well in paradise - not to mention that he had sent Reeva that text regarding the Tasha's restaurant incident.

We know he didn't go upstairs to wash up right after Dr. Stipp arrived, because OP testified that he later asked a police officer if he could wash up because he said the smell of the blood was making him ill.

I think OP went upstairs shortly after Dr. Stipp arrived so that he could retrieve his phone and possibly also Reeva's phone. If so, I think he was unable to find Reeva's phone because it may have been the phone that was buried beneath the bloody towels.

IMO, OP was in cover-up mode from the moment he called Stander, to when he told Baba "Everything is fine" to when he saw Stander, Clarice, Baba, another security guard, and then Dr. Stipp in his foyer/on his doorstep when he told them he thought Reeva was an intruder and shot her by mistake.

I think he was in cover-up mode during that unexplained trip upstairs immediately after Dr. Stipp said there was nothing more he (Stipp) could do for Reeva.

OP claimed that he sat with Reeva for 5 minutes in the toilet closet crying. But after a doctor told him there was nothing more that could be done he immediately left Reeva's side to go upstairs??? IMO, that was the time to sit with Reeva crying - but he didn't.

IMO, he disappeared upstairs while he had the chance before the police arrived, because he knew that once police were on the scene, he wouldn't be let out of their sight, let alone be allowed to return upstairs unaccompanied.

IMO his behaviour after the event was 'calculated', not consistent with being in 'shock' at discovering such a tragic, devastating accident had occurred.

 

[fox1lady]

clothes.
in answer to nel questioning about the inside out jeans, nel saying this was her hastily readying to leave [??]

op: "i don't understand why she would take off her jeans to put my clothes on to leave the house"

i still find it odd that she had a bag of her clothes by the bed, but was wearing his clothes, after earlier changing into her pyjamas.

Wasn't she cooking in her PJs? I would have thought she would have showered at some point after cooking and yoga! Perhaps following the shower she chucked on some of Oscar's stuff as she didn't have anything light to wear in bed, although it was a "very humid" night as OP describes - and they were lovers so (although I assume) they have seen each other naked before :blushing:

 

[Suthrnqt]

Oscar did pretty much obliterate Nel's attempted point on that one.

I think his clothes that she was wearing WERE her pajamas. That would also explain why her jeans were on the floor inside out - she had changed out of them to put on her sleep clothes.

Has it ever been confirmed that the inside-out jeans were indeed Reeva's? During this part of OP's testimony, didn't June mouth the words, "Those aren't Reeva's jeans" or something to that effect? Am I misremembering??
Why would she have jeans on the bedroom floor and jeans outside the bathroom window?
:dunno:

 

[fox1lady]

Oscar did pretty much obliterate Nel's attempted point on that one.

I think his clothes that she was wearing WERE her pajamas. That would also explain why her jeans were on the floor inside out - she had changed out of them to put on her sleep clothes.

And there's me thinking Mr Pistorius was being a stud and peeling them from Reeva's body whilst in the throes of passion Those skinny jeans are a killer to get off :0

 

[Interested Bystander]

Did OP really say he didn't know if Reeva knew the security code to his alarm system?

Because she was at his house alone that afternoon from about 13:00. Does this mean he left his house that morning without switching the alarm system on?

My recollection is that he did. Reeva had stayed the night before and had been doing the washing that day. She had been out during the afternoon of the 13th. We saw her arriving back before him in the early evening of the 13th. She has to have known the code to let herself in and out. So many lies from OP. He is fairly obviously a compulsive liar.

 

[Fuskier]

And he heard the window sliding open and hitting the frame above the noise of the fan. As Reeva wasn't near the fan/s, the noise would have been much louder to her, yet she never said 'Did you hear that'? She just observed him reach under the bed for his gun and didn't mention the noise before he went charging off on his stumps? No wonder Nel keeps trotting out his favourite catchphrase "It's so improbable, it cannot be reasonably possibly true".

Exactly! Reeva was alive at the time the window allegedly slid open. SHE WOULD HAVE HEARD THE WINDOW AND INTRUDER! She would have raised the alarm herself - if this happened the way OP says it did.

 

[Val1]

Crasshopper I saw your post at the beginning of this thread where you were saying that it was just your speculation that Nest used a complex forensic computer program to analyze the blood on the walls. Thank you for confirming that it was just speculation! Because it threw me for a loop when Nest conceded to Mr. Roux that the blood over the bed, that Nest had determined was from arterial spurt, could actually have been just blood from OPs hands that was cast off. So much for all of that "S pattern" stuff, uh. But I am still interested in reviewing the computer forensics that are used in the US, would you mind reposting them? I can't seem to find your post that had the 2-3 links.

Also, I would like to discuss with you how Reeva's heart was able to beat for nine (9) minutes without respiratory function. That would be a new medical first, right? And since Reeva had not one but two severed arteries, how do you explain the absense of significant blood pooling? I know you posted that the blood pooling was less than you would have expected, but with two severed arteries, one in her arm and one in her head, really doesn't it look like she bled to death in the WC and her heart stopped pumping blood in less than a minute or two?

bbm - I'm trailing again so my apologies if this has been addressed. I was wondering, after brain death, does the heart not require some form of manipulation(cpr, massage, electrical stimulae) to continue beating after the brain no longer gives it instruction, as well as the heart also needing some form of replacement blood/plasma to stay functional if there is large blood loss(either external or internal)?

 

[Bobbie Elliott]

Exactly this!
Why would he stop randomly shooting through a door or at a SILENT intruder or "moving wood?"

It is logical to conclude he had to have heard her screaming.

OP has (or thinks he has) a few "get out of jail free" cards which he applies simultaneously with Oscar Speak. The main ones are (i) a poor memory for incriminating events, and (ii) the fact that he has had no control over the guns which misbehaved in (at least) 2 incidents. In relation to Reeva's murder, he says that he didn't intentionally point the gun at, or shoot, anyone. If this was the case, it wouldn't have mattered if he heard Reeva scream or not. He couldn't stop shooting if he if he wanted to, because he had no control over the gun.

I think that the point I'm making is that, if a person makes illogical claims, one can only arrive at illogical conclusions. OP's defense if full of illogical claims which end in ridiculous conclusions.

 

[Val1]

Has it ever been confirmed that the inside-out jeans were indeed Reeva's? During this part of OP's testimony, didn't June mouth the words, "Those aren't Reeva's jeans" or something to that effect? Am I misremembering??
Why would she have jeans on the bedroom floor and jeans outside the bathroom window?
:dunno:

I had asked the same question, I don't believe anyone responded...

 

[Fuskier]

clothes.
in answer to nel questioning about the inside out jeans, nel saying this was her hastily readying to leave [??]

op: "i don't understand why she would take off her jeans to put my clothes on to leave the house"

i still find it odd that she had a bag of her clothes by the bed, but was wearing his clothes, after earlier changing into her pyjamas.

Agreed. IMO this be sleuthed further. She was also found with her top in backwards.

 

[Cherwell]

My recollection is that he did. Reeva had stayed the night before and had been doing the washing that day. She had been out during the afternoon of the 13th. We saw her arriving back before him in the early evening of the 13th. She has to have known the code to let herself in and out. So many lies from OP. He is fairly obviously a compulsive liar.

Every time this comes up I wonder if the housekeeper was around to let her in or out. We have heard very little about her, but presumably she must have spent plenty of time in the house, cleaning and so on.

 

[PPKik]

<Respectfully snipped>

(ii) the fact that he has had no control over the guns which misbehaved in (at least) 2 incidents. In relation to Reeva's murder, he says that he didn't intentionally point the gun at, or shoot, anyone. If this was the case, it wouldn't have mattered if he heard Reeva scream or not. He couldn't stop shooting if he if he wanted to, because he had no control over the gun.

BBM

OP's claimed lack of control "over the guns which misbehaved" has really stood out for me too and bothers me a lot.

Being a person who has been trained in the safe use of firearms (handguns), and being a gun enthusiast, I know what he is saying about these handguns "just going off by themselves" is a serious untruth, especially, since he supposedly studied and took tests in gun proficiency and safety (although I have yet to find out anything about his actual training).

Handguns don't, they can't, fire without a finger being put on the trigger and the trigger then being pulled. (What I am saying applies to handguns and not long guns, here, because shotguns, for example, have different firing mechanisms).

There are truly no "accidents" with handguns "firing by themselves," because the trigger-puller has to make a conscious physical movement to pull the trigger.

"Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire" is the second most important rule of gun safety where I learned, and I'm sure that is true in SA. The first is: "Always point the gun in a safe direction."

 

[liesbeth]

I believe that Nest is forgetting the hip wound. There was definitely blood coming from that wound and since she was sitting (so to speak) on that wound with her head over the toilet, the I would say that the blood on the floor beside the magazine rack came from that hip wound. Also remember that Reeva's arm was up with her hand trying to protect her head. Her arm would fall more towards the toilet instead of down onto the floor.

MOO

I'm still catching up. Apologies if it's been posted before.

While reading your post I remembered that the hip wound had no exit wound. The photograph I've seen of the entrance wound is small. If I remember correctly the bullet fragmented and basically shredded her inside. But the only place where blood could have exited her hip was at the entrance wound. So maybe this is why the blood pool in the toilet was said to be from her arm?

 

[Forensics]

And also he didn't find it at all strange when she doesn't reply or move when he tell's her to call the police and get down.
You wouldn't leave the room until you were sure your partner had heard and understood what you were saying.
Doesn't ring true at all.

Unless he was taken up with the thrill of it all. I have sometimes wondered that, if his story is largely true, he may have been so intent on shooting his weapon at the alleged intruder that he abandoned all safety measures including confirming Reeva's location. Obviously he loved firing his gun and hitting a real person would have been the ultimate thrill for him (remember the watermelon comments) and no better opportunity would have presented itself then putting it down to self-defence....dolus directus in mho.

 

[liesbeth]

It appears OP's not the only one who shoots an alleged intruder 4 times...

Link

Unfortunately OP knew Reeva was in the house with him that night. This lady knew she was alone. And unlike this lady he never saw someone trying to get into the house with a blow torch.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Every time this comes up I wonder if the housekeeper was around to let her in or out. We have heard very little about her, but presumably she must have spent plenty of time in the house, cleaning and so on.

I thought it was determined that the housekeeper was away at the time of the murder - the reason she was not a witness. Also she did not live in the house as far as I recall. However, I am not sure about the gardener as he was supposed to live in the house. So was he away too? The mind boggles.

 

[wb180]

Unfortunately OP knew Reeva was in the house with him that night. This lady knew she was alone. And unlike this lady he never saw someone trying to get into the house with a blow torch.

Agreed - trying to use another case with a complete set of different facts to justify OP's actions is sort of clutching at the straws...

 

[Viper]

Is there a rule or an understanding of courtesy that FMs are supposed to sign out when they step away for periods of time? I only ask because I never sign out, I have this as one of the eight pages opened on my iPhone, and if I sign out signing back in again is a pain. I'm lazy! Please let me know. :smile:

 

[TorisMom003]

Is there a rule or an understanding of courtesy that FMs are supposed to sign out when they step away for periods of time? I only ask because I never sign out, I have this as one of the eight pages opened on my iPhone, and if I sign out signing back in again is a pain. I'm lazy! Please let me know. :smile:

No. You're fine leaving your name here even if you aren't. I do the same thing at times.

 

[TorisMom003]

Has it ever been confirmed that the inside-out jeans were indeed Reeva's? During this part of OP's testimony, didn't June mouth the words, "Those aren't Reeva's jeans" or something to that effect? Am I misremembering??
Why would she have jeans on the bedroom floor and jeans outside the bathroom window?
:dunno:

No, the jeans inside the house were never proven to be Reeva's. The jeans outside have been ignored so even though they look like women's jeans, we don't know for sure.

I agree with Reeva's mom. Reeva was to slim for the jeans in the bedroom to be hers. As a slim woman myself, I could look at them and tell that there is no way they would fit her without sliding off of her.

MOO