Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Oscar Pistorius trial part 3

999 replies

JillJ72 · 12/04/2014 19:08

Hiya,

Thread 1 here - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2022610-Oscar-Pistorius-trial

Thread 2 here - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2049921-Oscar-Pistorius-trial-part-2

To continue our respectful, open, interesting discussion.

OP posts:
member · 14/04/2014 09:05

Morning! OP's voice sounds a bit more subdued/not doing as many long explanations. Wonder if he's watched the trial so far over the weekend?

OneStepCloser · 14/04/2014 09:11

I'm wondering the same book what's the significance with the LED light?

voiceofgodot · 14/04/2014 09:12

He sounds very frustrated and weary.

I feel for him on the one hand, so much of the questioning seems incredibly trivial and picky - although of course, it has to be.

What I don't get is that he claims to not remember these little details eg. about the LED lights. Fair enough in a way as in - the evening was very traumatic and eventful. But this was his bedroom, surely if that light/amplifier was annoying, this would be something that had happened regularly. The way he talks about it all is as if it's a strange environment almost. I have had annoying LED lights in my room before and putting something over them was something I did regularly.

member · 14/04/2014 09:14

I wouldn't like to be Nell's computer helper - bet he's dreading tea break!

voiceofgodot · 14/04/2014 09:14

What do you mean One? I think he might be trying to demonstrate that it's unlikely he would have made such an effort to cover up this one little light, and that if there were other LED lights in the room the room would NOT have been in total darkness.

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:17

Long time lurker here

I think the significance of the LED light is that Nel is suggesting OP invented the scenario of throwing the jeans over the amp, to "create a time gap" for RS to be able to get to the toilet unheard.

I'd also suggest that OP invented the jeans over the amp story to explain why the jeans were out of place.

Nel has already suggested that the jeans were out because RS was trying to get dressed to leave..

I agree - if the light was a problem, then it would be a problem every night. Why is OP making out like it's a new thing. He could have just said "I usually throw xyz over the amp, but couldn't find it that night so picked up the first thing I could find"

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:24

Alex Crawford ?@AlexCrawfordSky 2m
#OscarPistorius seems to trip up. 'I dont remember duvet being on floor.' Nel reminds him of his version. 'You said it was on BED"

I think they're focusing on how there is blood spatter on the duvet now, as if it had been where OP said it was, it would be impossible, I think.

Nel is really badgering him now. OP sounds broken.

Roussette · 14/04/2014 09:25

The jeans thing makes sense. Nel has said how ordered and tidy Reeva was (and OP has agreed) and now the jeans out means she was either getting dressed to leave or, OP's version, he was covering up a LED light.

Can't quite work out how the 'low tone' or 'whisper' matters? This seems to be prosecution clutching at straws and trying to discredit him over a very similar word

HowAboutNo · 14/04/2014 09:25

Nel is meticulous: point out the small details that are 'wrong', add them to the bigger picture

You can see why he's had such a successful career

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:29

Yeah I'm thinking that the argument over the difference between 'low tone' and 'whisper' is trivial.

You could say one thing one day, then another the next to describe the same thing.

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:29

Agreed, Nel is just picking every. single. tiny. mistake. to keep reinforcing the message that OP is unreliable.

It's just one more opportunity to say "You're lying"

OneStepCloser · 14/04/2014 09:32

Thank you Glad and voice.

AmIthatSpringy · 14/04/2014 09:32

Can't listen to it at the moment as Dd is up and about. Could he have said the LED was bothering because he was sleeping on a different side of the bed therefore it was now in his eyeline?

Nerf · 14/04/2014 09:32

If Nel keeps on like this though I think there's a risk he loses the patience of the court . To be honest, low tone/ whisper I'm not sure everyone would see a difference. I'm more likely to hear a whisper anyway so agree with OP that that would suit him better.

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:34

Did I read upthread somewhere that they have said that once again, OP is sitting side on to Nel and refuses to look at him?

We're now very familiar with his way of answering each and every question from Nel by answering to 'M'Lady' rather than to Nel directly.

But he also asked a question himself of Nel, and once again directed it to the Judge - e.g. "M'Lady what did Mr Nel mean by xyz"

Is this the normal way of doing things? I just think it comes across as utterly petulant and childish. The man is asking you questions, you're having a discussion with him - address him directly like a grown up FFS.

It reminds me of a child announcing they're not talking to someone, then asking a go-between to pass messages to that person.

BookABooSue · 14/04/2014 09:35

It's so difficult to keep a sense of perspective when Nel is picking away at everything. Surely the duvet could have fallen off the bed after the shooting and OP not noticed? However he'd still have to explain why Reeva's jeans were on the bed or floor.

Aventurine · 14/04/2014 09:37

Just following thectrial. What's wrong with not asking someone where they're going when they get up in the night?

GladitsnotJustMe · 14/04/2014 09:38

Yeah I lose perspective when he focuses in on the minutiae too. I guess that might be his intention, to confuse OP.

Could he have said the LED was bothering because he was sleeping on a different side of the bed therefore it was now in his eyeline? - He could have done, that would be a logical explanation. But I don't believe he did.

OneStepCloser · 14/04/2014 09:39

God point Nel, if OP heard a window open why did he not ask Reeva whether she heard it as well, I mean he was right next to her...

Crazeeladee · 14/04/2014 09:39

Lurker here, exactly adventurine, I was up in the night last night, my dh didn't ask where I was going or anything. And I took my phone so I could see to walk around without turning lights on!

voiceofgodot · 14/04/2014 09:39

GladIts We're now very familiar with his way of answering each and every question from Nel by answering to 'M'Lady' rather than to Nel directly.

That is the correct court procedure. The barrister asks you the questions and you address your answers to the Judge.

AmIthatSpringy · 14/04/2014 09:41

But everyone in the witness box has addressed their comments to the judge.

I would suspect his psychologist has told him to focus on the judge and not make eye contact with Mr Nel

Nerf · 14/04/2014 09:41

I agree. It's not really a fact or a winning point that you think a person would do this and someone else thinks they wouldn't. I might ask dh if he can't sleep and leave it, especially if he got up, I might be half asleep and wobble off to the loo, I might be terrified of a noise and stay silent. Doesn't prove anyone else would though.

voiceofgodot · 14/04/2014 09:44

Springy - I agree, I think him turning away from Nel is his way of trying to cope with the bombardment. He knows he mustn't lose his temper and is probably trying his hardest to reduce the chances of that.

All these little details seem trivial, but together he is trying to build a picture that OP's version is littered with very improbable events. The duvet and blood spatters is a very interesting small point raised today. And I agree with Nel, it is not probable (which OP is denying - it's not doing him any favours) that Reeva would have stayed silent upon hearing a window open.

HowAboutNo · 14/04/2014 09:44

I wonder why he didn't say "did you hear the window then?" If she was awake?