Trial Discussion Thread #11 weekend thread

[MeeBee]

He was recalling the time when he was looking through the lighted window at night at a figure moving from right to left. There is a big difference between seeing that person through clear glass and seeing it through frosted.

Stipp's memory was that it was through frosted, because he couldn't see who it was or even if it was male or female. Just a pale figure.

Sorry, I think given that everyone including the judge, Nel and Roux all saw the significance of this suggests that no one is going to write it off as oh well, he's seen it before. Roux even tried to "prove" that Stipp couldn't really see the window - and failed.

He is describing what he saw that night.

You know what? If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck....it is probably a duck.

But if what sorrell said is true, then the window might have been partially open which is why he only saw a figure (I remember this). I wonder what this window looks like and how it opens. Is it a crank window? Is it one that opens like a door? Is it a sliding glass window? From sorrell's description it sounds like it's a window that opens sideways. So it is indeed possible that it was partially open. There's nothing definitive there.

 

[LemonMousse]

But if what sorrell said is true, then the window might have been partially open which is why he only saw a figure (I remember this). I wonder what this window looks like and how it opens. Is it a crank window? Is it one that opens like a door? Is it a sliding glass window? From sorrell's description it sounds like it's a window that opens sideways. So it is indeed possible that it was partially open. There's nothing definitive there.

It's a window that slides across and tucks itself behind the next pane.

 

[Val1]

But if what sorrell said is true, then the window might have been partially open which is why he only saw a figure (I remember this). I wonder what this window looks like and how it opens. Is it a crank window? Is it one that opens like a door? Is it a sliding glass window? From sorrell's description it sounds like it's a window that opens sideways. So it is indeed possible that it was partially open. There's nothing definitive there.

 

[MeeBee]

Thank you. So it does appear that Stipp might have been saying that the window was partially open.

 

[Rumpole]

This is not a personal attack. It's an opinion about the conclusion you reached, not you.

To say that the detailed and specific testimony of multiple witnesses describing that they are sure they heard a woman screaming, then saying that's evidence that OP's story is accurate, is beyond misrepresenting the evidence. It's more like starting with OP's story as gospel truth, then saying anything that doesn't fit OP's story must incorrect.

If testimony about a woman screaming doesn't match OP's version, then maybe it can be explained that OP is lying to keep from going to jail, not that all the witnesses were wrong about hearing a woman scream.

Reality is not determined by a poll.

People can be wrong and often are.... the majority can be wrong. People can be unanimously wrong.

The main reason I am 100% sure that the burgers and Stipp were mistaken about it being a woman is that the time they claim to have heard a woman scream... Reeva was dead. And in general... who would NOT assume a high pitched anguished scream was a woman? I would venture to say that I would make the same assumption myself, but unless there was a woman screaming other than Reeva... I have to conclude it was OP. I do hope that Roux did record screams from OP as he has hinted.

FWIW I did NOT start out believing OP's story. I did not know the details of the case before the trial started. I still know little other than what I have seen presented at trial. I started off 50/50 in regards OP's claim that he thought there was an intruder... The State presentation and witnesses have pushed me a little off 50/50 towards believing OP. But that is NOT the only issue.
The actual timing of events does not necessarily end the matter and I honestly can not see why the State is so fixated on it. It would be a "slam dunk" Murder IF they could prove beyond reasonable doubt that OP shot KNOWING Reeva was in the toilet... but I think to prove that beyond reasonable doubt was impossible from the outset.

 

[LemonMousse]

Can't see a tree obstructing that.

And if it was open, I think Stipp would have noticed that half of it was frosted and half not.

He was adamant he saw the figure through frosted glass.

Sorrell - don't fall asleep. Tell me what you meant

 

[LemonMousse]

Thank you. So it does appear that Stipp might have been saying that the window was partially open.

Apart from the fact that he said he thought it was closed and he saw the figure through frosted glass!!!!

 

[MeeBee]

Apart from the fact that he said he thought it was closed and he saw the figure through frosted glass!!!!

Ok, what exactly did he say? Couldn't it have still looked frosted to him even it was partially opened, even if it was just cracked?

 

[MeeBee]

That's a rather large window. It looks like it could be open but still be opaque enough to block the view of the person inside.

 

[beach]

Locking up the Weekend Discussion thread.


Moooove on over, please.


Link to Monday's Trial Discussion thread.

 

[LemonMousse]

I shall go and find the clip and report back.

I shall be gutted if my Columbo moment comes to nothing

Still, it would make a genius plot for a murder mystery!

I'll be back.