Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 5

[Roussette]

Time for a new thread - Part 4 nearly full

YNK, I just listened to OP's testimony and he indicated Miss Stander asked OP for the tape and rope type things for the bleeding and they were found in a cabinet in OP's pantry. Roux asked about the plastic and he didn't really remember anything about the plastic.

After listening to his testimony OP did go to the bedroom after finding RS in the toilet room and before going downstairs to open the front door. He stated in his testimony he found RS phone in the toilet (toilet room not toilet bowl) it was password protected so he went to his bedroom to get his phone off the bedside table on left. He grabbed both of his phones at this time. He would have had blood on him at this time.

Someone mentioned the hot night and questioned why if it was so hot they slept with a duvet on the bed. I spend some time in a hot country and last August the temperature at 0200 was 29C and the humidity level was 92 per cent, we had all the downstairs windows open, the french doors in the bedroom open, the overhead fan on full blast and had a thin duvet over us when we went to sleep so I don't see that as unusual. Also, as the saying goes it is always darkest just before the dawn it is also colder just before dawn, hence the need for bedclothes as the sudden drop in temperature just before dawn makes you feel really cold.

In his testimony OP indicated he tried to call (?) can't tell what he is saying it sounds like (Alford) which means nothing to me. He tried to do this on RS phone and found it to be passcode protected. After getting his phones from bedroom at 3:19:03 he phoned Mr Stander to help him pick RS up. He heard her breathing and wanted some help. He indicated Mr Stander had become a friend to him over time. He next called 911 or 91108 at 3:20:05. Didn't say at the time if 911 is also netcare. This is when he was told needed to get RS to hospital and not to wait for them. At 3:21:33 phoned security for a 9 second call. OP indicates he doesn't remember calling them but admitted obviously did as phone record indicates it. Then mentions after phone call with Netcare 911 went downstairs to unlock front door.

OP indicated Miss Stander asked him if he wanted her to make some phone calls. Miss Stander made the calls to Mr Darvias (spelling), his agent and his brother Carl. He was asked by Mr Roux if he contacted a lawyer and he said no.

"Then mentions after phone call with Netcare 911 went downstairs to unlock front door." I just mentioned that OP clarified that Netcare and 911 is the same thing. I wasn't sure what Netcare was until this time. Would that not mean OP called for an ambulance?

Miss Stander made the calls to Mr Darvias (spelling)

Justin Divaris a close friend who I think introduced him to Reeva

Thanks upnorth.

I listened to OP's testimony again and I'm puzzled about the side of the bed change.

It would have suited his "version" more if Reeva had been on the left, surely. So why would it be important for him to say they swooped and she slept on the right. He would keep the gun at the side he slept on and the empty holster could be moved

What am I missing here?

The blood expert observed evidence of arterial spray in the hallway on the stairs.
The pathologist sad following the head injury RS would have taken 2-3 breaths.
The heart would have stopped beating after about 6 minutes following the last breath, maybe sooner due to the grave bloodloss!

Even if, contrary to OP's story, the last 'bang' at 3.17 caused the head injury op could not have done all the faffing about that he claims.

It is also ridiculous to claim her heart was still beating (in the hallway/stairs) following the brain injury, last 3 breaths and heavy blood loss IF OP is to be believed and the head injury happened 20 minutes previously

Springy - I am also confused on the side of the bed thing. Am I right in thinking that Reeva allegedly slept on the side nearest the window? The gun was on the side nearest the bathroom. I suppose he can't have it both ways - if she was on the side nearest the window that allows him to reach for his gun without seeing that she's not lying right in front of him as he does so. If she was sleeping on the side nearest the window then it's harder to imagine her leaving the bed without him noticing, although he can say that she perhaps slid across the bed to get out on the side nearest the bathroom, and not out on her side where she would surely have almost brushed past him.

Yes Voice that's my difficulty. It would make more sense for him to claim she was on the left rather than the window side. Re the holster, he could have just said it was on whatever side he was on. He could easily have moved it afterwarda

His version doesn't help him at all

It's all so complicated isn't it? You're right in that several aspects of his story don't really help him. The only reason I can think is that maybe he forgot to move it to match his story, until it was too late. After all, he really did not have time (if he is lying) to concoct much of a tale or to switch things around.

For RS to have arterial spurt on the stair, she would have taken her last breath a maximum of 6 minutes before. If the last bang was the fatal shot it could just possibly (at a stretch of the imagination) have happened but only if he had already got on his p legs and the door was unlocked.

However OP is adamant the fatal shot came 25 minutes before (not 20 minutes as I stated previously, sorry about that).

I'm afraid that is completely impossible, and as far as I'm concerned this is the smoking gun.

Was this mentioned during the prosecution's case, or during cross-examination so far?

I wish I understood more why certain things haven't been discussed eg. were Reeva's fingerprints on the window? I realise that their presence wouldn't necessarily confirm anything but their absence definitely would.

Also since fatal shot was the last bang, the earlier bangs would have in most probability broken the door enough for OP to realise it was Reeva.

Horrifying!

Yes I'm referring to OP's testimony as well as the blood spatter experts (Van der Nest?) testimony.

It also fits with the neighbours hearing a woman shouting for help/screaming for her life!

But nobody is disputing she was shot in the toilet through the door. Or that he was on stumps when shooting. So are you saying you think he didn't run back and get the bat etc but that he shot her, broke the door down, and then carried her downstairs?
I really hate all this wafty stuff - could we just be clear in what is evidence and presented in court and what is opinion?

she would have taken her last breath a maximum of 6 minutes before

Can you tell me where you got 6 minutes from? Because Dr Saayman's evidence had to be paraphrased, I can only find vague references such as "Prof Saayman said the head wound would have been incapacitating but added Ms Steenkamp may not have died straight away" (from Sky News) which is no help at all because that could mean anything.

Also do we have any idea what time the Standers and Dr Stipp arrived at OP's house?

I agree Nerf - it's confusing enough as it is, I think we should try to be clear what has been established in court and what is conjecture.

Am I right in thinking that the defence have a timeline reconstruction lined up as part of the evidence they are presenting? I think a lot will be clearer (one can hope) by the time they have finished presenting their evidence.

I have also been wondering whether they deliberately put Dixon up at the point they did, knowing he was weak and that the approaching Easter holiday would mean a definite break in proceedings and allow time for people to forget about him.

That would be helpful if they do Voice. At the moment it's all a bit over excited on here in places!

Having seen some comments on other sites , most noticeably Digital Spy. I think that some people are saying the bat sounds were first and the second set were the shots, hence arterial spray on the stair.

I've been a member of DS for some years and the GD boards are always the same.

Can anyone help with this question - have the police admitted to moving the duvet? If so, from where and to?

Am I right in thinking that the defence have a timeline reconstruction lined up

If they have I hope they present it soon. I appreciate that as one witness (Charl Johnson I think) said "I didn't have a stopwatch" but it might help since we only really have accurate timings for the phone calls. The Stipps gave some times but also Mrs Stipp said her clock was off by a few minutes (not sure which way).

Maybe people should quote what they are using as a source or say "this is my personal speculation".

I'm not following the trial closely enough, or to be honest don't consider myself to be knowing more than either Roux or Nel - so although I'm very interested in the trial, I can't get too frothy about minor details (eg. the jeans on the floor outside the window) because IMO we have to respect the trial process and that the evidence being presented is the best and most complete available. I'm sure all of us have questions regarding apparent omissions by Nel thus far regarding evidence but I don't presume to know better than him...