I keep banging on about this and the message still doesn't get through. Once again:
THE STIPPS BOTH TESTIFIED THAT THERE WAS LIGHT IN THE TOILET THE WHOLE TIME FROM THE FIRST BANGS TO THE LAST
They BOTH said the light didn't change the whole time
This means that the door MUST have been broken into 15 minutes before the shots.
Therefore he KNEW she was in there and shot her anyway.
[/QUOTE]weve been watching the same trial with all due respect !!-
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.[/QUOTE]
what sentence do you guys think he will get, NOT WHAT YOU WANT HIM TO GET, WHAT YOU BELIEVE HE WILL GET?
I truly don't know. I think there's a very big chance he'll get off the premeditated murder.
I think if he does he should get around five to ten years.
But I have no faith that there is the will in SA for that to happen. And I foresee years of OP still out for some reason while they appeal and all the rest.
I hope I'm wrong. Because intent aside, he would have killed someone, and was determined to. He was not under threat and had no real reason to think he was.
;-)ok I have a cuppa and a cake now..all is well ;-)
trouble is on this thread.. we have all exhausted our thoughts for so long etc.... and with this wait for the trial we are all just going over the same stuff again of course... we just need to get to Monday 7th for some new details to chew over!!
what sentence do you guys think he will get, NOT WHAT YOU WANT HIM TO GET, WHAT YOU BELIEVE HE WILL GET?
Counts 2 3 and 4 - I think he'll get 5 years and a hefty fine -- (minimum)
Count 1 - Culpable Murder - 10 years -
total 15 years, out after 8 --- but he will appeal, if he gets any kind of sentence, so he'd end up getting 5 years suspended sentence, serving 2 if he's unlucky.- and of course the Judge may give him a reasonably time in jail so that it deters a future appeal, and i'm not sure that an appeal would always be granted over there, and considering it's a thorough and expensive trial this time round, would he have grounds to appeal ?
Counts 2 3 and 4 - I think he'll get 5 years and a heft fine for those minimum
Count 1 - Culpable Murder - 10 years -
total 15 years, out after 8 and then if it went to appeal, which it would if he gets any kind of sentence, he'd end up getting 5 years suspended sentence, serving 2 if he's unlucky.
I was replying to YOUR post about the STIPPS,---- i didn't bring this up,, you did ! - read the thread -
weve been watching the same trial with all due respect !!-
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.
If you watch you see that that's what Roux wanted him to say, but he didn't agree.
Light on in the bathroom, both. Light on in the toilet - Stipp, Light on in the toilet but lesser light - mrs Stipp.
Counts 2 3 and 4 - I think he'll get 5 years and a heft fine for those minimum
Count 1 - Culpable Murder - 10 years -
total 15 years, out after 8 and then if it went to appeal, which it would if he gets any kind of sentence, he'd end up getting 5 years suspended sentence, serving 2 if he's unlucky.
sandy can u clarifiy please.... do u mean for count 1 .. CM ten years plus the other
do u mean he would serve ten years then appeal the remainder of that sentence
or do u mean they put in an appeal IMMEDIATELT after the initial sentence...and he would actually serve what?? in your scenario above
I was replying to YOUR post about the STIPPS,---- i didn't bring this up,, you did ! - read the thread -
weve been watching the same trial with all due respect !!-
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Really? I'm befuddled. Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick. It's really too late for me again. Think I better get up to bed.
;-)ok I have a cuppa and a cake now..all is well ;-)
trouble is on this thread.. we have all exhausted our thoughts for so long etc.... and with this wait for the trial we are all just going over the same stuff again of course... we just need to get to Monday 7th for some new details to chew over!!
What we need is for someone to leak all of the evidence, photos, report, data…then we could go on, no problem!!
weve been watching the same trial with all due respect !!-
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.
[/QUOTE]
Really? I'm befuddled. Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick. It's really too late for me again. Think I better get up to bed.
Goodnight [/QUOTE]
goodnight Porky.. its ok, we have till Monday 7th to work on our stories so we are ready for the trial!!
What we need is for someone to leak all of the evidence, photos, report, data…then we could go on, no problem!!
exactly. it is frustrating just not knowing what actually happened.. I keep hoping OP will have a breakdown and confess all, but not putting any money on that....:>:(
yes he did - it was dimmer in toilet, as Mrs Stipp said it wasn't a bright light, - they agreed.
So I've got that right?
I've lost track a bit. Just watch one of those films that starts out really well, and then goes all totally to shit and makes you feel you've wasted your time.
exactly. it is frustrating just not knowing what actually happened.. I keep hoping OP will have a breakdown and confess all, but not putting any money on that....:>:(
No, but if Nel manages to catch him in a lie, stump him or make him fumble, it will be very satisfying
sandy can u clarifiy please.... do u mean for count 1 .. CM ten years plus the other
do u mean he would serve ten years then appeal the remainder of that sentence
or do u mean they put in an appeal IMMEDIATELT after the initial sentence...and he would actually serve what?? in your scenario above
each of the firearms charges could carry 5 years for each
but I think he'll get 5 years and then a hefty fine for the other two
I think the charge will be Culpable Murder, because Roux will be able to raise doubt that is legally admissable even if it's not truth to us on the outside !! - so that can carry between 5 - 10 years sentence, but I think the Judge will rule for 10 - and Roux will put in an appeal immediately. - so 15 years, but I think he'd be out in 8 -
and the ruling will be appealed - so if the Judge were to consider this likelihood , that Oscar + money = appeals - I think the Judge will ultimately serve a part suspended sentence if at all possible, - it's so hard I keep changing my mind , but I've a feeling he could get between 5 - 10 years basically - which would be so wrong.
I've lost track a bit. Just watch one of those films that starts out really well, and then goes all totally to shit and makes you feel you've wasted your time.
I hope the trial doesn't follow this trajectory.
Probably not….I expect the rest of the trial will be even better than what we saw so far
What is irritating is that OP will probably make millions with book deals and movie rights
On its own, I think the whole "I heard a noise, I was terrified, I reached for my gun and went to investigate, I presumed RS was still in bed as I hadn't heard her move, I didn't think to speak to her as I was too bound up in dealing with the intruders, etc, etc", could be plausable enough to cast "reasonable doubt" on the prosecution's case.
However, it is not on its own. Evidence of any noise - shouting or screaming - in the short period leading up to shots being fired will make his explanation irrelevent. If there was shouting / screaming before shooting, hen he must have known it was her, so he will be guilty.
This is very interesting. From the word go….I have not been able to get my head around how this man could possibly have assumed there were intruders. In my opinion, there are only two plausible circumstances in which OP could have thought he was dealing with intruders that night.
1. Reeva was clearly visible in front of him and noise suddenly materialized from elsewhere in the house, thereby CLEARLY indicating someone had entered the premises.
2. OP was ALONE in the house and suddenly heard a noise.
Thats it. Nothing else makes sense.
What we have is a situation where OP is in his house WITH his girlfriend. As she was shot in the toilet, we have to assume that the girl either was using the toilet for normal reasons and under normal circumstances or she had fled to the toilet in a frightened state to get away from him. The toilet seems to have been situated not far from the bedroom.
You only have to put yourself in the situation to see how nonsensical his version of events is. So you are at home with your partner, everything is fine…. and your partner heads into the loo. Noises come from the loo. So what. Outside of the fact that it's a confirmation that this is where your partner is at that precise moment, why on earth would that send you into a state of terror and fright to the point that you are so scared for your safety that you take out your gun and start shooting like a lunatic. The only reason any form of fear would come over you is if you heard noises from the loo and could clearly see your girlfriend asleep in bed, so its not her !!!!! As we all know THAT didn't happen so why assume for one split second its an intruder. Nonsense.
Any BS from him when he is questioned that it was dark, or he could not see her when he heard noises again does not answer why on earth he would not just have assumed automatically that any noise heard from so close a proximity and of all places, the toilet, could be anyone else BUT her. Even if the slightest doubt crossed his mind, wouldn't ONE simple question…. "Reeva…. is that you in there" have solved everything.
So….it really does come down to one issue for me. Why on earth did OP think for one second there was a break in situation, because NOTHING exists that would explain reasonably why he would have thought there was. His explanation on this issue will be at the heart of the prosecution case when they finally get him on the stand. It was the obvious panic reason given to the police at the time and it just does not hold up for one second.
The combination of the evidence from various neighbors of terrified screams from a WOMAN, absolute and total lack of any indication of any break in, and Reeva herself who proclaimed herself afraid of him by times just about says it all. A bad tempered superstar with a huge fondness for guns, and with obvious ego and power complex lashed out one night and took it too far. The End. You have to feel for the poor girl and at the same time despair at why, given that she was afraid of him, why on earth did she continue with the relationship or let herself be alone with him. Sadly it will never be explained. All thats left is to hope for justice in this case.
each of the firearms charges could carry 5 years for each
but I think he'll get 5 years and then a hefty fine for the other two
I think the charge will be Culpable Murder, because Roux will be able to raise doubt that is legally admissable even if it's not truth to us on the outside !! - so that can carry between 5 - 10 years sentence, but I think the Judge will rule for 10 - and Roux will put in an appeal immediately. - so 15 years, but I think he'd be out in 8 -
and the ruling will be appealed - so if the Judge were to consider this likelihood , that Oscar + money = appeals - I think the Judge will ultimately serve a part suspended sentence if at all possible, - it's so hard I keep changing my mind , but I've a feeling he could get between 5 - 10 years basically - which would be so wrong.
Right yes,,, I was confused about what would happen on appeal .. yes I think you are right, very much agree that this may be the outcome more or less
they will appeal of course... why is it that appeals usually result in shorter sentence... why should that be?? but I think it usually is...
Comments
You're right…apologies, I could not resist ^_^
I was replying to YOUR post about the STIPPS,---- i didn't bring this up,, you did ! - read the thread -
[/QUOTE]weve been watching the same trial with all due respect !!-
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.[/QUOTE]
I truly don't know. I think there's a very big chance he'll get off the premeditated murder.
I think if he does he should get around five to ten years.
But I have no faith that there is the will in SA for that to happen. And I foresee years of OP still out for some reason while they appeal and all the rest.
I hope I'm wrong. Because intent aside, he would have killed someone, and was determined to. He was not under threat and had no real reason to think he was.
This is AWESOME Kap.
;-)ok I have a cuppa and a cake now..all is well ;-)
trouble is on this thread.. we have all exhausted our thoughts for so long etc.... and with this wait for the trial we are all just going over the same stuff again of course... we just need to get to Monday 7th for some new details to chew over!!
Count 1 - Culpable Murder - 10 years -
total 15 years, out after 8 --- but he will appeal, if he gets any kind of sentence, so he'd end up getting 5 years suspended sentence, serving 2 if he's unlucky.- and of course the Judge may give him a reasonably time in jail so that it deters a future appeal, and i'm not sure that an appeal would always be granted over there, and considering it's a thorough and expensive trial this time round, would he have grounds to appeal ?
Kapp is amazing at these.... we have asked for more.....!!
That's quite pessimistic…!
If you watch you see that that's what Roux wanted him to say, but he didn't agree.
Light on in the bathroom, both. Light on in the toilet - Stipp, Light on in the toilet but lesser light - mrs Stipp.
IIRR.
sandy can u clarifiy please.... do u mean for count 1 .. CM ten years plus the other
do u mean he would serve ten years then appeal the remainder of that sentence
or do u mean they put in an appeal IMMEDIATELT after the initial sentence...and he would actually serve what?? in your scenario above
and the Unflappable Mrs Stipp said she saw the light on in the toilet, and Mr Stipp said he saw the light on in the Bathroom.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Goodnight
What we need is for someone to leak all of the evidence, photos, report, data…then we could go on, no problem!!
Goodnight
goodnight Porky.. its ok, we have till Monday 7th to work on our stories so we are ready for the trial!!
exactly. it is frustrating just not knowing what actually happened.. I keep hoping OP will have a breakdown and confess all, but not putting any money on that....:>:(
So I've got that right?
I've lost track a bit. Just watch one of those films that starts out really well, and then goes all totally to shit and makes you feel you've wasted your time.
I hope the trial doesn't follow this trajectory.
No, but if Nel manages to catch him in a lie, stump him or make him fumble, it will be very satisfying
but I think he'll get 5 years and then a hefty fine for the other two
I think the charge will be Culpable Murder, because Roux will be able to raise doubt that is legally admissable even if it's not truth to us on the outside !! - so that can carry between 5 - 10 years sentence, but I think the Judge will rule for 10 - and Roux will put in an appeal immediately. - so 15 years, but I think he'd be out in 8 -
and the ruling will be appealed - so if the Judge were to consider this likelihood , that Oscar + money = appeals - I think the Judge will ultimately serve a part suspended sentence if at all possible, - it's so hard I keep changing my mind , but I've a feeling he could get between 5 - 10 years basically - which would be so wrong.
Probably not….I expect the rest of the trial will be even better than what we saw so far
What is irritating is that OP will probably make millions with book deals and movie rights
I think they're a bit disruptive
http://oi61.tinypic.com/1et89e.jpg
http://oi60.tinypic.com/14mxsom.jpg
This is very interesting. From the word go….I have not been able to get my head around how this man could possibly have assumed there were intruders. In my opinion, there are only two plausible circumstances in which OP could have thought he was dealing with intruders that night.
1. Reeva was clearly visible in front of him and noise suddenly materialized from elsewhere in the house, thereby CLEARLY indicating someone had entered the premises.
2. OP was ALONE in the house and suddenly heard a noise.
Thats it. Nothing else makes sense.
What we have is a situation where OP is in his house WITH his girlfriend. As she was shot in the toilet, we have to assume that the girl either was using the toilet for normal reasons and under normal circumstances or she had fled to the toilet in a frightened state to get away from him. The toilet seems to have been situated not far from the bedroom.
You only have to put yourself in the situation to see how nonsensical his version of events is. So you are at home with your partner, everything is fine…. and your partner heads into the loo. Noises come from the loo. So what. Outside of the fact that it's a confirmation that this is where your partner is at that precise moment, why on earth would that send you into a state of terror and fright to the point that you are so scared for your safety that you take out your gun and start shooting like a lunatic. The only reason any form of fear would come over you is if you heard noises from the loo and could clearly see your girlfriend asleep in bed, so its not her !!!!! As we all know THAT didn't happen so why assume for one split second its an intruder. Nonsense.
Any BS from him when he is questioned that it was dark, or he could not see her when he heard noises again does not answer why on earth he would not just have assumed automatically that any noise heard from so close a proximity and of all places, the toilet, could be anyone else BUT her. Even if the slightest doubt crossed his mind, wouldn't ONE simple question…. "Reeva…. is that you in there" have solved everything.
So….it really does come down to one issue for me. Why on earth did OP think for one second there was a break in situation, because NOTHING exists that would explain reasonably why he would have thought there was. His explanation on this issue will be at the heart of the prosecution case when they finally get him on the stand. It was the obvious panic reason given to the police at the time and it just does not hold up for one second.
The combination of the evidence from various neighbors of terrified screams from a WOMAN, absolute and total lack of any indication of any break in, and Reeva herself who proclaimed herself afraid of him by times just about says it all. A bad tempered superstar with a huge fondness for guns, and with obvious ego and power complex lashed out one night and took it too far. The End. You have to feel for the poor girl and at the same time despair at why, given that she was afraid of him, why on earth did she continue with the relationship or let herself be alone with him. Sadly it will never be explained. All thats left is to hope for justice in this case.
Nel has plenty of points to catch him on .. I do hope he goes up a gear.. I want him to be more openly assertive!!
He always wins.
Right yes,,, I was confused about what would happen on appeal .. yes I think you are right, very much agree that this may be the outcome more or less
they will appeal of course... why is it that appeals usually result in shorter sentence... why should that be?? but I think it usually is...
The cat is taking its friends INTO Court
That can't be allowed.
Who's smuggling them in ? .(must be Botha ....., again!)
AND I see Roux is using the ancient art of 'Feline Hypnosis Technique' on Oscar before he takes the Stand !
Surely that can't be allowed either !
Is that even Legal ?