I believe the fight between OP and RS did not begin in the bedroom
The fight was downstairs in the living room / kitchen (it's an open plan)
Estelle van der Merwe could hear the argument between 2AM and 3AM
It was shown in court that she can hear clearly what happens towards the front of OP's house but nothing (except the gunshots) from the back of OP's house.
She couldn't hear RS's bloodcurdling screams, the cries for help, etc...
Did Estelle testify.. I don't think so?? I am losing the plot with this trial
yes may well have started downstairs, hence Reeva eating late... kitchen/lounge area...
I believe the fight between OP and RS did not begin in the bedroom
The fight was downstairs in the living room / kitchen (it's an open plan)
Estelle van der Merwe could hear the argument between 2AM and 3AM
It was shown in court that she can hear clearly what happens towards the front of OP's house but nothing (except the gunshots) from the back of OP's house.
She couldn't hear RS's bloodcurdling screams, the cries for help, etc...
we can only guess.......... but Mr Mike said he didn't hear a woman's screams at all or arguing, he was next door ! so who knows.
did u see it, seemed crazy .. which is the most dangerous charge, surely discharging a firearm!!
Lots of interesting snippets on that page, from past issues of "The Week"
Well I can see some logic behind it
In a country where firearms are common thing…
Discharging firearms in public : accidental discharges will happen and if the discharge causes injury, property damage or death then additional charges can be brought up.
Illegal possession of ammunition : what you really don't want is people without proper license to own firearms and bullets… and since additional charges would not be possible on simple possession then you give a much longer sentence to begin with.
Can you imagine, OP's father did not want to corroborate OP's story that could land him 15 years in jail !!!!
Discharging firearms in public : accidental discharges will happen and if the discharge causes injury, property damage or death then additional charges can be brought up.
Illegal possession of ammunition : what you really don't want is people without proper license to own firearms and bullets… and since additional charges would not be possible on simple possession then you give a much longer sentence to begin with.
Can you imagine, OP's father did not want to corroborate OP's story that could land him 15 years in jail !!!!
yes exactly, yes I see your point when u look at the bigger picture
as u say, guns commonplace so perhaps it does make sense.. yes....
C'mon barrbs… yes she testified Day 2 session 3 and 4
Thanks yes,
I was here this pm and Woolie has done my head in a bit the last two days...
yes I will rewatch them to refresh ;-) and just remind exactly what she said,
oh yes I do remember
poor woollie must say he stood up pretty well again Nel in the end, but what a shambles.... Roux must be losing his marbles bringing on people so incoherent
Sandy.. they are really funny.. I am getting coffee and will check them all out, love the first one!!
I love the door lock told hubby I want one of those!!
you have to have some humour with this trial or we will all need therapy !!
did u see it, seemed crazy .. which is the most dangerous charge, surely discharging a firearm!!
Lots of interesting snippets on that page, from past issues of "The Week"
During the course of the trial, the athlete’s version has changed from “putative self-defence” to “involuntary action”. He was not able to use the basic self-defence principle because there was no actual threat to his life. Under South African law, “putative self-defence” means that the accused genuinely believed their life was threatened and used “reasonable means” to protect themselves.
Pistorius has tried to convince the court that his vulnerability led him to believe his life was in danger. He claimed he had previously been a victim of violent crime and told the court he was “extremely fearful, overcome with a sense of terror and vulnerability” in the moments before he shot the gun. However, the athlete has also denied that he “consciously” pulled the trigger, insisting it was an “accident”. He told the court “I fired my firearm before I could think.”
Legal analysts have warned that switching his explanation from putative self-defence to involuntary action could create serious problems for his defence. Involuntary action is usually used in cases of sleepwalking, epileptic seizures or similar episodes.
So what the charges against Pistorius :
Premeditated murder
Pistorious currently faces a possible mandatory life sentence for premeditated murder – up to 25 years unless there are extraordinary circumstances. However, the legal definition of “premeditated” is a grey area. Eric Macramalla, a legal analyst at TSN, says it is usually reserved for more “robust planning” and generally does not include “an intent that materialised right before a crime was committed”. He points to a case in South Africa, State v Raath, in which a father forced his son to remove a firearm from a safe to kill the son's mother. The court ruled that this was not sufficient to constitute premeditated murder.
Murder
If Judge Thokozile Masipa does not believe Pistorius planned to kill Steenkamp, she could still convict him for the lesser charge of murder, says Macramalla. This would mean Pistorius intended to kill Steenkamp, with no planning element needed, and would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years.
Culpable homicide
Even if Pistorius is acquitted for murder, he could still face a conviction of culpable homicide, meaning he “negligently” killed Steenkamp, explains Macramalla. Sentencing is discretionary, varying from fines to prison time of up to 15 years. Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, legal analyst for the Washington Times, says the judge would need to assign a degree of negligence. “The higher the negligence, the longer the prison term,” he says.
Discharging firearms in public
Pistorius is also charged with two counts of discharging a firearm in public. He allegedly fired a gun at a restaurant on 11 January 2013 and again through a car sunroof on 30 November 2012. He could face five years in prison on each count.
Illegal possession of ammunition
This charge has only been touched on very briefly in court. Pistorius is charged with being in possession of ammunition for a firearm for which he does not have a licence. The prescribed sentence on this count is 15 years in prison.:o:o
Thanks yes,
I was here this pm and Woolie has done my head in a bit the last two days...
yes I will rewatch them to refresh ;-) and just remind exactly what she said,
oh yes I do remember
poor woollie must say he stood up pretty well again Nel in the end, but what a shambles.... Roux must be losing his marbles bringing on people so incoherent
Wollie won't be made a fool as Dixon was
But his opinions don't make much sense and aren't very convincing or even probative
What I found very interesting is the manner the Defence approached their expert witnesses… they don't give a full mandate from OP's story and ask for a report…that would be dangerous to their case… so they ask a little bit at a time, in a piecemeal manner even when Trial is well under way…. so they can change the story without contaminating the experts testimony….
But his opinions don't make much sense and aren't very convincing or even probative
What I found very interesting is the manner the Defence approached their expert witnesses… they don't give a full mandate from OP's story and ask for a report…that would be dangerous to their case… so they ask a little bit at a time, in a piecemeal manner even when Trial is well under way…. so they can change the story without contaminating the experts testimony….
That Is a very astute observations yes!
yes I have found the approach puzzling.... as roux is no fool .....but I think you have hit the nail on the head...
Sandy.. they are really funny.. I am getting coffee and will check them all out, love the first one!!
I love the door lock told hubby I want one of those!!
you have to have some humour with this trial or we will all need therapy !!
Discharging firearms in public : accidental discharges will happen and if the discharge causes injury, property damage or death then additional charges can be brought up.
Illegal possession of ammunition : what you really don't want is people without proper license to own firearms and bullets… and since additional charges would not be possible on simple possession then you give a much longer sentence to begin with.
Can you imagine, OP's father did not want to corroborate OP's story that could land him 15 years in jail !!!!
I posted about him spending a possible 25 yrs in jail on the other three counts weeks ago and was told I was being unkind wanting a man to spend 25 yrs in jail
During the course of the trial, the athlete’s version has changed from “putative self-defence” to “involuntary action”. He was not able to use the basic self-defence principle because there was no actual threat to his life. Under South African law, “putative self-defence” means that the accused genuinely believed their life was threatened and used “reasonable means” to protect themselves.
Pistorius has tried to convince the court that his vulnerability led him to believe his life was in danger. He claimed he had previously been a victim of violent crime and told the court he was “extremely fearful, overcome with a sense of terror and vulnerability” in the moments before he shot the gun. However, the athlete has also denied that he “consciously” pulled the trigger, insisting it was an “accident”. He told the court “I fired my firearm before I could think.”
Legal analysts have warned that switching his explanation from putative self-defence to involuntary action could create serious problems for his defence. Involuntary action is usually used in cases of sleepwalking, epileptic seizures or similar episodes.
So what the charges against Pistorius :
Premeditated murder
Pistorious currently faces a possible mandatory life sentence for premeditated murder – up to 25 years unless there are extraordinary circumstances. However, the legal definition of “premeditated” is a grey area. Eric Macramalla, a legal analyst at TSN, says it is usually reserved for more “robust planning” and generally does not include “an intent that materialised right before a crime was committed”. He points to a case in South Africa, State v Raath, in which a father forced his son to remove a firearm from a safe to kill the son's mother. The court ruled that this was not sufficient to constitute premeditated murder.
Murder
If Judge Thokozile Masipa does not believe Pistorius planned to kill Steenkamp, she could still convict him for the lesser charge of murder, says Macramalla. This would mean Pistorius intended to kill Steenkamp, with no planning element needed, and would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years.
Culpable homicide
Even if Pistorius is acquitted for murder, he could still face a conviction of culpable homicide, meaning he “negligently” killed Steenkamp, explains Macramalla. Sentencing is discretionary, varying from fines to prison time of up to 15 years. Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, legal analyst for the Washington Times, says the judge would need to assign a degree of negligence. “The higher the negligence, the longer the prison term,” he says.
Discharging firearms in public
Pistorius is also charged with two counts of discharging a firearm in public. He allegedly fired a gun at a restaurant on 11 January 2013 and again through a car sunroof on 30 November 2012. He could face five years in prison on each count.
Illegal possession of ammunition
This charge has only been touched on very briefly in court. Pistorius is charged with being in possession of ammunition for a firearm for which he does not have a licence. The prescribed sentence on this count is 15 years in prison.:o:o
yes that really is a very interesting article... and informative, surprising.... and we wonder what the judge will make of him ,, what are we hedging bets on, sentence wise ??
I posted about him spending a possible 25 yrs in jail on the other three counts weeks ago and was told I was being unkind wanting a man to spend 25 yrs in jail
TBH ...I think Roux knows there is nothing to object o..
Nel is not being unfair, he is testing....
Roux knows how Nel cross examines... how did Roux not realise this guy was NOT up to the job, that is the amazing thing here...
Deep down Roux (although well paid) is a decent family man, he's spent enough time with OP to know the truth. Consciously or sub consciously, whether beyond his ability to manipulate the impossible, deep down like many he knows OP should pay the price of his actions.
Illegal possession of ammunition
This charge has only been touched on very briefly in court. Pistorius is charged with being in possession of ammunition for a firearm for which he does not have a licence. The prescribed sentence on this count is 15 years in prison.:o:o
Seems a bit bizarre that the sentence for culpable homicide varies from a fine to 15ys in jail....illegal possession of ammunition without an appropriate license carries a prescribed sentence of 15yrs!!
I hope people understand me when I say this but I did feel bad and a bit embarrassed with that social worker and I didnt want Nel to disproportionality go mental on her. She frustrated me because she was hell bent on making Oscar a victim while Reevas loved ones are sitting right there. But court case aside, she's been doing this work for over two decades now and it is a respectable job to show empathy and compassion. I'm sure she's a lovely woman but putting her on the stand was a big mistake by Roux. She seems quite naive and just wants to do good according to her point of view, but it wasn't good for the defence or her because it opened her up to criticism.
I get what you are saying, the experts witnesses seem to fair game for Nel and so they should, and if you read between the lines they all know each other.
Roux should not put her on the stand, however good her intentions, its not her fault.
I did get the impression she was telling it how she saw it, without fudging, that all can you ask of any witness.
Yes it's a guess BUT entirely based on witness testimony… so not so easily dismissed.
Mike was sound asleep throughout the whole thing so was the other neighbor Mika
well, if only it were that simple. The neighbours didn't all have windows and balcony doors open, some had aircon, some didn't , hot still night, quiet , noise carries, witnesses varied in how deep they would have slept, when they were woken up and at what point , while things were escalating in OP's house, we can only infer, as will the Judge, based all the circumstantial evidence, forensics, ballistics, and which version sounds most probable.
Cue the psychologist/psychiatric report, that will come next, you can bet on it, it will be all OP has now to try influence Judge's ruling.
Seems a bit bizarre that the sentence for culpable homicide varies from a fine to 15ys in jail....illegal possession of ammunition without an appropriate license carries a prescribed sentence of 15yrs!!
I know , that's what barbarella said too !! very tough over there on guns and gun crime ! OP has every reason to be stressed out !
Comments
Did Estelle testify.. I don't think so?? I am losing the plot with this trial
yes may well have started downstairs, hence Reeva eating late... kitchen/lounge area...
we can only guess.......... but Mr Mike said he didn't hear a woman's screams at all or arguing, he was next door ! so who knows.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=oscar+pistorius+AND+cartoons+AND+jokes&biw=1366&bih=604&tbm=isch&imgil=8WsskdSvDJoEzM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcTldlKXF8AIqBNRKCOfUXCjsuTmN7OGE897pOIQBbO9AKRFegRH%253B301%253B329%253Bg_ZXWN1CtOO8DM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.funny-joke-pictures.com%25252F2013%25252F02%25252Ffunny-news-pistorius-escape-joke.html&source=iu&usg=__DDMlb8CONP4Jpa6Dzgivckj6_QM%3D&sa=X&ei=_F1tU4bwFInpygPo94HQBA&ved=0CDAQ9QEwAQ#facrc=_&imgrc=8WsskdSvDJoEzM%253A%3Bg_ZXWN1CtOO8DM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252F4.bp.blogspot.com%252F-XkMaG-GWiXI%252FUSeg5Q9yLVI%252FAAAAAAAAI40%252F_zCKfFRWZKo%252Fs1600%252Ffunny-pistorius-escapes.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.funny-joke-pictures.com%252F2013%252F02%252Ffunny-news-pistorius-escape-joke.html%3B301%3B329
New South African toilet door lock
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=oscar+pistorius+AND+cartoons+AND+new+south+african+door+lock&tbm=isch&imgil=in4Mo-nEKipEMM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcQiZzqB1v4z5KJ0gbBxtE0-QESxCjTMWXT1I1I18-poOwPG-56TRA%253B221%253B320%253BYJ0ckdNUndAziM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.veooz.com%25252Fphotos%25252FpGzvkNk.html&source=iu&usg=__B4yUUJFAr5a1lUoR5NF_U8EZtKc%3D&sa=X&ei=pF9tU9OIBdHI0AXbsIHYCg&ved=0CDsQ9QEwAw&biw=1366&bih=604#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=in4Mo-nEKipEMM%253A%3BYJ0ckdNUndAziM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fpbs.twimg.com%252Fmedia%252FBisMm-MCEAAbHCT.jpg%253Amedium%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.veooz.com%252Fphotos%252FpGzvkNk.html%3B221%3B320
Well I can see some logic behind it
In a country where firearms are common thing…
Discharging firearms in public : accidental discharges will happen and if the discharge causes injury, property damage or death then additional charges can be brought up.
Illegal possession of ammunition : what you really don't want is people without proper license to own firearms and bullets… and since additional charges would not be possible on simple possession then you give a much longer sentence to begin with.
Can you imagine, OP's father did not want to corroborate OP's story that could land him 15 years in jail !!!!
C'mon barrbs… yes she testified Day 2 session 3 and 4
as u say, guns commonplace so perhaps it does make sense.. yes....
Yes it's a guess BUT entirely based on witness testimony… so not so easily dismissed.
Mike was sound asleep throughout the whole thing so was the other neighbor Mika
Thanks yes,
I was here this pm and Woolie has done my head in a bit the last two days...
yes I will rewatch them to refresh ;-) and just remind exactly what she said,
oh yes I do remember
poor woollie must say he stood up pretty well again Nel in the end, but what a shambles.... Roux must be losing his marbles bringing on people so incoherent
Nite Cg
I love the door lock told hubby I want one of those!!
you have to have some humour with this trial or we will all need therapy !!
Think this warrants posting ! thanks barrbarrella, very interesting !
During the course of the trial, the athlete’s version has changed from “putative self-defence” to “involuntary action”. He was not able to use the basic self-defence principle because there was no actual threat to his life. Under South African law, “putative self-defence” means that the accused genuinely believed their life was threatened and used “reasonable means” to protect themselves.
Pistorius has tried to convince the court that his vulnerability led him to believe his life was in danger. He claimed he had previously been a victim of violent crime and told the court he was “extremely fearful, overcome with a sense of terror and vulnerability” in the moments before he shot the gun. However, the athlete has also denied that he “consciously” pulled the trigger, insisting it was an “accident”. He told the court “I fired my firearm before I could think.”
Legal analysts have warned that switching his explanation from putative self-defence to involuntary action could create serious problems for his defence. Involuntary action is usually used in cases of sleepwalking, epileptic seizures or similar episodes.
So what the charges against Pistorius :
Premeditated murder
Pistorious currently faces a possible mandatory life sentence for premeditated murder – up to 25 years unless there are extraordinary circumstances. However, the legal definition of “premeditated” is a grey area. Eric Macramalla, a legal analyst at TSN, says it is usually reserved for more “robust planning” and generally does not include “an intent that materialised right before a crime was committed”. He points to a case in South Africa, State v Raath, in which a father forced his son to remove a firearm from a safe to kill the son's mother. The court ruled that this was not sufficient to constitute premeditated murder.
Murder
If Judge Thokozile Masipa does not believe Pistorius planned to kill Steenkamp, she could still convict him for the lesser charge of murder, says Macramalla. This would mean Pistorius intended to kill Steenkamp, with no planning element needed, and would result in a compulsory sentence of 15 years.
Culpable homicide
Even if Pistorius is acquitted for murder, he could still face a conviction of culpable homicide, meaning he “negligently” killed Steenkamp, explains Macramalla. Sentencing is discretionary, varying from fines to prison time of up to 15 years. Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, legal analyst for the Washington Times, says the judge would need to assign a degree of negligence. “The higher the negligence, the longer the prison term,” he says.
Discharging firearms in public
Pistorius is also charged with two counts of discharging a firearm in public. He allegedly fired a gun at a restaurant on 11 January 2013 and again through a car sunroof on 30 November 2012. He could face five years in prison on each count.
Illegal possession of ammunition
This charge has only been touched on very briefly in court. Pistorius is charged with being in possession of ammunition for a firearm for which he does not have a licence. The prescribed sentence on this count is 15 years in prison.
Wollie won't be made a fool as Dixon was
But his opinions don't make much sense and aren't very convincing or even probative
What I found very interesting is the manner the Defence approached their expert witnesses… they don't give a full mandate from OP's story and ask for a report…that would be dangerous to their case… so they ask a little bit at a time, in a piecemeal manner even when Trial is well under way…. so they can change the story without contaminating the experts testimony….
That Is a very astute observations yes!
yes I have found the approach puzzling.... as roux is no fool .....but I think you have hit the nail on the head...
Coffee ????????
I posted about him spending a possible 25 yrs in jail on the other three counts weeks ago and was told I was being unkind wanting a man to spend 25 yrs in jail
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=72264064&postcount=1758
yes that really is a very interesting article... and informative, surprising.... and we wonder what the judge will make of him ,, what are we hedging bets on, sentence wise ??
It wasn't me I assure you
Deep down Roux (although well paid) is a decent family man, he's spent enough time with OP to know the truth. Consciously or sub consciously, whether beyond his ability to manipulate the impossible, deep down like many he knows OP should pay the price of his actions.
Seems a bit bizarre that the sentence for culpable homicide varies from a fine to 15ys in jail....illegal possession of ammunition without an appropriate license carries a prescribed sentence of 15yrs!!
Roux should not put her on the stand, however good her intentions, its not her fault.
I did get the impression she was telling it how she saw it, without fudging, that all can you ask of any witness.
Cue the psychologist/psychiatric report, that will come next, you can bet on it, it will be all OP has now to try influence Judge's ruling.