Trial Discussion Thread #29

Status
Not open for further replies.

beach

Verified Expert
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
18,370
Reaction score
4,470
Oscar Pistorius: South Africa gears up for its 'trial of the century'

(CNN) -- He was one of South Africa's favorite sons, an amputee track star who defied all the odds and sprinted into the hearts of millions during the 2012 Summer Olympics in London. She was a staggering beauty with the brains to match, a law graduate and model whose star was on the rise.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-trial-preview/



Pistorius channel goes on air in South Africa

http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_306483/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=Ip4glGHn
Watch live: Oscar Pistorius murder trial
Follow events from Pretoria as paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius appears in court accused of murdering his girlfriend, the model Reeva Steenkamp.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor.../Watch-live-Oscar-Pistorius-murder-trial.html


Links:

Full Indictment-4 Counts-107 Witnesses

http://www.scribd.com/embeds/185695...=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/LIVE-UPDATES-Pistorius-broadcast-trial-ruling-20140225

http://www.channel24.co.za/TV/News/DStvs-Oscar-Pretorius-trial-TV-channel-wont-be-tabloid-20140228


Twitter:

https://twitter.com/oscartrial199

https://twitter.com/GeraldImrayAP

https://twitter.com/Debora_Patta

Live Streaming:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/oscar-pistorius-trial-live-stream/

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/internet/97919-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-live-streaming.html

http://www.702.co.za/shows/oscar_stream.asp

http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-live-here-oscar-pistorius-murder-trial-day-9/

http://whoopwhoop.tv/pistorius2.htm

Live News Feed

http://cnnworldlive.cnn.com/Event/Oscar_Pistorius_trial_4

Trial Video Archive:

http://www.wildabouttrial.com/one_off/oscar-pistorius-trial-archive/

_________________________________________

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7
Thread #8
Thread #9
Thread #10
Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22 Thread #23
Thread #24 Thread #25 Thread #26 Thread #27 Thread #28
 
drinks.jpg
link
IMG_3449.jpg
link

Continue discussion here...
 
Plain and simple.

Oscar Pistorius, with full intent, murdered a person, that being Reeva Steenkamp.

No matter time frame, no matter motive, no matter stumps, no matter lighting, no matter screams, no matter LED light, no matter jeans, and no matter "versions".

Plain and simple.

IMO.
 
Forgive me if this news has already been shared today. Haven't caught up on the daily trial thread yet.

Pathologist Reggie Perumal will not testify. https://za.news.yahoo.com/top-pathologist-hired-pistorius-wont-testify-142633899.html or http://za.news.yahoo.com/top-pathologist-hired-pistorius-wont-testify-142633899.html

Well, I'm normally very cynical when it comes to the MSM, so I'm going to err on the side of...who knows why? But if, in fact, it's for the reason being mulled over by the media, I wouldn't be surprised. And, if so, I'm happy to know that there are still scruples in this world
 
Forgive me if this news has already been shared today. Haven't caught up on the daily trial thread yet.

Pathologist Reggie Perumal will not testify. https://za.news.yahoo.com/top-pathologist-hired-pistorius-wont-testify-142633899.html or http://za.news.yahoo.com/top-pathologist-hired-pistorius-wont-testify-142633899.html

I posted it on the previous thread. It was suggested that Perumal will not lie about the stomach contents and agrees with the State.

I wonder how many witnesses the defence has left now. They could all be running scared in case their reputations are demeaned as Dr Dixon's was.

IMO the Defence has fallen apart and could not be rectified now.
 
I can't see OP being convicted of anything so far. Nel has so far failed to make the case as far as I'm concerned. All I see are a lot of people (Nel among them) who take an invidious position and come up with speculative scenarios of what happened, whereas the only version that rings true to me is the one OP has elaborated all along.

Taking into account his highly strung persona and tendency to make hasty judgements, it all fits in very well for me. A lot of people are angry with him for having killed Reeva but I feel they need to be careful not to allow that anger to colour their view of what actually happened. Others just assume that he's lying because they find it hard to put themselves in his shoes. Many South Africans believe him because they KNOW what it's like to be worried about intruders, whereas Americans and others don't understand this very well as house break ins in America and Europe etc. are rare by comparison.

There may be details here and there that don't sound right, but they don't alter the core narrative. <modsnip>
 
I can't see OP being convicted of anything so far. Nel has so far failed to make the case as far as I'm concerned. All I see are a lot of people (Nel among them) who take an invidious position and come up with speculative scenarios of what happened, whereas the only version that rings true to me is the one OP has elaborated all along.

Taking into account his highly strung persona and tendency to make hasty judgements, it all fits in very well for me. A lot of people are angry with him for having killed Reeva but I feel they need to be careful not to allow that anger to colour their view of what actually happened. Others just assume that he's lying because they find it hard to put themselves in the shoes of the accused. South Africans believe him because they KNOW what it's like to be worried about intruders, whereas Americans and others don't understand this very well as house break ins in America are rare by comparison.

There may be details here and there that don't sound right, but they don't alter the core narrative. <modsnip>

Thanks! Interested to know whether you think OP deliberately shot at an 'alleged intruder/s" or the gun went off accidentally when it was pointed at the door? Which version of OP do you agree with as he used both in testimony?
 
Thanks! Interested to know whether you think OP deliberately shot at an 'alleged intruder/s" or the gun went off accidentally when it was pointed at the door? Which version of OP do you agree with as he used both in testimony?


Thank you. Can you quote his exactly lines? <modsnip>
 
I can't see OP being convicted of anything so far. Nel has so far failed to make the case as far as I'm concerned. All I see are a lot of people (Nel among them) who take an invidious position and come up with speculative scenarios of what happened, whereas the only version that rings true to me is the one OP has elaborated all along.

Taking into account his highly strung persona and tendency to make hasty judgements, it all fits in very well for me. A lot of people are angry with him for having killed Reeva but I feel they need to be careful not to allow that anger to colour their view of what actually happened. Others just assume that he's lying because they find it hard to put themselves in his shoes. Many South Africans believe him because they KNOW what it's like to be worried about intruders, whereas Americans and others don't understand this very well as house break ins in America and Europe etc. are rare by comparison.

There may be details here and there that don't sound right, but they don't alter the core narrative. He's telling the truth at least about not knowing that realising until it was too late that it was Reeva in there.


No, they don't. And if you disagree, please provide statistics proving otherwise. I'd really appreciate that information given that I am American.

Thank you.
 
Thank you. Can you quote his exactly lines? <modsnip>

<modsnip>

Maybe it should be the other way around.

When walking around carrying a 9 mm Parabellum loaded with black talon ammo, when sharing a bedroom with woman, a person should be extremely careful before firing into the toilet stall without first checking to make sure he's not about to put multiple bullets into his girlfriend.
 
<modsnip>

Maybe it should be the other way around.

When walking around carrying a 9 mm Parabellum loaded with black talon ammo, when sharing a bedroom with woman, a person should be extremely careful before firing into the toilet stall without first checking to make sure he's not about to put multiple bullets into his girlfriend.

+1 x too many 0s to type.
 
So did he shoot at the door because he was terrified or was the gun pointed at the door and accidently go off before he could think? Seems to me he said both. Maybe you could clarify for me.


Okay, thank you. Can you quote his exact statements in context because I've forgotten them. I'm not being facetious. I really can't remember now, but it seemed to me that this was more or less a semantical issue rather than anything else. I am open to be proved wrong, and again I'm not being facetious.
 
Stumps vs Prosthetics

Someone here asked me a few days ago which one I thought he was on during the final shooting.

And I replied that I cannot be sure.
But does it matter? Could he not have done everything either way, making this perhaps another straw man argument?

OP&#8217;s autobio which came out in 2009 details his life up till then.
When younger (till age 12) he outran his buds on his stumps. No balance problems, but I cited a few days ago, trying to be&#8230;well, balanced&#8230;that his present, larger upper body development might make balance an issue, or it might not. Nowhere in his own book does he indicate (to the best of my recollection) that he has a balance problem when on his stumps now.

So like his alleged &#8220;great fear of intruders&#8221; (yet note the status of windows, balcony doors, ladders, alarm off, going toward the intruders, etc.), seems to be another invented or overplayed issue.

Is there anything that he couldn&#8217;t do while on his stumps, those fateful minutes? The shooting, the bat strikes. People have to remember that he is a supreme athlete, with great strength, stretch, agility, and yes probably balance too.

Several times here I have noted that his prosthetics shatter rather easily, based on his own words. So I doubt he kicked the door, certainly not with any significant force, because they would have shattered and he could have had a serious fall. The Pros. was the one beholden to test his P-legs for impact survivability,. What if results came back that they shatter esily? That would have been definitive if a controlled experiment was done. How many times did Col. Vermuellen say &#8220;I was not asked to do that.&#8221;

So I find it fascinating that nether side tested his P&#8211;legs for forceful impacts. (A relatively easy experiment IMO, esp. given Newton&#8217;s 3rd law.) Much of what DT alleges, and these straw man arguments IMO are meant to hide exactly what he did and exactly when he did it.
 
Okay, thank you. Can you quote his exact statements in context because I've forgotten them. I'm not being facetious. I really can't remember now, but it seemed to me that this was more or less a semantical issue rather than anything else. I am open to be proved wrong, and again I'm not being facetious.

Maybe you should take the time and watch the testimony on YouTube yourself then report back to us what OP said. Then you will be able to quote OP's exact words yourself, and possibly draw your own conclusions based on what he actually said, not what you think he said.
 
Stumps vs Prosthetics

Someone here asked me a few days ago which one I thought he was on during the final shooting.

And I replied that I cannot be sure.
But does it matter? Could he not have done everything either way, making this perhaps another straw man argument?

OP’s autobio which came out in 2009 details his life up till then.
When younger (till age 12) he outran his buds on his stumps. No balance problems, but I cited a few days ago, trying to be…well, balanced…that his present, larger upper body development might make balance an issue, or it might not. Nowhere in his own book does he indicate (to the best of my recollection) that he has a balance problem when on his stumps now.

So like his alleged “great fear of intruders” (yet note the status of windows, balcony doors, ladders, alarm off, going toward the intruders, etc.), seems to be another invented or overplayed issue.

Is there anything that he couldn’t do while on his stumps, those fateful minutes? The shooting, the bat strikes. People have to remember that he is a supreme athlete, with great strength, stretch, agility, and yes probably balance too.

Several times here I have noted that his prosthetics shatter rather easily, based on his own words. So I doubt he kicked the door, certainly not with any significant force, because they would have shattered and he could have had a serious fall. The Pros. was the one beholden to test his P-legs for impact survivability,. What if results came back that they shatter esily? That would have been definitive if a controlled experiment was done. How many times did Col. Vermuellen say “I was not asked to do that.”

So I find it fascinating that nether side tested his P–legs for forceful impacts. (A relatively easy experiment IMO, esp. given Newton’s 3rd law.) Much of what DT alleges, and these straw man arguments IMO are meant to hide exactly what he did and exactly when he did it.


I think OP's entire story was concocted. He needed the stumps/no stumps part of the story so he could make up the LAME excuse that he felt vulnerable and helpless on his stumps.

He actually testified that while holding the fully loaded 9 mm he felt vulnerable because he was on his stumps. In the time it took him to wonder down to the bathroom with the gun he could have put on his prosthetics if he felt so vulnerable without them.

But of course that wouldn't have fit the "I shot because I was terrified on my stumps" version that OP and his lawyers worked out and re-worked.
 
Maybe you should take the time and watch the testimony on YouTube yourself then report back to us what OP said. Then you will be able to quote OP's exact words yourself, and possibly draw your own conclusions based on what he actually said, not what you think he said.

Excellent idea----because I'll tell you who's not going to go back and listen to hours of OP's testimony to find his exact quotes: ------>Apollo :D
 
I'm still dumbfounded that OP testified about his "version" of what happened instead of just saying, "This is what happened."

That, and he testified that his defense team "re-worked" his version.

WTF? He sounds more like a screenwriter who submitted a script than a witness testifying about the facts of what actually happened.
 
Stumps vs Prosthetics

Someone here asked me a few days ago which one I thought he was on during the final shooting.

And I replied that I cannot be sure.
But does it matter? Could he not have done everything either way, making this perhaps another straw man argument?

OP’s autobio which came out in 2009 details his life up till then.
When younger (till age 12) he outran his buds on his stumps. No balance problems, but I cited a few days ago, trying to be…well, balanced…that his present, larger upper body development might make balance an issue, or it might not. Nowhere in his own book does he indicate (to the best of my recollection) that he has a balance problem when on his stumps now.

So like his alleged “great fear of intruders” (yet note the status of windows, balcony doors, ladders, alarm off, going toward the intruders, etc.), seems to be another invented or overplayed issue.

Is there anything that he couldn’t do while on his stumps, those fateful minutes? The shooting, the bat strikes. People have to remember that he is a supreme athlete, with great strength, stretch, agility, and yes probably balance too.

Several times here I have noted that his prosthetics shatter rather easily, based on his own words. So I doubt he kicked the door, certainly not with any significant force, because they would have shattered and he could have had a serious fall. The Pros. was the one beholden to test his P-legs for impact survivability,. What if results came back that they shatter esily? That would have been definitive if a controlled experiment was done. How many times did Col. Vermuellen say “I was not asked to do that.”

So I find it fascinating that nether side tested his P–legs for forceful impacts. (A relatively easy experiment IMO, esp. given Newton’s 3rd law.) Much of what DT alleges, and these straw man arguments IMO are meant to hide exactly what he did and exactly when he did it.


Oh, wow! - interesting post for sure.
 
Okay, thank you. Can you quote his exact statements in context because I've forgotten them. I'm not being facetious. I really can't remember now, but it seemed to me that this was more or less a semantical issue rather than anything else. I am open to be proved wrong, and again I'm not being facetious.

Not a semantical issue at all. The entire case hinged on his plea of putative self-defense (the defense was built around this) and during his cross examination, OP made it very clear that he had not acted in putative self-defense. He was simply unwilling to admit he had knowingly fired the gun at all.

Also, regarding your comments:

Firstly, he is NOT innocent - he pulled the trigger! All that is to be decided is how guilty he is, and of what.

Secondly, I find it interesting that you are prepared to defend so vigorously somebody who has now been caught out on at least two blatant lies during his cross examination. The Tasha's incident alone has made it clear to everyone including the judge that OP is not a credible witness, as he claimed his finger was not on the trigger of a gun that can only fire if there is trigger pull.

You need to go and do more research, and perhaps read up on more educated opinions from those who have analysed this trial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
780
Total visitors
869

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,740
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top