Options

Oscar Pistorius Trial (Merged)

1157158160162163637

Comments

  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Wilkco wrote: »
    Did they say how much later the photo of the jeans with the outside showing was taken?

    Not that I remember. It wouldn't serve them. They just 'showed the picture' as though that meant something important.

    Roux has to counter with 'something', I suppose.

    I think OP and the defense want EVERYTHING that doesn't fit to be down to 'tampering', even when it makes no sense that it could be.
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ffawkes wrote: »
    Possible perhaps, but it's such a contrived set of circumstances that I have to say - improbable.

    Barely possible, incredibly unlikely. I think people underestimate the unlikeliness, the improbability of EACH step of OPs story. And how important it is in discerning the probable truth of it.

    Which is minimal.
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    porky42 wrote: »
    OP has already given a fairly convincing version of what happened in terms of his actions up until he fired the gun. I think it is clear that on his evidence alone he could have missed Reeva leaving the bedroom. At this stage an animation would probably cause more problems for OP re the duvet and fans than it would be worth.

    I don't think it was convincing at all:confused:

    The two fans, oh, er one fan, just inside the curtains, - OH, no not inside much further over and the little fan? Whoops, that's had to be forgotten even though OP made such a song and dance about it.


    The jeans over the LED light? And they just happened to be on the floor?

    And I could go on.

    For a long time.

    I particularly like the startled burglar SLAMS the toilet door which shows he was hiding in there.

    Oh and the ninja creeping up the bathroom hallway, the suicidal entry into the bathroom, all silent.

    And then the standing in the middle of the bathroom randomly screaming his head off over nothing.

    Really convincing.
  • Options
    daziechaindaziechain Posts: 12,124
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    porky42 wrote: »
    He would not be able to see her when he was facing away from the bed. He would not have been able to hear her with the working fan in his face. He would not be able to see the phone backlight when getting in the fans and before pulling the curtains and making the room pitch black. Its all perfectly possible and that is all it needs to be. This is not the weakest part of his story, that comes when he fires the shots and fails to put the light on when it was seen to be on
    He heard the window opening (or so he says) .. but didn't hear the flush or the lock which would have come after? He didn't go out onto the balcony so he would have seen the backlight especially on closing the doors.
    With balance issues he'd have had to clamber over that duvet .. he says he placed the large fan directly where the duvet was found .. not possible .. blood trail says different. Even he says that duvet on floor is not good for his 'version' .. remarkable that the accused would say anything like that .. he also says 'I would have' all the time rather than 'I did' ... bizarre behaviour.

    Also didn't one of the police officers testify that the balcony door was locked when they arrived (was it Van Rensburg?) and they had to find the key to open it? How does this fit in with OP going on it to shout for help .. are we to believe he then calmly locked it again :confused:

    I put it to Mr Pistorius that he's a liar, liar, knickers on fire!
  • Options
    Siobhan_MooreSiobhan_Moore Posts: 6,365
    Forum Member
    I don't think it was convincing at all:confused:

    The two fans, oh, er one fan, just inside the curtains, - OH, no not inside much further over and the little fan? Whoops, that's had to be forgotten even though OP made such a song and dance about it.


    The jeans over the LED light? And they just happened to be on the floor?

    And I could go on.

    For a long time.

    I particularly like the startled burglar SLAMS the toilet door which shows he was hiding in there.

    Oh and the ninja creeping up the bathroom hallway, the suicidal entry into the bathroom, all silent.

    And then the standing in the middle of the bathroom randomly screaming his head off over nothing.

    Really convincing.

    i shouldn't have done, but i did giggle at the bit in bold. it just doesn't all fit, does it?
  • Options
    Siobhan_MooreSiobhan_Moore Posts: 6,365
    Forum Member
    what actually is the point of the animation? that's a genuine question. how is it evidence? oscar has already given his version of events. is seeing it play out supposed to help? and wouldn't the animator have to be doing it right now, pretty much, due to how much his version changed during cross? so all nel has to establish is when the animation was done to be able to dismiss it as "tailoring evidence", right?
  • Options
    ffawkesffawkes Posts: 4,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Barely possible, incredibly unlikely. I think people underestimate the unlikeliness, the improbability of EACH step of OPs story. And how important it is in discerning the probable truth of it.

    Which is minimal.

    each single step in his story is improbable, for them all to have happened at the same time defies belief.

    And the fact they all happened on the very night he killed someone ...
  • Options
    Jeremy99Jeremy99 Posts: 5,476
    Forum Member
    That's really interesting.....do you think Roux wanted to use Dixon?

    My guess would be that, assuming Roux was at the time still in possession of his legal faculties, then I cannot image for one moment he would ordinarily have wanted Dixon to appear for the defence.

    He is fully aware of Gerrie Nel’s modus operandi and would know that the first thing Nel would do is to pounce on the fact Dixon was not qualified to appear as an expert witness in the areas he was giving evidence on. This is a cardinal sin of the first order!

    I can only assume there were external influences that reluctantly forced Roux into that situation. It has been written that Dixon was ‘highly thought of’ by the Pistorius family so this may have been a factor as ultimately they can call the tune. Perhaps it was something simple like Dixon was the only ‘expert’ they could get to appear for the defence.

    Who knows! What we do know is that it was a disaster and I would surmise that Roux knew it was coming just perhaps not to the extent it did!
  • Options
    curleys wifecurleys wife Posts: 3,986
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Do the police/state need to have investigated OP's version of what happened that night in order to eliminate it? Or is that too time-intensive an approach so they investigate what they view as the most likely version?
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    what actually is the point of the animation? that's a genuine question. how is it evidence? oscar has already given his version of events. is seeing it play out supposed to help? and wouldn't the animator have to be doing it right now, pretty much, due to how much his version changed during cross? so all nel has to establish is when the animation was done to be able to dismiss it as "tailoring evidence", right?

    They're cursing and reanimating as we speak. Or they may have to just cut bits of it that are no longer OPs version.

    I'm looking forward to seeing it.
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Do the police/state need to have investigated OP's version of what happened that night in order to eliminate it? Or is that too time-intensive an approach so they investigate what they view as the most likely version?

    I think they've demonstrated that they've investigated OPs version:confused:
  • Options
    teresagreenteresagreen Posts: 16,444
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Seems so...how frustrating that the prosecution case was closed and it was too late to present this counter evidence.

    I think Nel will be onto any defence witnesses who try to claim that OP was telling the truth.
  • Options
    josjos Posts: 9,992
    Forum Member
    Do the police/state need to have investigated OP's version of what happened that night in order to eliminate it? Or is that too time-intensive an approach so they investigate what they view as the most likely version?

    Surely they do what they do in England

    The police collect the evidence and present it to the CPS equivalent and then it's up to them what to charge him with and present the evidence to the court .
  • Options
    curleys wifecurleys wife Posts: 3,986
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think they've demonstrated that they've investigated OPs version:confused:
    But for all Mr Nel's ridicule of Mr Dixon, where is the state evidence/investigation that it wasn't dark in the bedroom, that Mr Stipp could have seen OP on his stumps through the bathroom window, that the door had been kicked with the prostheses etc? And where has the state preempted and addressed the likely eye/ear witness testimony for the defence? Or explored the possibility that a bat on a door can sound like a gunshot?
  • Options
    josjos Posts: 9,992
    Forum Member
    But for all Mr Nel's ridicule of Mr Dixon, where is the state evidence/investigation that it wasn't dark in the bedroom, that Mr Stipp could have seen OP on his stumps through the bathroom window, that the door had been kicked with the prostheses etc? And where has the state preempted and addressed the likely eye/ear witness testimony for the defence? Or explored the possibility that a bat on a door can sound like a gunshot?


    The prosecution has to submit the evidence it intends to present to court , in advance, to the defence, but the defence doesn't give the prosecution any advanced warning of what it intends to present to court.
  • Options
    konyakonya Posts: 5,004
    Forum Member
    Taken from the link I gave above;

    'Where were the coffee mugs? Oscar said that when they went to bed they each had a cup of coffee. What happened to the empty mugs? I saw no trace of them in the bedroom pictures. If they were later found in the kitchen, who had carried them downstairs, and when? '


    Have we talked about this on here???
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    But for all Mr Nel's ridicule of Mr Dixon, where is the state evidence/investigation that it wasn't dark in the bedroom, that Mr Stipp could have seen OP on his stumps through the bathroom window, that the door had been kicked with the prostheses etc? And where has the state preempted and addressed the likely eye/ear witness testimony for the defence? Or explored the possibility that a bat on a door can sound like a gunshot?

    They can't prove what they can't prove. They weren't there.

    What they can do is look at the evidence, and they have.

    And it doesn't fit OPs story.

    Strangely OPs story has now changed in order to 'fit' the evidence they have uncovered.

    People KNOW that gun shots are louder than bats. The defense have tried to say that the bat is as loud and sounds the same.

    Because most only heard the last bangs, and OP says those were the bat.

    They have earwitness testimony which they trust. They do seem impressive and have no axe to grind.

    The prosecution have looked at all the evidence and it DOESN'T work for OPs version.

    Thus they think he's lying.

    They are so sure that he is lying that they have charged him with murder, they have done this because of the evidence.

    IF it had all fitted, there wouldn't be a case.
  • Options
    RhumbatuggerRhumbatugger Posts: 85,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jos wrote: »
    The prosecution has to submit the evidence it intends to present to court , in advance, to the defence, but the defence doesn't give the prosecution any advanced warning of what it intends to present to court.

    There you go, that's important too. Thanks Jos.
  • Options
    josjos Posts: 9,992
    Forum Member
    konya wrote: »

    Interesting - mostly what we have discussed on here.
  • Options
    gettygetty Posts: 3,480
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Not long to wait really and it changes colour every 8 seconds.:D
    http://days.to/until/5-may
  • Options
    josjos Posts: 9,992
    Forum Member
    konya wrote: »
    Taken from the link I gave above;

    'Where were the coffee mugs? Oscar said that when they went to bed they each had a cup of coffee. What happened to the empty mugs? I saw no trace of them in the bedroom pictures. If they were later found in the kitchen, who had carried them downstairs, and when? '


    Have we talked about this on here???[/QUOTE]

    Don't think so. If it has been discussed it passed me by.
  • Options
    franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    getty wrote: »
    Not long to wait really and it changes colour every 8 seconds.:D
    http://days.to/until/5-may

    That's pretty.
  • Options
    teresagreenteresagreen Posts: 16,444
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I don't think it was convincing at all:confused:

    The two fans, oh, er one fan, just inside the curtains, - OH, no not inside much further over and the little fan? Whoops, that's had to be forgotten even though OP made such a song and dance about it.


    The jeans over the LED light? And they just happened to be on the floor?

    And I could go on.

    For a long time.

    I particularly like the startled burglar SLAMS the toilet door which shows he was hiding in there.

    Oh and the ninja creeping up the bathroom hallway, the suicidal entry into the bathroom, all silent.

    And then the standing in the middle of the bathroom randomly screaming his head off over nothing.

    Really convincing.

    You forgot to mention how he suddenly stopped screaming s soon as he found Reeva's bloody body with her brain hanging out. :D
  • Options
    curleys wifecurleys wife Posts: 3,986
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jos wrote: »
    The prosecution has to submit the evidence it intends to present to court , in advance, to the defence, but the defence doesn't give the prosecution any advanced warning of what it intends to present to court.
    But presumably the state would have seen all neighbours' statements and selected their witnesses from those? In which case they would be aware of what defence eye/ear witnesses would be likely to testify. Obviously the state doesn't have to refer to any witness versions that don't support their own case, but I just thought that by acknowledging and addressing anything likely to come up via a defence witness, the state would appear more confident and take any potential surprise/sting away from the defence.
This discussion has been closed.