Trial Discussion Thread #34 - 14.05.06 Day 27

[james83]

Turning the alarm off before leaving the bedroom
Everything is fine to Baba
Coming downstairs at the moment the Standers pulled up
Begging for Stander to drive Reeva to hospital.
It's obvious he wanted Reeva away from the scene so he could take care of a few thing's.

 

[BritsKate]

bbm That's the whole thing, I don't believe most of his testimony... there's the odd nugget of truth I'm sure, but which are which are very hard to determine.

That's the problem I have too. His testimony is discredited automatically because he did lie under oath. So what parts do I believe? Instead, I end up tossing all his testimony and then...what's left to 'prove' he was in fear for his life because of an 'intruder'?

 

[sleuth-d-]

BBM - it's odd isn't it? He happily snoozed through screaming, cricket bat bashing and gunshots, and then for no apparent reason, he was magically transported to the front of the house completely awake!

baba didn't ever mention frank out at the front of the building either. although he did mention being outside with a second security guard [in the buggy].

having said that, baba also said there were five people at the front of the house after the standers got out of the car...

baba
second security guard

j stander
carise stander

??? frank ???

all very unclear/inconclusive.

 

[Really?]

No because everything was fine.

actually, " Everything Is Fine" would be a good title for the book.

:drumroll:

:jail:

 

[crowmarsh]

I can't make sense of the comment I'm afraid.

Apologies I am new here and finding my way around and did not explain myself very well. By the way I enjoy your comments and feel you try to examine the evidence objectively without emotion

 

[crasshopper]

We see much the same in their messages and even on the witness stand, there's a very subtle implication had Reeva done this or that, she may not have died that night. It isn't 'normal' for someone who loved their partner and accidentally mistook them for an intruder to subtly suggest they're somehow at fault for a 'mistake' made by the defendant.

I'm pretty confident that for every message we know of, every reference Oscar made on the stand to what Reeva 'should' have done - there are probably dozens of other examples, that are suggestive of emotional abuse, no one has witnessed.

JMO

Indeed...'if she'd only spoken up' was a great example.
What I find heartbreaking is that Reeva, imo, had an inkling, knew it felt wrong but like many 'wanted to make it work.'

I think of Travis looking at Jodi's face knowing and of Reeva's terror when she finally realized. RIP.

 

[Fuskier]

Thank you so much. Very interesting link. Prof Grant has some interesting articles on his blog. Thanks to K.T. for the link

http://criminallawza.net/

Thank you for this link which I found helpful in understanding SA Law on 'intent'
and how a firearm user will be judged according to what is expected of a reasonable firearm user.

 

[katydid23]

Apologies I am new here and finding my way around and did not explain myself very well. By the way I enjoy your comments and feel you try to examine the evidence objectively without emotion

:welcome: :fireworks:

 

[crasshopper]

That's the problem I have too. His testimony is discredited automatically because he did lie under oath. So what parts do I believe? Instead, I end up tossing all his testimony and then...what's left to 'prove' he was in fear for his life because of an 'intruder'?

I don't discard entire testimony for 1 or 2 mistakes, slips of tongues, being confused by the attorney (not everyone is bright). In OP's case I have problem's with too much of his testimony and the implausibility of his version, so I have to pretty much throw everything out.

The emotion, I believe is real, he's stuck between two 'awfuls' he KILLED/CutDown a woman he knew and was close to and the very real possibility of South African Jail.

 

[sleuth-d-]

He is definitely in a difficult position ,particularly if press reports are to be believed and that he is still employed by the Pistorius family .
I would be interested to know if this is true one way or another.
In any event the fact he was on site and yet OP didn't seek his assistance or that of security does make things look very bad for OP because he called Stander first
Which is still quite a bizarre choice to me for someone who allegedly wanted help urgently for Reeva. I could understand it if Stander or his daughter had been doctors.

yes, instead of being a doctor, carice was a legal adviser, who also had good knowledge of where the towels and spare overnightbags were in the house, and could help with 'returning reeva's bag to her mother'. she could also phone all op's friends with the mysterious missing phone at 4am [but not call the mother].

that business with carice and aimee, and reeva's bag doesn't look good imo.

 

[steveml]

I was very surprised when OP testified that Reeva couldn't possibly have gone downstairs and eaten again later without him knowing so will be very interested to hear tomorrow's witness.
It would have been better for him if he had just said I don't know ,I was asleep .

OP did initially say he didn't know.

Nel: 'I put it to you that she must have eaten two hours before her death,'

OP: 'I don't have an explanation for it so I can't comment on it.'

Nel then went on to say he was going to press OP for an explanation.

Irreconcilable questioning at it's best (or worst).

 

[Greater Than]

Not very important, but there seems to be a general assumption that Reeva had not said ILY before the Valentine card. There is no way at all that we can know this. I don't infer it from the wording of the card. Valentines Day is a good day to say ILY - whether it's been said before or not.

FWIW, she actually did tell him she had fallen in love with him in the text message she sent after the embarrassingly jealous scene he made at her friend's engagement party:

"... I'm the girl who fell in love with u and wanted to tell you this weekend."

Conversely, he testified that he "never had the opportunity" to tell her that he loved her.

http://www.businessinsider.com/oscar-pistorius-sent-this-text-to-reeva-steenkamp-2014-3

 

[lithgow1]

This has just a little more info on the Kim Myers incident. To be honest, I wished they'd couched it in slighter milder words than 'very sinister'. It's a shocker of him to say what he said for sure, to say anything to her really, but to say that in particular takes a lot of hide. But IMO 'sinister' is heavy enough for his more ardent and sometimes vicious supporters out there to go to town on, and indeed the 'hang him high' people can get in on it too. 'Deeply disturbing' maybe?

http://www.businessinsider.com/pistorius-accused-of-making-sinister-remark-to-witness-2014-5#!KCyS5

 

[Interested Bystander]

bbm -This makes absolutely no sense to me, how else would an intruder get into your house, except through the doors and windows(unless like RS, you suddenly became one during your grudgingly invited visit).... why even install an alarm system like that?

If it is like ours; the alarms are within the rooms not on the windows. The windows do have safety locks but the alarm will only sound if the PIR beam inside the room is broken. Each room has a PIR and some internal doors, those nearest to the exits, also have magnetic contacts which, if parted, will sound the alarm. This is quite normal in the UK. In fact, I know nobody who has anything different. It sounds as though OP's was similar to ours, except we have to enter a code and it seems he only had to press a button.

 

[Madeleine74]

I think those who are going to believe (or have already chosen to believe) everything OP said are going to keep believing regardless of what the evidence shows or doesn't show. Since the only eye witness to what actually happened is dead, that in and of itself allows much opining about did occur. It allows some poetic license, if you will.

I personally don't think 4 shots is indicative of an accident or merely a mistake. One shot, yes. The next 3 shots obliterated it being an accident or not intended. It was most definitely intended. The point was to kill the person in that loo and that is what was achieved. Based on OP's various versions, and considering the various witness statements (ear witnesses) I also believe it was a female screaming in great distress and OP knew exactly who it was. He couldn't help but hear her. In SA terms what he did was murder.

I believe the state has proven that, but more importantly, I believe OP has proven that all by himself.

 

[sleuth-d-]

does anyone have any opinions on whether the charger for the phone used downstairs is significant? why has nel brought it into cross examination with both standers. mention of the charger was also avoided by oldwage when he did re-direct on j stander.

did the charger also disappear from the scene?
is nel going to argue that the phone had a flat battery and so the first op calls could only be made from the kitchen, or within reach of a plug?

 

[sleuth-d-]

If it is like ours; the alarms are within the rooms not on the windows. The windows do have safety locks but the alarm will only sound if the PIR beam inside the room is broken. Each room has a PIR and some internal doors, those nearest to the exits, also have magnetic contacts which, if parted, will sound the alarm. This is quite normal in the UK. In fact, I know nobody who has anything different. It sounds as though OP's was similar to ours, except we have to enter a code and it seems he only had to press a button.

yes, op mentioned a sensor at the landing, so the alarm zone for downstairs could be de-activated any time before that point.

still not sure why [in his 'version'] he de-activated it though.

 

[aoibhinn]

I'm a few pages late but I thought I might pop this in here. It's a units converter (metric to imperial, celsius to farenheit, and more). The interface is nice and easy to use. It's useful for Oscar's height measurements and distance between residences, particularly:-

http://www.unitconverters.net/

 

[lithgow1]

At least we know Frank hasn't been coerced into giving a false testimony.

It benefits him for OP to be acquitted as if OP receives a prison sentence it's likely that his services will no longer be required anyhow.

Might be more worth his while for OP to get the guilty verdict - he can sell his story for a lovely pension plan and doesn't have to work for and more importantly live with an intense and angry reckless gun-toting tool. Frank needs an agent.

 

[Tink]

Hmm, I just for the first time went back to read the text messages between Reeva and Oscar. In those long ones, I really see Oscar's self-centredness and controlling nature. Reeva is being quite straightforward in explaining how his behaviours affected her, but he is blaming everything on her. "She talked to another man when she could see he was upset." Nothing is his fault, it's her. Even in the "more loving" messages read out by the defense, there is a sense of Reeva trying to soothe, console, nurture and take care of him. You get the feeling that she's a bit walking on eggshells not to upset him.

Tink