Also worth remembering that the defence hasn't even got started on listing all of the issues that they have with the way the crime scene was preserved and recorded by the SA police.
Indeed. If she discards all of that, then in the end it may all come down to OP's testimony. If the judge believes his story about Reeva in the toilet, then it will come down to his intent, and whether the actions were reasonable. I would say that:
1. Not checking that Reeva was there / OK
2. Immediately going for the gun and charging off down the corridor
3. His stalking profile and thoughts as he advanced from bedroom to bathroom
4. No attempt to talk to the person in the toilet
5. Blasting without the door / handle moving
6. Firing 4 shots - possibly with a gap in between
None of these actions are reasonable or likely to be done by a 'normal' person in a similar circumstance. They suggest instead someone who is reckless and comfortable enough with guns to take on whatever burglar there might be. And so his sentence is likely to reflect that.
I don't think she will buy for an instant the "it went off by itself" or the "I was so very scared / wanted to protect Reeva" defence. His actions above do not support any of those claims.
But for her to rule that he knew it was Reeva may be too controversial with the police-evidence moving. The lights, screaming and text messages might however tip the balance. Whatever happens in the next few weeks, when the verdict comes it will be an edge-of-the-seat nail-biter!
The pathologist for the defence argued if the shooting came completely out of the blue Reeva would not have screamed. Nel pointed out in the Pistorious had shouted out 'Reeva Reeva phone the police' a number of times and the pathologist agreed that would have created fear in Reeva. Pistorious in his own evidence said she was likely in fear. Therefore she was 'primed' in anticipation that there could be a shooting or incident, and more likely to scream.
If Reeva had been in the toilet quietly going about her business unaware of any issues, that's when she is likely not have screamed as the bullets would have been a complete shock.
It would seem the defence counsel may not have not given the full picture to their pathologist. That Botha may have been just asked just to base his report on Reeva not being 'primed'. We've seen the same with Dixon with the tests and photos he took.
definitely coached, there's been a link on here tonight of an article saying he HAS HAD coaching lessons in preparation for his cross exam !
And it did all sound sooo forced didn't it - and that pause before he shouted GET THE F**K OUT OF MY HOOOOOWWSE !!
That was one bit I thought might have been genuine - I think Nel is right, that's what he screamed at Reeva. I think he had trouble getting that out in court because it was the crucial moment, when he went into a rage state. He could rehearse all he liked that it was shouted at an intruder, but he can't remove that real emotion.
The sobbing voice throughout seemed contrived though. Reminded me of that couple who burned six children to death.
That was one bit I thought might have been genuine - I think Nel is right, that's what he screamed at Reeva. I think he had trouble getting that out in court because it was the crucial moment, when he went into a rage state. He could rehearse all he liked that it was shouted at an intruder, but he can't remove that real emotion.
The sobbing voice throughout seemed contrived though. Reminded me of that couple who burned six children to death.
I have been reminded of that more than once in this trail.
His fingers in ears, head down is also transparent because sometimes he does it in the wrong places ;-)
Either he was not aware of the significance, which seems unlikely or he knows it is out there and did not want to tip off the defence as to its significance which I think is more likely.
Right from early on I have believed that both Stipps said exactly the same thing about the lights and that it was clear. What makes Mr S so compelling is the low key way he gave the evidence. He did not even try to clarify himself suggesting he was not concerned with its significance and thus untainted.
Whatever the reason it is now stuck in the defence craw and they are not going to be able to shake it loose.
And so to bed. Goodnight!
BIB. I think so as well. It seems as though Nel's tactics are to keep his powder dry until the last possible moment. Let the defence lay out the latest version and then Nel will create confusion and uncertainty by microscopically laying out the differences between bail application/plea/evidence. I think he is aware of the significance of the light in the toilet and bathroom and the timing of screams heard. But I am sure Roux is equally aware of them. The animation could well be decisive as once it is laid out by the defence there will be no more wriggle room. Dangerous for the defence if they don't get it spot on and with that in mind it is just possible they may not go with it.
It must be an odd case for Nel where it does seem as though there are constant small shifts in the defence's version of events and he is having to cover these bases.
IMO the light in the bathroom/loo and the screaming will become the two main issues which will settle this case one way or the other. A woman's scream during or after the first bangs; case closed. Faint light in loo at same times = same result.
I would find it rather unusual if you couldn't close a toilet door. The door would open into the bathroom & close towards the toilet.
Apologies if this has been 'argued' - I have intermittent internet connection argh
I meant that you could not reach the door handle when sitting on the loo. Not that the loo door could not be closed from inside the loo. I still wonder why he said he pushed the door to try to open it.
That was one bit I thought might have been genuine - I think Nel is right, that's what he screamed at Reeva. I think he had trouble getting that out in court because it was the crucial moment, when he went into a rage state. He could rehearse all he liked that it was shouted at an intruder, but he can't remove that real emotion.
The sobbing voice throughout seemed contrived though. Reminded me of that couple who burned six children to death.
Yes, and the bloke sat there in court crying, rubbing his eyes but - no tears! Just like OP. ;-)
Apart from softly laying Reeva down on a towel in the bathroom what did Pistorius physically do for her apart from let her bleed to death?
03:16 He fired the fatal shots or bashed the door with the bat.
Rips out door panels
Locates key & opens door
Hugs Reeva as she lay in the toilet.
Struggles to pull her out of the toilet.
Lays her softly on a towel in the bathroom.
Tries Reeva's phone, can't gain access.
Goes to bedroom to collect his phones.
03:18:14 His phone switched on.
03:19:03 Calls Stander for assistance.
03:19:27 Call ends
03:20:03 Calls Netcare
03:21::06 Call ended
Runs downstairs to open front door
Fiddles with bedroom door to get second door open
03:21:33 Calls security, can't remember doing so.
03:21:40 Ends call without speaking.
03:22:05 Security call Pistorius, (I'm fine)
03:22:17 Call ended
Picks up Reeva and carries her downstairs.
This is not an exact record of the sequence of events, but based on the version from Pistorious where is the time for him to apply first aid in the bathroom? Most of the time he's either on the phone or running about, with Reeva left lying on the bathroom floor.
As Nel pointed out, one of the strangest parts of the story was that Pistorius should've been screaming and shrieking when trying to get into the toilet room and then suddenly fell almost totally silent (apart from the 'Help, help, help') when he discovered her body. I'm not sure that's plausible.
Wouldn't he have screamed more when he discovered the body, especially as he wouldn't have known how badly injured she was until he got access?
I have been reminded of that more than once in this trail.
His fingers in ears, head down is also transparent because sometimes he does it in the wrong places ;-)
I've noticed that. Also he very often covers his entire face...that is nothing to do with crying or not wanting to see, he doesn't want to be seen. He's even used his handkerchief opened out to cover his whole face. I'd say he's aware that there are experts there who will pick up on his facial expressions and conceals them at various times in case he gives something away.
As Nel pointed out, one of the strangest parts of the story was that Pistorius should've been screaming and shrieking when trying to get into the toilet room and then suddenly fell almost totally silent (apart from the 'Help, help, help') when he discovered her body. I'm not sure that's plausible.
Wouldn't he have screamed more when he discovered the body, especially as he wouldn't have known how badly injured she was until he got access?
He's tailored his screaming to fit with the prosecutors witnesses.
Roux then says they heard OP and not Reeva. imo.
he didnt love her at all, thats why i cringe every time he goes on as if she was his love of his life. They were only together for 3 months, and those 3 months were far from roses and like her mother said ''they were fighting a lot''.
I think because she was intelligent (law graduate) and had big aspirations to make it big in the modelling industry, she may have been diff. to his usual puppy dog, yes partners.
its just a shame though that she never got out when she saw how jealous/controlling he was:(
Of those three months, Reeva was away filming in Jamaica. She must have left soon after they met which is probably why he said that they started getting to know one another in December.
Doesn't his training season start in November? Just that I read he trains and lives in Italy during that season.
As Nel pointed out, one of the strangest parts of the story was that Pistorius should've been screaming and shrieking when trying to get into the toilet room and then suddenly fell almost totally silent (apart from the 'Help, help, help') when he discovered her body. I'm not sure that's plausible.
Wouldn't he have screamed more when he discovered the body, especially as he wouldn't have known how badly injured she was until he got access?
Apart from softly laying Reeva down on a towel in the bathroom what did Pistorius physically do for her apart from let her bleed to death?
03:16 He fired the fatal shots or bashed the door with the bat.
Rips out door panels
Locates key & opens door
Hugs Reeva as she lay in the toilet.
Struggles to pull her out of the toilet.
Lays her softly on a towel in the bathroom.
Tries Reeva's phone, can't gain access.
Goes to bedroom to collect his phones.
03:18:14 His phone switched on.
03:19:03 Calls Stander for assistance.
03:19:27 Call ends
03:20:03 Calls Netcare
03:21::06 Call ended
Runs downstairs to open front door
Fiddles with bedroom door to get second door open
03:21:33 Calls security, can't remember doing so.
03:21:40 Ends call without speaking.
03:22:05 Security call Pistorius, (I'm fine)
03:22:17 Call ended
Picks up Reeva and carries her downstairs.
This is not an exact record of the sequence of events, but based on the version from Pistorious where is the time for him to apply first aid in the bathroom? Most of the time he's either on the phone or running about, with Reeva left lying on the bathroom floor.
Something that's always puzzled me is that they (the Standers?) told him to "Put her down" and he did. There was something about him holding her hip and trying to keep her airway open, but that seems to have been abandoned when Dr Stipp tried to help her. He walked away at some point - I haven't been in such a tragic situation, for which I'm thankful, but I don't think I would leave the body of a person I loved. I'd be holding on to them and not want to let go.
I can see why he's been an icon to so many - he overcame so much (his disability) which is no mean feat in itself, imho. I should think he gave hope to so many with similar limitations. I can't, personally, take these achievements from him.
True. It's a shame he let it all go to his head, though, isn't it? Peel away the layers of this 'icon' and look at what is revealed.....
My impression of OP throughout this whole trial has been that he seems to feel greatly inconvenienced and genuinely outraged that this should be happening to him. To this day, and underneath all that snivelling chagrin for M'Lady's benefit, there still seems to be a "do you KNOW who you're dealing with here??!" vibe going on with him.
BIB. I think so as well. It seems as though Nel's tactics are to keep his powder dry until the last possible moment. Let the defence lay out the latest version and then Nel will create confusion and uncertainty....
You'd think both sides could agree on the results of the post mortem but Pistorius wants to contest every report & piece of evidence. Botha the defence pathologist could not flag up any differences in Perumal's & Prof. Symmonds post mortem reports, just that Symmonds was more detailed and it was the one Botha chose to use.
The state has laid its reports before the court, the defence hasn't. I don't think Dixon was even asked to provide reports on most of his efforts.
The defence seem to have misled their own experts as to the facts, or their experts were fully aware and provided answers that did not fit the facts. Botha gave his opinion Reeva would not scream based on not knowing Reeva had been 'primed' by Pistorius shouting at her?
Then you have Dixon's various tests, in the end he seemed to be saying, 'I was only following orders'.
I don't think Nel has to cause any confusion, Pistorius has done that himself with his clear and detailed evidence.
I suspect the defence ballistics expert might have had his finger in a number of pies relating to this case.
The screaming in the toilet before the shots is extremely odd. The screaming whilst running around is very odd indeed.
And then to STOP screaming the minute he sees Reeva's smashed body, again.
You'd think the sight of it and the knowledge of what had happened would more probably have started him screaming.
The whole account of his behaviour is counter intuitive, and seems tailored to 'fit'.
This may not be proof, but it doesn't half stretch the boundaries of the believable.
Agreed, the accounts of his screaming and shouting both before and after discovery of Reeva don't sound right. It has definitely been rehearsed and he definitely wanted to tell it from start to finish - interruptions and going back and forwards unsettled him badly, suggesting he was telling a rehearsed story that wasn't all true.
I honestly don't know about the moment of discovery though. I can see someone just crumpling up in horror at the sight, whether he'd killed her in a rage (which maybe would evaporate at that moment) or was faced with the horrible realisation that it was her and not an intruder.
From the evidence so far I don't believe he had loving feelings for her, so whatever caused him to kill her, the emotion that he is displaying now is a mixture of remorse at what he did (knowing or not) and self-pity. I guess I judge the balance of those to be a little more on the side of self-pity on his behaviour and what he's said.
This is the transcript of the bail afadavit. This is his sworn testimony of what he says happened on the night of the 13th feb
He did not whisper to Reeva, he did not speak to Reeva at all.
The only reference he makes to shouting. Is when going down the passage he tells the intruder /s to get out. And a little later he shouts to Reeva to call the police.
The prolonged screaming and crying and yelling is a later addition.
Obviously the Pretorian Plod made a mess of the investigation which puts some of their evidence in serious doubt. I'm no legal expert so I don't know if that means m'lady could toss all of their evidence or just that of certain officers.
I could easily toss all the photo evidence of anything that wasn't nailed down or screwed down in what was left of that DIY disaster of a house. So that just leaves the door.
The door has been tramped over by men in big boots, reconstructed, bits of it lost, broken again as it was manhandled off the scene and then left hanging around in the office of the sports coach and one time amateur policeman Colonel Van Rensburg, for all and sundry to interfere with.
OP admits to making the 4 holes so we can rule out attempts to secure OP’s guilt by corrupt plod poking extra holes in it, giant South African woodworm or the Coach using it for target practice. Someone could have cracked through the bullet hole either accidentally or on purpose after the event so we cannot rely on this either.
The poor door was also poked, prodded, levered and lazily dusted in the courtroom as well but I don’t think this changed it much.
A cricket bat bashing a door sounds too much like the remixed beat of A Gun Jamming with DJ Dr Dix and his Gun Range Crew so the order of bangs cannot be determined anyone other than Oscar himself.
So at best guess it’s SHOTS then BAT.
It looks like no one is going to be able to rely on hearing a woman’s bloodcurdling screams either so we can all rest easy the next time we hear a female in distress and just pull the curtains and go back to bed.
That effectively makes the audio evidence of all ear witnesses so far unreliable.
So we are left just with OP’s story and what the Stipps saw.
The accused has accused them of lying but I still want to judge for myself.
Mrs Stipp says she saw OP in the bathroom window when she could not have, as the defence will attempt to prove later. She did retract this but there is now a whiff of suspicion about her reliability.
She lied about holding open her right curtain for the photographer and possibly also about always having her curtains parted down at the bottom. Although we cannot rule out that she pulled these only after seeing a suspicious bearded Geologist lurking about in her bushes taking hundreds of digital photographs.
She seemed a bit “too” definite about what she saw so with everything else let’s rule out her evidence as unreliable too.
That leaves Mr Stipp.
Taaa Daaa. The Mighty Mr Stipp To the Rescue…..
If he was a lone witness without the influence of the now officially evil Mrs Stipp I would be happy to rely on his recollection of hearing the shots, then seeing the bathroom light and hearing the screaming moments after the shots. We have no 3.02 evidence time now as Mrs Stipp is out of the picture so we can only fix the time by the sets of bangs then arrival of security and generally being there for the incident. The phone call also helps here.
You also have to question if Mrs Stipp could have tainted Mr Stipp’s evidence. Now I think Mrs Stipp would frighten me into believing anything but I think Mr Stipp is made of sterner stuff.
They must have discussed what happened which resulted in Mrs Stipp “seeing” OP in the bathroom window. I am convinced he saw a light in the toilet but others are convinced otherwise so lets say he only saw a light in the bathroom. I am convinced he saw that light straight after the first shots. That is reliable because the beginning of the event is fixed and very memorable. You hear a noise you see a light. That cannot have been planted by subsequent conversation with other witnesses IMO.
So there is now just OP and Mr Stipp’s version.
Ding ding…..Round 1…
One version fits with the other perfectly except for when the bathroom light was put on.
In this respect OP says he cannot be sure when it was put on. Stipp says it was on when the first screams started after the shots. These coincide with OP’s screams to call Reeva after the gun went off whilst pointed at the door. I think the light was on just after the shots.
Timeline after shots: OP says after standing stunned for an unknown period he backed up the corridor to the bed. It was pitch dark. It is impossible that he could be mistaken about this as he describes still being scared and feeling around for Reeva in the dark and feeling behind the curtains. If there was a light in the bathroom then he would have been able to see something but his story says otherwise. After he returns to the bathroom with growing suspicions that the intruder is Reeva he could well have been brave enough to turn on the light so lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he put it on then. It does not quite make sense with some of what he says subsequently but it cannot be ruled out. So his first return to the bathroom is the earliest the light could be on.
Now it is down to could OP have got the light on before Stipp heard the bangs, talked to his wife, got up and walked about 2m to the small balcony. I do not know but I am assuming at this point that our only remaining witness does not suffer from cataracts or is so riddled with arthritis that he can only move at a snail’s pace. I’m sure the eagle eyed members of Team Roux would have spotted this sort of thing.
Ding ding….Round 2…
Roux tried hard to stretch this time period from “moments” to “a few seconds.” Bless him he tried
to throw out a few random times to see if he could jog Stipps memory “10 seconds, half a minute, 2 minutes, 2 hours.” But Stipp was not happy and said just a few seconds, not minutes. So let’s give the benefit of the doubt to OP and say it was a full minute.
OP now has a minute to do the “Finding Reeva” round trip. Well I tried acting it out myself “12 Angry Men” style and I have to disagree with Mr Stipp it didn’t take minutes, it only took me 45 seconds. Uh oh.
So OP could have made the trip in the time it took Stipp to get to the balcony and see the bathroom light.
So OP story could be true. It takes a whole series of improbable coincidences but it is possible.
The only thing I have a real problem with now is how he could have either been frightened into firing or that the gun just went off.
Ding ding….Final Round
Lets look into Oscar’s head at the time….
BANG!
Oscar’s brain: “Hey! Oscar that was your gun going off”
Oscar “I don’t even have a gun”
Oscar’s brain “I’m your brain idiot, I know you have a gun”
Oscar “Okay, wow I must have fired, let me just check….”
BANG!
Oscar “Yeah, that was me”
Oscar’s brain “Wait though, was that you being scared of that noise or did the gun just go off by itself – lets test it……BOOO!”
BANG!
Oscar “Jesus, what was that!?”
Oscar’s brain “Yeah could have been the fright. Lets check if this thing will go off by itself….”
BANG!
Oscar’s brain “Yep. Could have been that as well”
Oscar “I’m hungry….oooh, me made holes in door”
The first shot could be caused by a fright or by accident. No one would then pause for a second or two then fire three more shots for the same reason. It is just not possible.
So he fired deliberately at an intruder with the knowledge that he could have hit them. So whatever that amounts to in SA law is what he should pay for IMO.
True. It's a shame he let it all go to his head, though, isn't it? Peel away the layers of this 'icon' and look at what is revealed.....
My impression of OP throughout this whole trial has been that he seems to feel greatly inconvenienced and genuinely outraged that this should be happening to him. To this day, and underneath all that snivelling chagrin for M'Lady's benefit, there still seems to be a "do you KNOW who you're dealing with here??!" vibe going on with him.
I agree. He resents having to have a trial: he doesn't think he should be there: he's had to put his life on hold(his own words) and most of all he totally resents Nel questioning him, doesn't think he needs to answer to anyone. Everyone should just accept his word that it was a terrible accident.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned with regard to the shots and that is that if the bullets were supersonic there would have been a loud 'crack' or 'boom' sound as they broke the sound barrier.
Reading up on gun forums, I noticed in discussions of the phenomenon (nothing to do with this case) that there was a broad consensus that the 'crack' can sound like a shot itself and may be equally loud.
This, added to the ricochet echo of the shots, may account for the confusion over the number of shots fired in this case.
Anyone who's been shooting knows that it is sometimes difficult to tell what is shot and what is echo.
It's possible that the first 4 'banging sounds' that Estelle Van der Merwe heard, and her husband believed were gunshots, was actually 2 plus 2 'cracks'.
Apart from softly laying Reeva down on a towel in the bathroom what did Pistorius physically do for her apart from let her bleed to death?
03:16 He fired the fatal shots or bashed the door with the bat.
Rips out door panels
Locates key & opens door
Hugs Reeva as she lay in the toilet.
Struggles to pull her out of the toilet.
Lays her softly on a towel in the bathroom.
Tries Reeva's phone, can't gain access.
Goes to bedroom to collect his phones.
03:18:14 His phone switched on.
03:19:03 Calls Stander for assistance.
03:19:27 Call ends
03:20:03 Calls Netcare
03:21::06 Call ended
Runs downstairs to open front door
Fiddles with bedroom door to get second door open
03:21:33 Calls security, can't remember doing so.
03:21:40 Ends call without speaking.
03:22:05 Security call Pistorius, (I'm fine)
03:22:17 Call ended
Picks up Reeva and carries her downstairs.
This is not an exact record of the sequence of events, but based on the version from Pistorious where is the time for him to apply first aid in the bathroom? Most of the time he's either on the phone or running about, with Reeva left lying on the bathroom floor.
Any timeline should include the first 'shots' heard around 3.00 am.
Estelle Van der Merwe heard '4 banging sounds' around that time, which her husband believed were gunshots.
Annette Stipp - looked at her clock radio at 3.02am, which she said was 3 or 4 minutes fast. She decided to get up for a drink and just as she was about to sit up, she heard what sounded like 3 gunshots.
Comments
Indeed. If she discards all of that, then in the end it may all come down to OP's testimony. If the judge believes his story about Reeva in the toilet, then it will come down to his intent, and whether the actions were reasonable. I would say that:
1. Not checking that Reeva was there / OK
2. Immediately going for the gun and charging off down the corridor
3. His stalking profile and thoughts as he advanced from bedroom to bathroom
4. No attempt to talk to the person in the toilet
5. Blasting without the door / handle moving
6. Firing 4 shots - possibly with a gap in between
None of these actions are reasonable or likely to be done by a 'normal' person in a similar circumstance. They suggest instead someone who is reckless and comfortable enough with guns to take on whatever burglar there might be. And so his sentence is likely to reflect that.
I don't think she will buy for an instant the "it went off by itself" or the "I was so very scared / wanted to protect Reeva" defence. His actions above do not support any of those claims.
But for her to rule that he knew it was Reeva may be too controversial with the police-evidence moving. The lights, screaming and text messages might however tip the balance. Whatever happens in the next few weeks, when the verdict comes it will be an edge-of-the-seat nail-biter!
The pathologist for the defence argued if the shooting came completely out of the blue Reeva would not have screamed. Nel pointed out in the Pistorious had shouted out 'Reeva Reeva phone the police' a number of times and the pathologist agreed that would have created fear in Reeva. Pistorious in his own evidence said she was likely in fear. Therefore she was 'primed' in anticipation that there could be a shooting or incident, and more likely to scream.
If Reeva had been in the toilet quietly going about her business unaware of any issues, that's when she is likely not have screamed as the bullets would have been a complete shock.
It would seem the defence counsel may not have not given the full picture to their pathologist. That Botha may have been just asked just to base his report on Reeva not being 'primed'. We've seen the same with Dixon with the tests and photos he took.
That was one bit I thought might have been genuine - I think Nel is right, that's what he screamed at Reeva. I think he had trouble getting that out in court because it was the crucial moment, when he went into a rage state. He could rehearse all he liked that it was shouted at an intruder, but he can't remove that real emotion.
The sobbing voice throughout seemed contrived though. Reminded me of that couple who burned six children to death.
I have been reminded of that more than once in this trail.
His fingers in ears, head down is also transparent because sometimes he does it in the wrong places ;-)
....
BIB. I think so as well. It seems as though Nel's tactics are to keep his powder dry until the last possible moment. Let the defence lay out the latest version and then Nel will create confusion and uncertainty by microscopically laying out the differences between bail application/plea/evidence. I think he is aware of the significance of the light in the toilet and bathroom and the timing of screams heard. But I am sure Roux is equally aware of them. The animation could well be decisive as once it is laid out by the defence there will be no more wriggle room. Dangerous for the defence if they don't get it spot on and with that in mind it is just possible they may not go with it.
It must be an odd case for Nel where it does seem as though there are constant small shifts in the defence's version of events and he is having to cover these bases.
IMO the light in the bathroom/loo and the screaming will become the two main issues which will settle this case one way or the other. A woman's scream during or after the first bangs; case closed. Faint light in loo at same times = same result.
Yes, and the bloke sat there in court crying, rubbing his eyes but - no tears! Just like OP. ;-)
03:16 He fired the fatal shots or bashed the door with the bat.
Rips out door panels
Locates key & opens door
Hugs Reeva as she lay in the toilet.
Struggles to pull her out of the toilet.
Lays her softly on a towel in the bathroom.
Tries Reeva's phone, can't gain access.
Goes to bedroom to collect his phones.
03:18:14 His phone switched on.
03:19:03 Calls Stander for assistance.
03:19:27 Call ends
03:20:03 Calls Netcare
03:21::06 Call ended
Runs downstairs to open front door
Fiddles with bedroom door to get second door open
03:21:33 Calls security, can't remember doing so.
03:21:40 Ends call without speaking.
03:22:05 Security call Pistorius, (I'm fine)
03:22:17 Call ended
Picks up Reeva and carries her downstairs.
This is not an exact record of the sequence of events, but based on the version from Pistorious where is the time for him to apply first aid in the bathroom? Most of the time he's either on the phone or running about, with Reeva left lying on the bathroom floor.
Wouldn't he have screamed more when he discovered the body, especially as he wouldn't have known how badly injured she was until he got access?
I've noticed that. Also he very often covers his entire face...that is nothing to do with crying or not wanting to see, he doesn't want to be seen. He's even used his handkerchief opened out to cover his whole face. I'd say he's aware that there are experts there who will pick up on his facial expressions and conceals them at various times in case he gives something away.
He's tailored his screaming to fit with the prosecutors witnesses.
Roux then says they heard OP and not Reeva. imo.
ETA the screaming stopped after the last shot.
Doesn't his training season start in November? Just that I read he trains and lives in Italy during that season.
I think this correct.
The screaming in the toilet before the shots is extremely odd. The screaming whilst running around is very odd indeed.
And then to STOP screaming the minute he sees Reeva's smashed body, again.
You'd think the sight of it and the knowledge of what had happened would more probably have started him screaming.
The whole account of his behaviour is counter intuitive, and seems tailored to 'fit'.
This may not be proof, but it doesn't half stretch the boundaries of the believable.
Yes Kap, this is very odd.
Something that's always puzzled me is that they (the Standers?) told him to "Put her down" and he did. There was something about him holding her hip and trying to keep her airway open, but that seems to have been abandoned when Dr Stipp tried to help her. He walked away at some point - I haven't been in such a tragic situation, for which I'm thankful, but I don't think I would leave the body of a person I loved. I'd be holding on to them and not want to let go.
True. It's a shame he let it all go to his head, though, isn't it? Peel away the layers of this 'icon' and look at what is revealed.....
My impression of OP throughout this whole trial has been that he seems to feel greatly inconvenienced and genuinely outraged that this should be happening to him. To this day, and underneath all that snivelling chagrin for M'Lady's benefit, there still seems to be a "do you KNOW who you're dealing with here??!" vibe going on with him.
You'd think both sides could agree on the results of the post mortem but Pistorius wants to contest every report & piece of evidence. Botha the defence pathologist could not flag up any differences in Perumal's & Prof. Symmonds post mortem reports, just that Symmonds was more detailed and it was the one Botha chose to use.
The state has laid its reports before the court, the defence hasn't. I don't think Dixon was even asked to provide reports on most of his efforts.
The defence seem to have misled their own experts as to the facts, or their experts were fully aware and provided answers that did not fit the facts. Botha gave his opinion Reeva would not scream based on not knowing Reeva had been 'primed' by Pistorius shouting at her?
Then you have Dixon's various tests, in the end he seemed to be saying, 'I was only following orders'.
I don't think Nel has to cause any confusion, Pistorius has done that himself with his clear and detailed evidence.
I suspect the defence ballistics expert might have had his finger in a number of pies relating to this case.
Agreed, the accounts of his screaming and shouting both before and after discovery of Reeva don't sound right. It has definitely been rehearsed and he definitely wanted to tell it from start to finish - interruptions and going back and forwards unsettled him badly, suggesting he was telling a rehearsed story that wasn't all true.
I honestly don't know about the moment of discovery though. I can see someone just crumpling up in horror at the sight, whether he'd killed her in a rage (which maybe would evaporate at that moment) or was faced with the horrible realisation that it was her and not an intruder.
From the evidence so far I don't believe he had loving feelings for her, so whatever caused him to kill her, the emotion that he is displaying now is a mixture of remorse at what he did (knowing or not) and self-pity. I guess I judge the balance of those to be a little more on the side of self-pity on his behaviour and what he's said.
He did not whisper to Reeva, he did not speak to Reeva at all.
The only reference he makes to shouting. Is when going down the passage he tells the intruder /s to get out. And a little later he shouts to Reeva to call the police.
The prolonged screaming and crying and yelling is a later addition.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/19/oscar-pistorius-defence-statement
Obviously the Pretorian Plod made a mess of the investigation which puts some of their evidence in serious doubt. I'm no legal expert so I don't know if that means m'lady could toss all of their evidence or just that of certain officers.
I could easily toss all the photo evidence of anything that wasn't nailed down or screwed down in what was left of that DIY disaster of a house. So that just leaves the door.
The door has been tramped over by men in big boots, reconstructed, bits of it lost, broken again as it was manhandled off the scene and then left hanging around in the office of the sports coach and one time amateur policeman Colonel Van Rensburg, for all and sundry to interfere with.
OP admits to making the 4 holes so we can rule out attempts to secure OP’s guilt by corrupt plod poking extra holes in it, giant South African woodworm or the Coach using it for target practice. Someone could have cracked through the bullet hole either accidentally or on purpose after the event so we cannot rely on this either.
The poor door was also poked, prodded, levered and lazily dusted in the courtroom as well but I don’t think this changed it much.
A cricket bat bashing a door sounds too much like the remixed beat of A Gun Jamming with DJ Dr Dix and his Gun Range Crew so the order of bangs cannot be determined anyone other than Oscar himself.
So at best guess it’s SHOTS then BAT.
It looks like no one is going to be able to rely on hearing a woman’s bloodcurdling screams either so we can all rest easy the next time we hear a female in distress and just pull the curtains and go back to bed.
That effectively makes the audio evidence of all ear witnesses so far unreliable.
So we are left just with OP’s story and what the Stipps saw.
The accused has accused them of lying but I still want to judge for myself.
Mrs Stipp says she saw OP in the bathroom window when she could not have, as the defence will attempt to prove later. She did retract this but there is now a whiff of suspicion about her reliability.
She lied about holding open her right curtain for the photographer and possibly also about always having her curtains parted down at the bottom. Although we cannot rule out that she pulled these only after seeing a suspicious bearded Geologist lurking about in her bushes taking hundreds of digital photographs.
She seemed a bit “too” definite about what she saw so with everything else let’s rule out her evidence as unreliable too.
That leaves Mr Stipp.
Taaa Daaa. The Mighty Mr Stipp To the Rescue…..
If he was a lone witness without the influence of the now officially evil Mrs Stipp I would be happy to rely on his recollection of hearing the shots, then seeing the bathroom light and hearing the screaming moments after the shots. We have no 3.02 evidence time now as Mrs Stipp is out of the picture so we can only fix the time by the sets of bangs then arrival of security and generally being there for the incident. The phone call also helps here.
You also have to question if Mrs Stipp could have tainted Mr Stipp’s evidence. Now I think Mrs Stipp would frighten me into believing anything but I think Mr Stipp is made of sterner stuff.
They must have discussed what happened which resulted in Mrs Stipp “seeing” OP in the bathroom window. I am convinced he saw a light in the toilet but others are convinced otherwise so lets say he only saw a light in the bathroom. I am convinced he saw that light straight after the first shots. That is reliable because the beginning of the event is fixed and very memorable. You hear a noise you see a light. That cannot have been planted by subsequent conversation with other witnesses IMO.
So there is now just OP and Mr Stipp’s version.
Ding ding…..Round 1…
One version fits with the other perfectly except for when the bathroom light was put on.
In this respect OP says he cannot be sure when it was put on. Stipp says it was on when the first screams started after the shots. These coincide with OP’s screams to call Reeva after the gun went off whilst pointed at the door. I think the light was on just after the shots.
Timeline after shots: OP says after standing stunned for an unknown period he backed up the corridor to the bed. It was pitch dark. It is impossible that he could be mistaken about this as he describes still being scared and feeling around for Reeva in the dark and feeling behind the curtains. If there was a light in the bathroom then he would have been able to see something but his story says otherwise. After he returns to the bathroom with growing suspicions that the intruder is Reeva he could well have been brave enough to turn on the light so lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he put it on then. It does not quite make sense with some of what he says subsequently but it cannot be ruled out. So his first return to the bathroom is the earliest the light could be on.
Now it is down to could OP have got the light on before Stipp heard the bangs, talked to his wife, got up and walked about 2m to the small balcony. I do not know but I am assuming at this point that our only remaining witness does not suffer from cataracts or is so riddled with arthritis that he can only move at a snail’s pace. I’m sure the eagle eyed members of Team Roux would have spotted this sort of thing.
Ding ding….Round 2…
Roux tried hard to stretch this time period from “moments” to “a few seconds.” Bless him he tried
to throw out a few random times to see if he could jog Stipps memory “10 seconds, half a minute, 2 minutes, 2 hours.” But Stipp was not happy and said just a few seconds, not minutes. So let’s give the benefit of the doubt to OP and say it was a full minute.
OP now has a minute to do the “Finding Reeva” round trip. Well I tried acting it out myself “12 Angry Men” style and I have to disagree with Mr Stipp it didn’t take minutes, it only took me 45 seconds. Uh oh.
So OP could have made the trip in the time it took Stipp to get to the balcony and see the bathroom light.
So OP story could be true. It takes a whole series of improbable coincidences but it is possible.
The only thing I have a real problem with now is how he could have either been frightened into firing or that the gun just went off.
Ding ding….Final Round
Lets look into Oscar’s head at the time….
BANG!
Oscar’s brain: “Hey! Oscar that was your gun going off”
Oscar “I don’t even have a gun”
Oscar’s brain “I’m your brain idiot, I know you have a gun”
Oscar “Okay, wow I must have fired, let me just check….”
BANG!
Oscar “Yeah, that was me”
Oscar’s brain “Wait though, was that you being scared of that noise or did the gun just go off by itself – lets test it……BOOO!”
BANG!
Oscar “Jesus, what was that!?”
Oscar’s brain “Yeah could have been the fright. Lets check if this thing will go off by itself….”
BANG!
Oscar’s brain “Yep. Could have been that as well”
Oscar “I’m hungry….oooh, me made holes in door”
The first shot could be caused by a fright or by accident. No one would then pause for a second or two then fire three more shots for the same reason. It is just not possible.
So he fired deliberately at an intruder with the knowledge that he could have hit them. So whatever that amounts to in SA law is what he should pay for IMO.
Sorry Reeva
I agree. He resents having to have a trial: he doesn't think he should be there: he's had to put his life on hold(his own words) and most of all he totally resents Nel questioning him, doesn't think he needs to answer to anyone. Everyone should just accept his word that it was a terrible accident.
Do you think Roux knows the shots came first?
Reading up on gun forums, I noticed in discussions of the phenomenon (nothing to do with this case) that there was a broad consensus that the 'crack' can sound like a shot itself and may be equally loud.
This, added to the ricochet echo of the shots, may account for the confusion over the number of shots fired in this case.
Anyone who's been shooting knows that it is sometimes difficult to tell what is shot and what is echo.
It's possible that the first 4 'banging sounds' that Estelle Van der Merwe heard, and her husband believed were gunshots, was actually 2 plus 2 'cracks'.
Any timeline should include the first 'shots' heard around 3.00 am.
Estelle Van der Merwe heard '4 banging sounds' around that time, which her husband believed were gunshots.
Annette Stipp - looked at her clock radio at 3.02am, which she said was 3 or 4 minutes fast. She decided to get up for a drink and just as she was about to sit up, she heard what sounded like 3 gunshots.