Oscar Pistorius trial

[JillJ72]

Starting a new thread as as was pointed out on the other thread, it is not an appropriate place to "talk" and continue to "promote" a really poor excuse for a "joke".

Yesterday's post-mortem evidence was awful; if ever there's a way to get across just how unglamorous guns are, post-mortem evidence is a painfully honest way of doing so.

I listened to the trial live today. My main impression? That Darren Fresco consulted with legal experts to ensure his affidavit did not incriminate him, yet left room for questions that weren't explicitly answered. If he'd paid for that input from legal experts, they didn't sew it up nicely and tightly. I got the impression he was a bit of an unwilling witness really, and had problems remembering some things, yet was very insistent on others. Some good journo feeds on twitter that give different flavours and interpretations.

I'll be honest. I hope this was as OP said, an appalling mistake. But equally so many questions, the constant "whys". And so I am sitting on the fence, listening to argument and counter-argument, and waiting for the judge's final decision.

Never have been in a court of law before, are proceedings usually this long, slow, going round in circles, playing cat and mouse?

thing is, he wasn't an outwardly nice man was he? Look at his little performance at the Paralympics, that's not the mark of an outwardly nice person...

He is known in SA for having a vile temper and being a fairly dislikeable character.

but no idea why someone would stay in a relationship that was that shit that early on, I do get that people stay with someone who has started out charming and broken down their partner systematically over time but this was only three months in and already his true colours were showing. I find it very that someone wouldn't walk away that early. And no, not victim blaming, just musing as to why some women choose to stay in a relationship that even starts out on that footing. She seemed like a confident woman who knew her own mind, so why?

Apparently she'd come out of an abusive relationship. She was very vulnerable.

There were red flags in my relationship earlier than 2 months. I'm independent, confident, professional, educated. It's amazing what you can excuse, explain and lie eve. It's boiling a frog.

Believe - not lie eve

"We are living in a double standard relationship. Every five seconds I hear about how you dated another chick. You really have dated a lot of people yet you get upset if I mention one funny story with a long term boyfriend.''

he sounds like a deeply insecure person.

"dated"

Those messages make my blood run cold. Leaving a party following a big row for 'flirting' rings so many bells for me.

I'm not sure how Roux can spin that to make it sound anything but nasty and controlling.

but no idea why someone would stay in a relationship that was that shit that early on
Didn't the witness say that 90% of the texts were fine, he was only drawing attention to the ones that he thought had bearing on the case?

The reasons people stay in EA/DV relationships are complicated but definitely in most cases, there are good parts and people stay in the hope that the good parts are the real partner and the bad parts are just a blip. Plus although the relationship was new, they shared some friends in common, they'd have known of each other before they got together so there could have been some kind of emotional commitment even before they dated.

The texts seem like textbook EA with the double standards comment and Reeva trying to make OP happy/pander to his moods.

I think the texts are damning for OP and I just feel so sad for Reeva and her family.

I'm not sure how roux is going to turn this one around either without trying to assassinate Reeva's character which is perhaps not beyond the realms of possibility.

He must have known that the texts would come up as evidence as it would have been known the phones were taken for analysis.

Interesting that someone said upthread that they hoped the phones would show something which exonerated op yet it seems exactly the opposite has happened...

I think it would be distasteful to go with the strategy of smearing Reeva's name when she is no longer here to defend herself.

If the defence do wish to turn the messages on their head, I do hope they try to do so with respect for Reeva and her parents / family.

If they are sensible they will not cast aspersions but they will try to add context to the messages and OP's state of mind / pressures, etc.

Which in no way excuse his actions.

I haven't had a chance to catch up with today's trial yet though I have seem some reporting of the text messages.

The text messages don't look good it's true but you could certainly find/texts emails sent to me over the years from exes that don't make me out to be a wonderful person and if viewed alone/out of context would look like I was an incredibly selfish/self-centred person with a lot of issues.

I'm not trying to excuse domestic violence. A friend of mine has recently been through something and if that guy had had access to guns who knows what would have happened. I also know from experience that a jealous/controlling partner does not always turn into a violent one. Though very difficult to live with, I have known men like this who were also loving and kind and if you don't realise you are being controlled its easy to end up staying with them.

Not saying this is relevant in this case as does sound like OP has anger problems. he admitted as such to Piers Morgan. One wonders why nobody in the family was urging him to get help.

I think OP was difficult, I think OP had issues. The texts do suggest that his relationship was volatile and I can no longer be as sure as I was that there wasn't really much of a motive.

Classic emotional abuser. Why do people stay when it's that shit early on? I did. Look at the texts- she believed she could explain/ reason with him- that she was dealing with a normal person she could have a dialogue with. So did I. It may be naive but there you go. You love the man, you think you can help him through his insecurities. You can't, and you have no control... But you don't fully realise that yet.

And if you don't know any different its easy to think that's how a relationship works. Until I got talking to other women (about their relationships), I didn't realise that most people don't need their partner's agreement to go out for the night. I thought it was normal for a man to say no.

Plus the intensity is consuming. You want dialogue with the person so you engage... You should RUN a million miles.

Sorry, just back on my phone & it sent my message again, I wasn't saying reeva was those things, I was looking at it from the defence perspective, as I imagine they will try to counter the "im scared of you" image in our minds.

Why would an intruder be In the bathroom? Nicking a loo roll?

trying to rubbish the victim wont help him at all. I hope very much they don't go down that route.

Roux might get OP to try to put the texts in a more favourable light. The prosecution will certainly question OP about them. It will be interesting how well he handles that. I suspect with lots of breaks for tears.

Oh yes, tears and perhaps the odd vomit for good measure.

Felt sorry for reevas mum in court listening to thise messages, must be hard to think of your child being so unhappy.

Oh yes, tears and perhaps the odd vomit for good measure.

Felt sorry for reevas mum in court listening to thise messages, must be hard to think of your child being so unhappy.

WannaBe I was the one hoping the texts would support OP's version because I think the two worst scenarios for Reeva's family would be for (1) OP to have murdered Reeva during an argument (2) everything to seem open to interpretation and then for OP's version to be believed but without conclusive proof.
My sympathy is firmly with Reeva's family. I don't think OP can be exonerated. Regardless of who was in the bathroom, he killed them.
I just can't imagine how horrific it was for Reeva, if she was trying to escape an argument, thought the bathroom would be a safe place, then after the first shot, realised she had no way of escaping.

I never got a chance to listen this morning but have caught up a bit on twitter, you tube and the papers.

The texts they read out in court clearly show a very troubled relationship and I agree that so early on, it should have had alarm bells ringing. Poor Reeva - I too have been in a position with my ExH where it didn't matter what I did, he found fault and belittled. That was nearly 20 years ago since i left him, and I can still remember feeling so helpless and frustrated at the way he would interpret things.

Perhaps someone can tell me if Gerrie Nel is finished with Moller, or is he back on the stand tomorrow.

I wonder if these messages are setting the scene, but there are maybe some pertinent ones on the 13th Feb. I did say that I thought the prosecution must have had something up their sleeve, as the evidence so far had been circumstantial, and the disclosure of their messages is starting to build into something close to a motive.

The texts are aso heartfelt. So sad

I don't know how June Steenkamp holds it together, poor woman. Maybe she has been numbed by the awfulness of it.

I don't think they've finished with the phone evidence yet. Today was just from reeva's phone. They haven't looked at his yet.

Of all the channels i have it's Sky that has a terrible signal at 9.30 when I want to watch the trial update.

Can anyone tell me why the defence was focussing on dogs barking. I take it they will say the dogs were barking at the time of the shooting yet no one claims to have heard them apart defence witnesses.