She is supposedly Reevas best friend along with the Myers sisters. I don't know though, she's in a relationship with Oscars best friend Justin Divaris. I've said this before everybody is so linked together in a incestual way, it makes me feel a bit iffy to be honest. It makes me think who truly were Reevas friends.
Aside from Reeva they all seemed like a bunch of arrogant, unlikeable people to me. I wouldn't be surprised if on some way Reeva was pushed into being a relationship with Oscar.
I've never seen Samantha at the trial any day, a bit strange but who knows. This is going to sound pathetic of me but just going by pictures and such, Samantha has a very mean, intimidating bitch face. She seems untrustworthy.
why you asking such personal qusetions? Don't you have a sensitive bone in your body ffs?
I think that's a little unfair...if we share personal info that we think gives some insight into the trial you must expect someone to ask you aout it, if they think it has some relevance. I don't think asking how long you were together is that 'personal' given what you'd felt comfortale to share on the forum.
Yes, but as someone said on here a few days ago, an interrogator like Nel can make even the most innocent of people sound guilty. It's how they operate.
This is also doing their job.
To expect prosecutors OR defence teams to modify their behaviour because it doesn't t fit with an individual's or societies ideals of 'fair play or decorum' is ridiculous imo.
Everyone is viewing the trial through the prism of their experience, and for some their pre-conceived ideas of the defendant. It is our experience that shapes our opinions and outlook.
Some ill have experience of domestic violence, others may have had a great admiration for the man or believe he's hot etc etc
I see some people claiming to be objective. This is impossible unless your mind was a completely blank slate when the trial started.
I think you can make an effort to be objective though, even if you have pre-conceived ideas and past experiences. I've read dozens on comments on here from people who believed totally in his guilt before the trial even started. I find that bizarre.
Interesting that the pro-OP people (that are getting fewer and fewer) have nothing other than complaints about Nel and his "underhand ways". Why the hell should that matter? Nel is not on trial for murder, OP is. It's OP's answers and demeanour that matter.
But, to be fair, what else do they have at this stage?
I hate the term Pro and Anti, it's disgusting that peoples questions and opinions become such. It's an open debate in which 'thought's, questions and thinking' should be appreciated if put in the right manner.
This is a trial in which the the judge should be thinking along the terms that could often be reflected by just ordinary people's opinions on here, that does not make the judge anti or pro it makes her in the position to consider all aspects of the case, what is presented and how she deems such.
It the cord wasn't long enough then why didn't Nel say so. Why didn't he say 'We've measured the cord and it won't reach'? Answer: because it's not been measured and Nel was just bluffing based on a rather poor misreading of the photos.
I actually think the cords are long enough...but OP was`t emphatic enough in making his point... he should have said it`s my room and I know where the fans go and where the relevant sockets are....but he did`t....OP will probably win this point on a technicality but I still think his lack of absolute certainty wont have gone un-noticed
Who would he be discussing these "two liars" with and why? If he's only been told recently then it's only a small circle of people he has spoken to, and I'd say it's impossible he doesn't know who told him, if someone did.
We agree it's not impossible for the info not to have weaved it's way to OP. And agree with him not knowing the informer. However, he may not have wanted to implicate the informer. (I have read/heard he implicates some people)
Stipp said that not only was she dead, she had been dead for a while her eyes were drying over and becoming milky? All that crap about going into the garden shouting at a doctor to help her as she was dying, that the doctor was incompetent etc just looks increasingly terrible in light of his continuing accusations today. He looks and sounds a very foolish man who should shut up .
It the cord wasn't long enough then why didn't Nel say so. Why didn't he say 'We've measured the cord and it won't reach'? Answer: because it's not been measured and Nel was just bluffing based on a rather poor misreading of the photos.
He didn't misread them, he got OP to be very certain on something that isn't true. And to reveal that he is very likely not to have put them there by going on about how it could reach and he would believe a measurement or something, instead of the perfectly natural truthful response of 'I know, I put them there'.
Yes but they don't have to prove a fight…so what's the point.
If Prosecution convinces the Judge that OP's version is fabricated and reconstructed from the evidence, fight or no fight, he will be found guilty of premed murder.
Absolutely. If he is considered to have tried to cover up anything, then it's considered the highest form or murder in SA, not 'premed', but Dolus Directus
Clearly you don't recall the endless bitching about Roux and Oldwage that went on during the prosecution's case?
I vividly recall the absolutely extreme trashing of the Stipps because of one, properly recorded change in her testimony, and one photograph that had hardly anything to do with anything.
The same people doing that are extraordinarily flexible with OP whose behaviour, proven lies and vacillations are LEGION, and who has changed his account many times.
But these people are 'objective' and 'neutral' of course.;-)
A lot of people who sussed OP pretty early on actually LIKED Roux, even though he was VERY hard on the prosecution witnesses.
We have the gamut of opinion on here kap, 'objectivity' can't be claimed by any of the variants.
his ex girlfriend - she was a witness and' testified to Oscar's temper, and was in the car when he shot through the sun roof of a car, and that's one of the misuse of firearms charges Oscar's up for as well as other Counts.
I suspect he's feeling extremely doubtful about saying anything in the witness box as he knows every single word could be pounced on and used against him by the insidious Nel.
But if you knew something as a fact and could get one over that pesky Nel...
I thought the pose was very contrived and designed to irritate the witness. It's just unseemly. I cannot imagine it happening in a British court.
If it helps, I have reAd on various twitter feeds that OP is not looking at Nel at all. He is looking at the exhibits and M'Lady. So OP will not be affected by the leg thing.
I think that's a little unfair...if we share personal info that we think gives some insight into the trial you must expect someone to ask you aout it, if they think it has some relevance. I don't think asking how long you were together is that 'personal' given what you'd felt comfortale to share on the forum.
Thanks. I wasn't being rude, or didn't intend to be. I was just interested. If Steenkamp and Pistorius had been together for a while I would be more inclined to believe he shot her deliberately. But 12 weeks is a very short period of time, especially as they both had busy lives and she wasn't even staying there regularly.
She is supposedly Reevas best friend along with the Myers sisters. I don't know though, she's in a relationship with Oscars best friend Justin Divaris. I've said this before everybody is so linked together in a incestual way, it makes me feel a bit iffy to be honest. It makes me think who truly were Reevas friends.
Aside from Reeva they all seemed like a bunch of arrogant, unlikeable people to me. I wouldn't be surprised if on some way Reeva was pushed into being a relationship with Oscar.
I've never seen Samantha at the trial any day, a bit strange but who knows. This is going to sound pathetic of me but just going by pictures and such, Samantha has a very mean, intimidating bitch face. She seems untrustworthy.
If it helps, I have reAd on various twitter feeds that OP is not looking at Nel at all. He is looking at the exhibits and M'Lady. So OP will not be affected by the leg thing.
I did wonder if he was looking at Nel. Probably a wise move!
He doesn't need to keep changing his mind and confusing everyone especially himself.
Stick to the facts if he is innocent , he doesn't have to prove anything that's the prosecutors job but he can't help himself .
Are you listening to the way Nel takes his words and tries to turn them around? It's a classic prosecutor's trick. They even ask questions trying to make the defendant think they have information about something where they have nothing to see if they will fall for it.
That's one thing I really liked about Roux. He never tried to trick anybody, or twist their answers or ask compound questions. He went out of his way to make sure they had said what they wanted to. And further that he understood them correctly.
There are only a small percentage of lawyers who are like that.
I think you can make an effort to be objective though, even if you have pre-conceived ideas and past experiences. I've read dozens on comments on here from people who believed totally in his guilt before the trial even started. I find that bizarre.
And of course there are some who have always belived in his innocence and will continue to do so whatever the evidence.
We have the whole spectrum. Objectivity isn't necessarily the quality of those on either of the most extreme positions.
I deeply suspect, however, that those who thought that OP was guilty from the start, might just have good judgement.
Yes, but as someone said on here a few days ago, an interrogator like Nel can make even the most innocent of people sound guilty. It's how they operate.
Why keep using that word - it's inflammatory.
He is cross examining - that's his job to delve and dig until he gets to the truth.
It would be easier if only OP would give straight answers.
If he was doing anything extreme I'm sure M'Lady will tell him.
You are correct. He is scared of implicating himself. People like Pistorius never see their behaviour as wrong. They are right, everyone else is wrong. It's the nature of the beast.
I hope you survived and got out.
Yes it is these personality traits i think people are reacting to, it is becoming more and more apparent the longer he is in the stand..... I got my children and I out, took my ex to court got 7 convictions against him and a permanent restraining order
I hate the term Pro and Anti, it's disgusting that peoples questions and opinions become such. It's an open debate in which 'thought's, questions and thinking' should be appreciated if put in the right manner.
This is a trial in which the the judge should be thinking along the terms that could often be reflected by just ordinary people's opinions on here, that does not make the judge anti or pro it makes her in the position to consider all aspects of the case, what is presented and how she deems such.
Just a thought
I think the poster you are answering to was referring to the fact that those who are Pro Pistorius have put almost all other debaters on the thread on ignore. So they also cannot consider all the arguments. It seems to me that in a thread such as this people have an opinion , if you don't like it move on. If its offensive alert it. To form little gangs is incredible childish. That's my thoughts on it anyway:)
It was ludicrous that OP apparently was told after they had given evidence, so 3 weeks ago at most, yet he couldn't recall who had told him.
He said he has spoken to a lot of people so could not remember who. Did he not say earlier that he has been at his uncle's house and had not spoken to anyone? I think.
Comments
The wife or girlfriend (can't remember) of that guy who owned the car dealership and was a good friend of Reeva.
She asked Reeva if she would like to come and watch a movie with her on the 13th and Reeva said no, she would be staying at Oscar's.
I think that's right or pretty close.
She is supposedly Reevas best friend along with the Myers sisters. I don't know though, she's in a relationship with Oscars best friend Justin Divaris. I've said this before everybody is so linked together in a incestual way, it makes me feel a bit iffy to be honest. It makes me think who truly were Reevas friends.
Aside from Reeva they all seemed like a bunch of arrogant, unlikeable people to me. I wouldn't be surprised if on some way Reeva was pushed into being a relationship with Oscar.
I've never seen Samantha at the trial any day, a bit strange but who knows. This is going to sound pathetic of me but just going by pictures and such, Samantha has a very mean, intimidating bitch face. She seems untrustworthy.
This is also doing their job.
To expect prosecutors OR defence teams to modify their behaviour because it doesn't t fit with an individual's or societies ideals of 'fair play or decorum' is ridiculous imo.
I think you can make an effort to be objective though, even if you have pre-conceived ideas and past experiences. I've read dozens on comments on here from people who believed totally in his guilt before the trial even started. I find that bizarre.
Come off it, Oldfatwage is big and ugly enough to take it.
Oh
I hate the term Pro and Anti, it's disgusting that peoples questions and opinions become such. It's an open debate in which 'thought's, questions and thinking' should be appreciated if put in the right manner.
This is a trial in which the the judge should be thinking along the terms that could often be reflected by just ordinary people's opinions on here, that does not make the judge anti or pro it makes her in the position to consider all aspects of the case, what is presented and how she deems such.
Just a thought
I actually think the cords are long enough...but OP was`t emphatic enough in making his point... he should have said it`s my room and I know where the fans go and where the relevant sockets are....but he did`t....OP will probably win this point on a technicality but I still think his lack of absolute certainty wont have gone un-noticed
We agree it's not impossible for the info not to have weaved it's way to OP. And agree with him not knowing the informer. However, he may not have wanted to implicate the informer. (I have read/heard he implicates some people)
Completely agree.
He didn't misread them, he got OP to be very certain on something that isn't true. And to reveal that he is very likely not to have put them there by going on about how it could reach and he would believe a measurement or something, instead of the perfectly natural truthful response of 'I know, I put them there'.
Absolutely. If he is considered to have tried to cover up anything, then it's considered the highest form or murder in SA, not 'premed', but Dolus Directus
http://whosyourdadic.com/2014/04/09/the-oscar-pistorius-trial-what-did-he-do/
I vividly recall the absolutely extreme trashing of the Stipps because of one, properly recorded change in her testimony, and one photograph that had hardly anything to do with anything.
The same people doing that are extraordinarily flexible with OP whose behaviour, proven lies and vacillations are LEGION, and who has changed his account many times.
But these people are 'objective' and 'neutral' of course.;-)
A lot of people who sussed OP pretty early on actually LIKED Roux, even though he was VERY hard on the prosecution witnesses.
We have the gamut of opinion on here kap, 'objectivity' can't be claimed by any of the variants.
Haha!
his ex girlfriend - she was a witness and' testified to Oscar's temper, and was in the car when he shot through the sun roof of a car, and that's one of the misuse of firearms charges Oscar's up for as well as other Counts.
But if you knew something as a fact and could get one over that pesky Nel...
If it helps, I have reAd on various twitter feeds that OP is not looking at Nel at all. He is looking at the exhibits and M'Lady. So OP will not be affected by the leg thing.
Thanks. I wasn't being rude, or didn't intend to be. I was just interested. If Steenkamp and Pistorius had been together for a while I would be more inclined to believe he shot her deliberately. But 12 weeks is a very short period of time, especially as they both had busy lives and she wasn't even staying there regularly.
Does she have evil eyes?
I did wonder if he was looking at Nel. Probably a wise move!
I don't think Pistorius was that hesitant about the length of the cords anyway. He seemed fairly certain that it reached.
Are you listening to the way Nel takes his words and tries to turn them around? It's a classic prosecutor's trick. They even ask questions trying to make the defendant think they have information about something where they have nothing to see if they will fall for it.
That's one thing I really liked about Roux. He never tried to trick anybody, or twist their answers or ask compound questions. He went out of his way to make sure they had said what they wanted to. And further that he understood them correctly.
There are only a small percentage of lawyers who are like that.
Who doesn't!
And of course there are some who have always belived in his innocence and will continue to do so whatever the evidence.
We have the whole spectrum. Objectivity isn't necessarily the quality of those on either of the most extreme positions.
I deeply suspect, however, that those who thought that OP was guilty from the start, might just have good judgement.
Why keep using that word - it's inflammatory.
He is cross examining - that's his job to delve and dig until he gets to the truth.
It would be easier if only OP would give straight answers.
If he was doing anything extreme I'm sure M'Lady will tell him.
Yes it is these personality traits i think people are reacting to, it is becoming more and more apparent the longer he is in the stand..... I got my children and I out, took my ex to court got 7 convictions against him and a permanent restraining order
I think the poster you are answering to was referring to the fact that those who are Pro Pistorius have put almost all other debaters on the thread on ignore. So they also cannot consider all the arguments. It seems to me that in a thread such as this people have an opinion , if you don't like it move on. If its offensive alert it. To form little gangs is incredible childish. That's my thoughts on it anyway:)