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?

There are pictures showing clearly that he was wearing his prosthetics when it happened, Im a bit unclear as to what that means to be honest Wouldnt it just mean that he took time to put them on so not realising that Reeva was not there a little bit odd? If he did it before going onto the balcony then I would imagine he would be fully awake and all senses alert, it couldnt be said that it was a panicked rushed shooting surely? Wouldnt it be more plausible if he was not fully awake?

I wonder what the safety record of his estate is like as well, had there been lots of break ins there?

I must admit that I am only following this via the news and on here and not watching the trial so I`m probably missing great chunks.

ewn.co.za/-/media/Files/BailApplication pdf

Here's the link Free, you just click the "convert links automatically" below this box.

Sorry that doesn't work

See if this does

ewn.co.za/-/media/Files/BailApplication%20pdf

I am sure I saw somewhere had been no break ins on that estate for a couple of years.
He does seem to have been anxious about it though. Tale of him coming home and thinking washing machine was an intruder. Thought friend knocking lamp over was intruder.
Until this happened he lived 6 months of the year in Italy. I am sure he didn't carry a gun there!

.onestepcloser. There are no pictures showing that.

Originally prosecution said it was premeditated as he took the time to put his legs on before shooting. His defence said he didn't and he shot from his stumps.

There has been no evidence led yet to say either way, although the state appear to be conceding that he was on his stumps.

The argument in court yesterday and today was over what happened next. He had said at bail that once he realised she must be the one in the toilet, he put his legs on and then went back and tried to break down the door. The state are now arguing that he broke the door down from the lower height, indicating I think, that he lied about that in his affidavit. It must tie in with the timescales for calling for help, I think.

The state are building up their case slowly, but the defence are picking jokes in everything.

It is very interesting, but I'm not going to call anything until I've heard it all.

One person who claimed to hear an unspecified female voice talking as if arguing, but didn't know who or where it is from certainly does not prove they were arguing.

When the security did their patrol in the hour before, the house was quiet and in darkness. This was from court too, not media speculation

Onestep, if you read the link above, OP says he tried to open the door but couldn't so put his prosthetics on in order to kick the door in. This didn't work either so he then got the cricket bat.

Having read his account it does sound plausible.

And he did phone someone to ask them to call an ambulance, and Netcare(not sure what that is). His response to the guard, saying "I'm fine" does make sense- he had already called for help and didn't need other people there.

Musing out loud here, but usually people with wealth live in places that are very secure (or as much as they can be) so I am a little concerned about the intruder story, not saying it couldnt happen, but it would be fairly unlikely?

See, Im usually one for giving benefit of the doubt, but I`m really struggling.

Thanks Excuse.

And, AmIThat!

If anyone is interested, all the proceedings are on you tube, so if you are sad like me and are fascinated by this,you can watch the different days in court and listen to the actual testimony.

I was really against televising this, but it is done in a very non-showy way and tells you everything without any media slant.

It is a couple of days behind, very, very interesting

AmI there is a photo of him with blood on his prosthetic legs. Though that doesn't prove when he put them on, just that he had them on when he carried her downstairs.

Also there are kick marks on the door, the prosecution forensics didn't notice this when they examined it. Which is rather unprofessional of them.

I'm confused. Are the defence saying that he did have his legs on when he shot her (hence premeditated) but took them off when he bashed the door down

There is no way it could ever be self defence. Even accepting OP's version it's not self defence.

No intruder, no attack, no threat, no danger (from outsiders at least), no evidence of any threat whatsoever. Absolutely nothing to defend himself from.

No defence are saying. Legs off - shot, then panic, legs on then break down door. Which was why Barry Roux brought up the footprint with sock embedded in the varnish as defense are clear he had his legs on when he broke down the door (but not when shooting)

It is the prosecution who are now saying legs off - shot, the legs still off when bashing the door down. This is a complete u turn for the prosecution and it is not clear why they now believe this. As I said it may be to do with the timings of Oscar screaming for help, but their case is not clear yet. Hopefully we will find out in the next few days in court.

Thanks for doing the link excuse

I have seen pretty much all of the trial too and I have to say What Iam is saying is spot on and what has been happening in court.

Can I ask what are people's feelings of OP reactions in court, holding ears, retching and throwing up?

Sorry I ment AmI not IAm.

I think the prosecution have changed their theory for two reasons - they think the marks on the door are too low for OP to have had his prosthetics on when hitting with the bat, and they also now seem to be considering that OP tried to break the door down with the bat before he fired the gun.

Opal can I ask why?

Because it's not very attractive to be seen weeing or pooing on the loo.

Here is OP plea

"http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/03/world/document-pistorius-plea-statement/"

But the "expert" yesterday said the bullets were defininitly fired before the bashing with the bat.

Feel- I was a little synical about the vomiting etc, but when he did it today, I thought it must be genuine. He didn't know those pictures were going to be shown, so it must have been a natural reaction.

Book yes, agree about the low marks, hence the theatrics in court with Col Vermeulen balancing on his knees, showing how to hit the door.

Although he also stated,as the state expert, that the shots were fired first, then the door broken. Which confused me, as when the ear witnesses were on the stand, they seemed to be focussing on what came first, bat or gun. So the Colonel kind of contradicted that.

Which is why I think the prosecution have something up their sleeve - which they must have to be so sure it was premeditated murder.

Free, I don't think he is acting, seeing some pics of his tear stained faced and what looks like puke around his mouth. My take on it, for what it's worth, is that he and his friends have a very easy relationship with guns, are fascinated by them, and like the idea of them.

I suspect none of them have been mature enough to actually think about what damage they do to a human. Actually being made aware of what bullets can do, as well as the pain Reeva must have felt, must be ........actually I can't think of a word here.

Combination of guilt, disgust, grief, horror, shock

And he has always come across as quite young, not very mature. Not sure how I would react.

And he knew the testimony from the pathologist wasn't being broadcast, so I doubt it was done for the sake of the "audience" as some seem to think.

I don't think the Judge would be influenced by his reactions either way

the bullets were definitely fired before the bashing with the bat. Excuse yes the expert did say that as his evidence went on but it seemed at the start that the prosecution were considering the bat came first. That also seemed to fit with their cryptic comments at the start that they would explain how they thought the neighbours had heard the shots but not the bat (because the bat was first).

Feel I think the retching and crying are genuine but I don't think it has any bearing on guilt. There's a New York Times piece which basically says you can be upset and still have deliberately murdered someone and I think that's true. (Not to say OP did deliberately murder Reeva but I don't think his emotional and physical response in court gives any insight one way or the other).

I dont think you tell anything from the retching and crying and burying his head. Whether he killed her on purpose or accident he can still be distruaght and disgusted by his actions either way, that I would think is human nature.

Opal would you stay the night with a bf when you didn't and trust him to let you have a wee/poo in private in the middle of the night? I wouldn't.

re the retching I feel the same as oneStep and AmI

Abusive men can do lots of hand wringing.

Maybe he is wretching and crying because he is thinking of life in a SA prison when he sees those photos/hears the details?

I agree with you all with regards to his reactions.