Options

Oscar Pistorius Trial (Merged)

1533534536538539546

Comments

  • Options
    benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    must say, OP is looking pretty dark eyed today and not so good... I think he was confident in the "expert witnesses" he told Nel would be speaking on his behalf...... and after the pathologist before him and this guy who is in his own world on the stand... OP is realising things are not looking so good.

    still hiding face and fingers in ears though, only the sympathy vote will sae him now..

    I really think Roux suggested to him yesterday when he finished his evidence that a plea might be his best chance. I am certain that Roux did do that. I never thought he would agree to it, but I'm sure now that Roux has made it clear he is almost certainly looking at a prison sentence.
  • Options
    lynwood3lynwood3 Posts: 24,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cath99 wrote: »
    So to those who aren't 100% sure of OPs guilt (on premeditated murder) what are your current feelings?

    I'd say I'm now 95% sure he knew he was shooting Reeva and his entire defence is a fabrication. My only doubts are the argument prior to the killing - how the eating at 2am fits with that and that he was on his stumps when this supposed argument took place.

    I do worry (will have to be careful how I say this...was jumped on earlier!) that the mistakes made by the police (footprint on door etc) raise questions about their integrity and I aspect Roux to go to town on that later.

    If on the jury, I am now confident to put my hand up to guilty (Have we elected a foreman yet?}.

    For your doubts on the argument......consider how he has 'tailored' his evidence, then think about "Get the f*ck out of my House" Why would he corner an intruder in the toilet and shout that? I put it to you (:D) that he shouted it at Reeva as he chased her into the toilet with the bat.
    Estelle Van de Merwe heard arguing around the time that Reeva would have been eating according to the pathologist reports.
    I think it is doubtful that he had taken his prosthesis off at all, or that they went to bed.
    She locked herself in the toilet to get away from an angry OP, who furiously attacked the door with the cricket bat when she wouldn't come out.
    So the now enraged OP got his gun and shot at the door.
    When the screaming stopped he levered off the damaged door panel

    He didn't go back to the bedroom to put on his legs and get the bat and look for his socks at all ........that is why the gun and the bat were found in the bathroom.
  • Options
    franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1fab wrote: »
    Right. Must admit, I felt a bit sorry for old Dixon, as I would feel sorry for anyone up against Nel. But I'm sure he doesn't really need our sympathy - he's been doing this for years, and clearly loves it.

    Yes he came across, to me anyhow, that he's enthusiastic about his work.
  • Options
    Cg_EvansCg_Evans Posts: 2,039
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    The camera focused on him during the discussion. Up until then he had his head in his hands and fingers in ears.
    It's interesting that his demeanour when discussing bullets does change and has been noted. That aught to make him cringe with extreme shame..

    its odd


    col281 wrote: »
    I know he did a bit of boo hoo ing while on the stand but anyone know if he threw up while he was up there 'cos there were lots of conversations which would have had him reaching for the green bucket if he'd been in the dock.

    Dont think he has ever thrown up whilst on the stand, just cried
  • Options
    LeeahLeeah Posts: 20,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Just here, looking at Reeva's twitter, so sad :(
  • Options
    End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I missed all of today's sessions and haven't read a decent report summing things up. From what I've been able to glean, is it fair to say the defense expert witness Dixon was skewered by Nel?
  • Options
    1fab1fab Posts: 20,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Does anybody have any idea how the tests to compare the cricket bat and gun sounds were carried out? I mean, did they take the recordings from outside the building, as the witnesses would have heard them, or from inside at close range? If the latter, they're pretty useless tests, I would have thought.
  • Options
    loveloveXloveloveX Posts: 4,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Leeah wrote: »
    Just here, looking at Reeva's twitter, so sad :(

    She was wonderful wasn't she :(

    She seemed so alive and full of life. Her personality is that of someone who I feel the world needs more. People who met her just once have nothing but the best things to say about her. Compassionate, kind, thoughtful, intelligent, strong and more. It's so sad :cry:
  • Options
    1fab1fab Posts: 20,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    loveloveX wrote: »
    She was wonderful wasn't she :(

    She seemed so alive and full of life. Her personality is that of someone who I feel the world needs more. People who met her just once have nothing but the best things to say about her. Compassionate, kind, thoughtful, intelligent, strong and more. It's so sad :cry:

    I'm sure she was wonderful, but I'm sure people said great things about Oscar Pistorius too before this happened.
  • Options
    benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The whole demeanour of the defence team has changed. Remember at the beginning how we were quite captivated by Roux? He was punchy and theatrical and oozed confidence. Apart from discussions about Reevas wounds OP was animated, listening intently and making notes and praying.
    Today it just looked like the wheels were coming of. OP looked dejected. roux was going through the motions. The prosecution looked to be in the ascendancy . That's my take. Things can and do change. However I think OP himself blew the case.
  • Options
    cath99cath99 Posts: 6,826
    Forum Member
    Thanks lynwood.

    Do you think the prosecution will spell out their version re cricket bat then shots? Or will Nel just leave it open for interpretation? I'm surprised he hasn't made a point of making that point!
  • Options
    shortyknickersshortyknickers Posts: 2,488
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    AJ_Tvll wrote: »
    I thought it was fascinating ! …can't wait for more tomorrow.

    Bugger. I have been out all day, just got in and was hoping Dixon had finished and they would be onto a new witness but from this post it looks like he is back on again tomorrow?

    I have only read the last few pages but they have given me a flavour of today's action, I will go have a look at the recordings now. Sounds interesting :o
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 182
    Forum Member
    cath99 wrote: »
    Thanks lynwood.

    Do you think the prosecution will spell out their version re cricket bat then shots? Or will Nel just leave it open for interpretation? I'm surprised he hasn't made a point of making that point!

    As I understand it (mainly from people on here) prosecution's own witness said shots then bat and it would be difficult for Nel to disagree with his own expert witness.

    Dunno what "difficult" means in this scenario though.
  • Options
    barrbarrellabarrbarrella Posts: 3,601
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    I really think Roux suggested to him yesterday when he finished his evidence that a plea might be his best chance. I am certain that Roux did do that. I never thought he would agree to it, but I'm sure now that Roux has made it clear he is almost certainly looking at a prison sentence.

    I agree yes... but op wants to go free so will resist I guess... but also is it correct that NEL has to agree to a plea bargain too??
  • Options
    feckitfeckit Posts: 4,303
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1fab wrote: »
    Does anybody have any idea how the tests to compare the cricket bat and gun sounds were carried out? I mean, did they take the recordings from outside the building, as the witnesses would have heard them, or from inside at close range? If the latter, they're pretty useless tests, I would have thought.

    Probably the same as this :-

    “Mr Dixon, are you saying ‘I saw a photograph of the socks and made a determination that they were the same as the fibres on the door’?” Nel asked, adding “Did you ever have those socks in your hand?”

    Dixon conceded that he had come to his conclusions without a physical examination.
  • Options
    bobbydbobbyd Posts: 3,388
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    Since he is not denying murder the integrity of the scene is not as vital. Also the allegations , mainly by Op that the scene was tampered with makes little sense. When the Plods were all over the scene they had no idea what OPs evidence was. Remember he refused to talk to the police when they arrived. So it's not credible that they in some way implicated him in a scenario , much of which is in fact still evolving this week.
    I cannot see Roux making that much of it. What does it change?

    BIB:o:o:o

    I get what you meant and agree.
  • Options
    barrbarrellabarrbarrella Posts: 3,601
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    feckit wrote: »
    Probably the same as this :-

    “Mr Dixon, are you saying ‘I saw a photograph of the socks and made a determination that they were the same as the fibres on the door’?” Nel asked, adding “Did you ever have those socks in your hand?”

    Dixon conceded that he had come to his conclusions without a physical examination.

    and the cleaners had cleaned the door!! NEL said it could be a bit of cloth from that!!
    you could not make it up!!
  • Options
    KapellmeisterKapellmeister Posts: 41,322
    Forum Member
    I think this is how the trial is panning out at the moment:

    http://s17.postimg.org/avt6ve9ov/nel_and_dog.jpg

    :kitty:
  • Options
    1fab1fab Posts: 20,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    feckit wrote: »
    Probably the same as this :-

    “Mr Dixon, are you saying ‘I saw a photograph of the socks and made a determination that they were the same as the fibres on the door’?” Nel asked, adding “Did you ever have those socks in your hand?”

    Dixon conceded that he had come to his conclusions without a physical examination.

    Yes, if that's the case with the bat tests, it would be ridiculous. You can't just record a bat hitting a door and claim that's the same sound that would be heard by neighbours some distance away. The sound might carry quite differently to the sound of a gun. I'm pretty sure it would.
  • Options
    lynwood3lynwood3 Posts: 24,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cath99 wrote: »
    Thanks lynwood.

    Do you think the prosecution will spell out their version re cricket bat then shots? Or will Nel just leave it open for interpretation? I'm surprised he hasn't made a point of making that point!

    No, frustratingly, he hasn't.
    The only reference to it is that he and Roux have declared that they are in dispute over the time of the shots.
    Obviously the shots have to come first for Roux.
  • Options
    barrbarrellabarrbarrella Posts: 3,601
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think this is how the trial is panning out at the moment:

    http://s17.postimg.org/avt6ve9ov/nel_and_dog.jpg

    :kitty:

    OH KAP I LOVE IT!! glad u are back on the pics:kitty:;-)
  • Options
    benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I agree yes... but op wants to go free so will resist I guess... but also is it correct that NEL has to agree to a plea bargain too??

    Yes, they offer a plea to Nel and its up to him to accept or decline. It's a bit like chess. Nel can decline if he is certain that he will get a conviction for the pre med, however sometimes a compromise is reached.
    If OP has refused to accept a plea then he loses the benefits of mitigation.
    Pleading guilty to a lesser charge would have benefits that are ruled out if he goes ahead. Which he appears to have done.
  • Options
    franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Criminologist and Forensic Profiler, Laurie Pieters - OP Trial Day 24, 15 April 2014

    http://oscartrial.dstv.com/video/512794/category/0

    Interesting to hear her views about lateness of defence carrying out tests. Also comments on Dixon.
  • Options
    2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,579
    Forum Member
    Leeah wrote: »
    Just here, looking at Reeva's twitter, so sad :(

    Especially the one on 13 feb where she said ' gonna be in heaven tomorrow' :(
  • Options
    LeeahLeeah Posts: 20,239
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Flukie wrote: »
    A 2 week holiday after Thursday?!

    Is that for My Lady to come up with an excuse to let OP off?
    She'd need two weeks to come up with something to justify it!

    Will this trial be done by Christmas or will it go into next year?

    At this bloody rate I'd say next year>:(
This discussion has been closed.