Oscar Pistorius trial part 2

[JillJ72]

To continue from previous thread

If they did DTD it would have been mentioned as being evidence of a loving relationship, and would go some way to discrediting the argument theory.

Each tiny detail is plausible - the point is putting altogether all those "ahh I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one" and you've just accepted an implausible story.

Not hearing her go to the loo
Thinking you see her in bed with the duvet over her legs
Leaving the balcony windows open though you're paranoid about intruders
Firing a gun without pulling the trigger
Firing another gun 4 times without meaning to

And so on...

Each individual event - maybe.

Put them all together and you've either got someone exceptionally stupid or calculating liar.

I agree Pennies. The idea that a young couple in love would, on their first Valentine's together, just go to bed and be asleep by 10 just seems odd. It doesn't sound like a heady, new relationship - so I wonder if she wasn't that happy, despite his protestations to the contrary today, or whether they had been arguing that night.

I don't know though - I still have difficulty imagining why he would want to kill her. I'm still more inclined to believe he was full of adrenaline and desperate to use that gun on an imagined intruder.

Interesting side note - a journo who is in the court everyday called Barry Bateman (great live tweets if you can't watch) says OP has never looked at Nel, not once. I know I raised this yesterday, but never looking at him seems weird and I imagine can be slightly frustrating for Nel

He is supposed to address the Judge though. Apparently that is the Done Thing.

I know, but never looking at him, not once is just strange to me!

On a massive aside - I've never really done Twitter before but it's pretty ace for this kind of thing isn't it.

Pennies - same here.

... And each journalist has their particular way of relaying the words being said. But, so much vitriol from readers. Doesn't hugely enamour me to elements of the world at large. That is why I am grateful that by and large on this thread we have avoided a bunfight.

(I checked that then, see what I did )

I'm just watching session 2 on YT. Finding it excruciating OP saying he can't remember who told him that Samantha and Darren had been in contact and concocted a fabricated story re. the gun going off in the car. Nel saying 'you can't remember who told you because you are lying'.

I've not really looked at readers' comments, because essentially I don't understand Twitter I don't want my own opinion coloured by ranters. However, having a live feed from various journalists (who must all be worth their salt by dint of them being given the OP gig) right from the very courtroom is astonishing. How times have changed etc etc.

Agree that this thread is very balanced and respectful. Long may it be like that.

Pennies who are you following because i just seem to get a load of non people ranting either for or against, im not very good with twitter ??

Or emoticons

Barry Bateman and Alex Crawford are good to follow

Oscar Trial Channel
Dianne Hawker
Barry Bateman (but that was just from a few minutes ago, so not really)
Andrew Harding (BBC)
Karyn Maughan

They are all just writing pretty much verbatim what is said in court.

IMO OP made a fool of himself today. Absolutely refused to accept that he must have pulled the trigger on the Glock under the table in Tasha's restaurant, even though he was the one holding it and the gun could not have fired unless someone had pulled the trigger.

Sticking to his Story that the gun went off by itself - I wonder if Glock will be joining the queue to sue him for slander??

He's an absolute child.

I wonder when Nel is going to ask OP about the blood on the duvet and on the wall by the left side of the bed (as you look from the foot of the bed - where OP was sleeping that night) ?

I doubt it could have come from Reeva as he carried her from the bathroom downstairs - it was a few drops of bllod on each, not arterial spray.

Thank you how and pennies

He really was exposed in so many ways today. Spoiled and entitled when in his position is a risky strategy

Someone said upthread about OP repeating the questions back, that's a technique he might have been taught in media training. It allows you to clarify the question and gain a bit of time so you can compose an answer. As an athlete I'm guessing he'll have had media training at some point so he might use that technique automatically.

Saying that, I think he did himself no favours today at all. It seems too far fetched that everyone around him is either lying or letting him down.

I've been thinking about the open window and why it's important. Didn't one of the witnesses (possibly even two of them) say they thought they heard a woman shout for help and then a man shouting help. I wonder if Reeva opened the window to shout for help before locking herself in the toilet. If she did, then I guess OP might feel he had to explain why the window was open.

I thought it was interesting today that he wouldn't say how often he had fired the gun at the door. He said others had said it was 4 times. It made me wonder if he did fire more but somehow the empty casings were missed by the police (eg if he had fired 6 times then all the witnesses who thought they heard two sets of shots would have been correct and not confused about the sound of a gun or a bat).

BMW6 I wonder when Nel is going to ask OP about the blood on the duvet and on the wall by the left side of the bed

I thought OP covered that yesterday when he said he couldn't call for help from Reeva's phone so he put her down gently and went to the bed to get his own phone. Since he'd been cradling Reeva, he would have had blood on him that could have transferred to the bed. Admittedly Nel didn't ask about the blood stains but I just thought 'ah that explains the blood stains on the bed' when I heard it.

Watching today I had a lightbulb moment.
One of my biggest problems with the argument theory has been what would they have started arguing about at that time of the night.
Then this business with the fans comes up. This has given me the most likely very ion of the argument theory.

He says he asked Reeva to bring in the fans and close the doors before she went to sleep. He then woke up some hours later and the doors are still open and the fans out. He then gets angry with her for falling alseep and leaving them. He rants and raves about how she has put them at risk. She grabs her phone and retreats to the toilet (the only place in the room where she can put a door between them) just to get away from the argument. She is not frightened enough to feel the need to call for help but like most of us instinctively takes her phone and feels more secure having it. OP continues to rant at her, look what could happen kind of thing, grabs his gun in rage maybe just to show her what they could face in a robbery, he gets more and more wound up, especially as she removes herself, he follows continuing his ranting and in the must of all the rage and anger he finds himself shooting through the door, maybe not even fully realising what the concequences of this would be. As soon as the shots ring out a calm of rationality comes over him, he realises what he has done. He then goes about gaining access to the toilet just like he has said he did.
The intruder idea us fresh in his head, this is what the whole thing was about anyway so it is reasonably easy to spin the intruder story as after all that was what he was ranting at Reeva about.

The above is pure speculation but for me is the first time I have been able to put together a timeline that fits the boxes for the argument theory.

I still not sure what to believe really. OP hasn't come across well today but as has been said, it can be hard for anybody to look good under hostile questioning.

One thing for me is absolutely true and that is he killed Reeva. Whoevers story is true I just don't feel you can ever justify furring blindly into a closed door in a confined space when you have not seen the threat. For me that is murder. Legally I understand that it is not always so black and white put personally I do see it that way.

On a lighter note, I had to smile today when Nell used Roux's catch phrase 'I put it to you that it can not be'.
I wonder if he did that on purpose!

Roadkill, after today I've started to think an argument started over leaving the doors open.

Hmm, given that he has come across a little bit of a paranoid scared man yes I guess he would have been a little bit cross if the doors had been left open.

Roadkill - great point! I wondered why Reeva hadn't followed OP's instructions re the fans and the door and how he would have reacted to that.

I thing I can't get my round is why, if he is so terrified of intruders, did he have a broken window on the ground floor, no alarm system, no bars on windows. Makes no sense.