Trial Discussion Thread #50 - 14.08.8, Day 40 ~final arguments continue~

[Jake18]

1. I'm not saying Burger/Johnson are lying. I think they were credible witnesses. I'm saying that they were mistaken as to whether the screams were male or female.

2. The whole point is that the help help help came BEFORE the shots (listen to burger's testimony). Therefore, he would have had to have come up with this intruder defence before he shot her. That's just nonsense. I agree that its the best defence possible, but I think its totally implausible that he came up with the idea before/during shooting her and went to the lengths of creating his defence/alibi by screaming out for help.

Its also not right to say that burger didn't say the man screamed. She said in her examination in chief that the man screamed for help (link below at 45 mins in):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e9aUB5a4Ig

BIB: Why is this totally implausible?

 

[AJ_DS]

1. I'm not saying Burger/Johnson are lying. I think they were credible witnesses. I'm saying that they were mistaken as to whether the screams were male or female.

2. The whole point is that the help help help came BEFORE the shots (listen to burger's testimony). Therefore, he would have had to have come up with this intruder defence before he shot her. That's just nonsense. I agree that its the best defence possible, but I think its totally implausible that he came up with the idea before/during shooting her and went to the lengths of creating his defence/alibi by screaming out for help.

BiB… you are missing the point… when Reeva screamed for help… OP was with her and he knew it was 3AM in a quiet estate and that neighbors would certainly hear Reeva… therefore the only inference would be that OP was threatening Reeva… this is embarrassing for OP… it's HIS neighbors that he will cross paths with every day… not an ideal situation… OP is still not armed with his gun or thinking he will shoot Reeva… he's just faced with a screaming Reeva… so OP shout Help, Help, Help not to mock her per say but to chime into what he considers exaggerated behavior from Reeva… to project onto Reeva her own behavior.

… it's hard to express into words… but I have seen and heard it before during arguments and fights between couples.

It's a combination of embarrassment and exasperation at an exaggerated response from one of the arguing individuals.

 

[Exchange973]

I'm curious. Do you honestly think that Oscar did not lie?

Because if you think Oscar did not lie then you must believe that Mrs Burger lied? And Mr. Johnson? Dr. Stipp? Mrs Stipp? Col van Rensburg? W/O van Staden? Mrs van der Merwe?

How can you believe that all these people lied for no apparent reason, yet you can not believe that Oscar lied even after his own counsel admitted that Oscar lied about Tasha's?

See my posts above. I'm not saying earwitnesses are lying. I think they all came to court to give credible accounts. However, I think that they are (or that there is sufficient reasonable doubt that they are) mistaken about whether it was a woman's or a man's screams. The help help help heard by the man at the same time suggests it was post-shots and therefore was a man's (OP's) screams

 

[Angela Carr]

I don't recall how Burger described the man's help help help, but I distinctly remember Johnson's description of the woman's being fearful and the man's being monotone, almost as if he was embarrassed to shout help help help.

You are remembering correctly. Some people commenting need to go over the evidence again, it's no good basing thoughts and views on incorrect evidence.

 

[AJ_DS]

Check the link below at minute 45. She clearly said the man screamed. She may have changed her story later - but this was her original evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e9aUB5a4Ig

No problem with that… it's not a change in her story it's a clarification of terminology between what she means by screaming and by shouting… to tell you the truth I'm not certain that I could explain the difference myself… and I don't believe it is relevant either way.

 

[Exchange973]

BiB… you are missing the point… when Reeva screamed for help… OP was with her and he knew it was 3AM in a quiet estate and that neighbors would certainly hear Reeva… therefore the only inference would be that OP was threatening Reeva… this is embarrassing for OP… it's HIS neighbors that he will cross paths with every day… not an ideal situation… OP is still not armed with his gun or thinking he will shoot Reeva… he's just faced with a screaming Reeva… so OP shout Help, Help, Help not to mock her per say but to chime into what he considers exaggerated behavior from Reeva… to project onto Reeva her own behavior.

… it's hard to express into words… but I have seen and heard it before during arguments and fights between couples.

It's a combination of embarrassment and exasperation at an exaggerated response from one of the arguing individuals.

OK - well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I personally am not convinced. It just doesn't sit comfortably with what the State allegedly says was happening at the time, but meshes completely with OP's account (given before he knew the Burger's had heard it).

 

[AJ_DS]

I don't recall how Burger described the man's help help help, but I distinctly remember Johnson's description of the woman's being fearful and the man's being monotone, almost as if he was embarrassed to shout help help help.

I believe you are correct

 

[Exchange973]

No problem with that… it's not a change in her story it's a clarification of terminology between what she means by screaming and by shouting… to tell you the truth I'm not certain that I could explain the difference myself… and I don't believe it is relevant either way.

Right - and OP's changing his story between his bail statement and cross examination was a "clarification of terminology" too... ;-)

I don't think burger was lying at all. But, as this shows, people change their accounts slightly between their written and spoken evidence and within their oral evidence too. This doesn't automatically mean that they are lying. It seems that the state witnesses are being given a free pass on inconsistencies greater than OPs.

 

[Exchange973]

BIB: Why is this totally implausible?

See posts above. In any event, Nel didn't even put this to OP (If I remember correctly). The state just wants to brush this bit of the evidence under the carpet.

 

[liesbeth]

What did Lux say?!!!!?

Something about a restraining order. Alas.

 

[Greater Than]

See my posts above. I'm not saying earwitnesses are lying. I think they all came to court to give credible accounts. However, I think that they are (or that there is sufficient reasonable doubt that they are) mistaken about whether it was a woman's or a man's screams. The help help help heard by the man at the same time suggests it was post-shots and therefore was a man's (OP's) screams

The evidence given by four independent witnesses was that a woman screamed.

If the defense wanted the court to accept the possibility that all four witnesses were incorrect about the gender of the individual who screamed, then they should have provided evidence to poke holes and raise reasonable doubt. They told the witnesses they had said evidence, the witnesses still maintained they heard a woman, and then the defense never produced the evidence.

Without the scream test evidence to raise reasonable doubt, all four ear witness' evidence of hearing a woman scream is accepted as fact.

 

[Jake18]

See posts above. In any event, Nel didn't even put this to OP (If I remember correctly). The state just wants to brush this bit of the evidence under the carpet.

Why is it implausible that at the time of getting a gun he decided to create the only obvious alibi?

The DT would have him too busy startling, freezing, flighting and exploding from his "slow burn" at that time but the physiology they've based their case on was quite different to the physiology I learnt at medical school.

He had the presence of mind to get his gun so he had the presence of mind to accept that he was going to be in deep deep trouble.

 

[liesbeth]

Well on the Defence's case the shots were between 3:12-3:14, so that leaves only 5 minutes before the first call. In that time he went to the bedroom, searched for her there, put on his legs (30 secs approx), went back to the bathroom, kicked the door, back to the bedroom, hit the door with the bat, broke down a panel, took reeva out of the toilet, went back to the bedroom and made the call.

Plenty to be doing in 5 minutes. Not enough time to do in one and a half mins as the state has been forced to argue (or at least there is reasonable doubt there).

Where did the defence get the 3:12-3:14 time? From Mr Johnson's notes. The same Johnson who, according to the defence, lied and colluded with his wife to incriminate Oscar.

 

[AJ_DS]

Oh please. Would you be saying the same if I was anti-OP. I do have a decent grasp on the facts, but not an encyclopaedia knowledge. I still think I should be able to post

Luckily for you I have an encyclopedic knowledge… let me assist you

The person you were referring to is Estelle van der Merwe who believed a woman was crying and her husband corrected her by saying it was Oscar crying.

Awaiting your answer to my question, twice asked but still unanswered.

 

[Val1]

Thanks. I disagree that its irrelevant. It calls Burger and Johnson into question. Stipp on screams isn't so damning for the defence, as he said the first sounds were shots - consistent with OP's case. Its burger's blood curdling screams that are the problem for OP - and her hearing help help help before the sounds "in the region of 3:17" suggests that these screams were after Reeva had been shot.

As for why he might have screamed before shooting - the idea that this was a deliberate act by a ruthless criminal mastermind foreseeing a potential trial/defence one and a half years down the line doesn't add up for me.

Or just maybe he had been reading the paper and was aware of this case and in the heat of the moment figured it could work for him too:

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Man-who-shot-wife-in-error-can-sympathise-with-Oscar-20140407

 

[AJ_DS]

Right - and OP's changing his story between his bail statement and cross examination was a "clarification of terminology" too... ;-)

I don't think burger was lying at all. But, as this shows, people change their accounts slightly between their written and spoken evidence and within their oral evidence too. This doesn't automatically mean that they are lying. It seems that the state witnesses are being given a free pass on inconsistencies greater than OPs.

Quite different LOL

Bail application : went onto the balcony to fetch a fan

Trial : stayed in bedroom and moved 2 fans

The addendum about speaking to Reeva in bed is a CRUCIAL KEYSTONE element of OP's version… and he didn't tell Roux about it at the time…. Please

Without that conversation his entire version falls apart before it even begins

…and so much more changes and additions that it cannot be a coincidence

Burger clarified the difference between screaming and shouting… and she did not kill anyone, she is not charged with murder, she is not facing life in prison.

 

[LemonMousse]

I find myself quite surprised by your posts, Exchange. Surely you realise that it can still be murder even if Milady is not completely convinced he knew it was Reeva? I am assuming you also know that in terms of the case, premeditation is irrelevant. In SA, it has sentencing implications, but there's no requirement to prove it to get a conviction.

The issue at hand is "intent" and this can be a matter of seconds. Was he intending to seriously harm the human being he knew was behind the toilet door when he fired? If yes, it's murder. He doesn't have to know it was Reeva.

I am also always amazed whenever anyone says "But how could he come up with such an elaborate story so quickly"?

Elaborate story? Where? What else was he going to say? His girlfriend was dead with bullets from his gun, in his home in the middle of the night. No evidence of anyone else or a break in, clearly not suicide. "Oh dear, I thought it was a burglar" is about all he could say, and would take a fraction of a second to think up.

He refused to speak to the police at all and when coming up with something for the bail statement all he had to do was be mindful of what neighbours might have heard. Since he was the only person in the house left alive, then most of what he said could not be directly contradicted.

It wasn't an elaborate story at all, I'm afraid. It was knee jerk.

And regarding the "help, help, help"'s - the ones Burger heard came immediately after the female ones. When pressed, she said she thought it was the man mocking the woman. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

Once he knows he's killed her, and also knowing that the "helps" from both Reeva and him may well have been heard, he replicates them on the balcony.

When you think about it, what is he doing yelling help from the balcony? Who does that in this day and age? Whose help did he want? Security? Evidently not because he changed his mind after calling them to tell them he was fine.

Netcare? The police? Stander? They were going to hear him from his balcony? His neighbours?

He shouted help like that because he knew it had already been shouted that night, and there was a chance someone heard. Only thing that makes sense.

 

[AJ_DS]

Why is it implausible that at the time of getting a gun he decided to create the only obvious alibi?

The DT would have him too busy startling, freezing, flighting and exploding from his "slow burn" at that time but the physiology they've based their case on was quite different to the physiology I learnt at medical school.

He had the presence of mind to get his gun so he had the presence of mind to accept that he was going to be in deep deep trouble.

BiB… could you elaborate a bit on that ?

 

[LemonMousse]

I'd also like to add - if you believe that Oscar Pistorius sounds sufficiently like a woman when he screams to convince four educated, sensible people that he was one, why didn't we hear a recording of it?

His vocal cords are his vocal cords, they haven't changed in 18 months. If he could do it then, he could do it now and evidently he tried....and failed.

The ONLY inference anyone can reasonably draw from this is that, in fact, he sounds nothing at all like a woman when he's screaming.

But you'd just prefer to go ahead and believe that he does.....because?

 

[AJ_DS]

I find myself quite surprised by your posts, Exchange. Surely you realise that it can still be murder even if Milady is not completely convinced he knew it was Reeva? I am assuming you also know that in terms of the case, premeditation is irrelevant. In SA, it has sentencing implications, but there's no requirement to prove it to get a conviction.

The issue at hand is "intent" and this can be a matter of seconds. Was he intending to seriously harm the human being he knew was behind the toilet door when he fired? If yes, it's murder. He doesn't have to know it was Reeva.

I am also always amazed whenever anyone says "But how could he come up with such an elaborate story so quickly"?

Elaborate story? Where? What else was he going to say? His girlfriend was dead with bullets from his gun, in his home in the middle of the night. No evidence of anyone else or a break in, clearly not suicide. "Oh dear, I thought it was a burglar" is about all he could say, and would take a fraction of a second to think up.

He refused to speak to the police at all and when coming up with something for the bail statement all he had to do was be mindful of what neighbours might have heard. Since he was the only person in the house left alive, then most of what he said could not be directly contradicted.

It wasn't an elaborate story at all, I'm afraid. It was knee jerk.

And regarding the "help, help, help"'s - the ones Burger heard came immediately after the female ones. When pressed, she said she thought it was the man mocking the woman. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

Once he knows he's killed her, and also knowing that the "helps" from both Reeva and him may well have been heard, he replicates them on the balcony.

When you think about it, what is he doing yelling help from the balcony? Who does that in this day and age? Whose help did he want? Security? Evidently not because he changed his mind after calling them to tell them he was fine.

Netcare? The police? Stander? They were going to hear him from his balcony? His neighbours?

He shouted help like that because he knew it had already been shouted that night, and there was a chance someone heard. Only thing that makes sense.

Very well put… Bravo !