Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 5

999 replies

Roussette · 18/04/2014 17:46

Time for a new thread - Part 4 nearly full

OP posts:
upnorthfelinefan · 19/04/2014 20:36

I think she only had her phone in the toilet since he said he had to go to the bedroom to get his to call Stander.

BOEUFster · 19/04/2014 20:40

There are plenty of accounts from people who found him arrogant and obnoxious, mind, and not all of them have been with the wisdom of hindsight. He appears extremely mindful of his PR and 'brand' (as anyone who makes millions from sponsorship would be, one imagines), so I'm not sure that information from public appearances would be especially reliable.

RonaldMcDonald · 19/04/2014 20:51

Dear Lord

If you judged me from my twitter feed you would find me an altogether different person from the one that I am for some in RL.
Each person shows different sides to people.
Anyone from work would not know me from my twitter feed as I am forced to be a certain person in work
Given the many many tales of a rude, spoilt, arrogant manchild that exist re Pistorius I would imagine that much of what is in his twitter is filtered

If, like me, he had a nameless twitter feed then maybe it would be believable. He is all about brand Pistorius, as are his family.
They called Dr Stipp about having to speak with the Pistorius lawyer and discussed hoping they could keep Ms Steenkamp's slaughter out of the press long before they considered informing her parents
This is normal when you are a brand but you cannot be fooled by it surely?

Nerf · 19/04/2014 21:04

Stackalee I agree about the fictional accounts of what may have happened; I posted on the last thread about it. There is very little information and so people start imagining the details and writing little scenarios of what might have happened. But that doesn't really help to keep things clear.
Until 5 May there is very little to learn - that twitter feed is vile, making allegations of terminations one minute and wanting to get pregnant another.
If you scroll down the photo of SA heat suggests she is called Emily. I doubt very much she is a front for OP.

Hillwalker · 19/04/2014 21:22

He probably didn't even write the tweets himself, probably done by his PR people. When L'Wren Scott died, tweets from her appeared posthumously for this reason. All to try to keep his public image squeaky clean because his status and income depended on that.

Happy Easter everyone.

upnorthfelinefan · 19/04/2014 21:42

Reeva's phone was in the toilet and OP fished it out to call for help but it was password locked.

upnorthfelinefan · 19/04/2014 21:51

My mistake, I don't tweet so didn't realize it was typical for people to put on different personas.

FreeLikeABird · 19/04/2014 21:56

If it was in the toilet, why would he even fish it out to try it? Surly he must know once a phone hits water it's not going to work, I find the whole phone on toilet thing strange. Surly if it was in water it wouldn't even be on? So how did he know about pass code.

Who said the phone was in the toilet bowl? Was it OP when being questioned?

RonaldMcDonald · 19/04/2014 21:57

That password locked thing surprised me also

my iphone has an emergency services override
perhaps hers was a different type of iphone

homebythesea · 19/04/2014 22:21

I think the pathologist thing is a bit of a red herring.

If I understand it correctly All the prosecution needs to show is that Oscar thought there was someone in the toilet, he shot, and the reasonable person would know that would result in serious injury or death to the person(s). The apparently largely undisputed evidence of where the shots were, injuries sustained etc are irrelevant to that surely?

Nerf · 19/04/2014 22:25

I think the pathology and forensics all tie in to whether he changed aim. So did he hear someone fall and aim at them or wildly shoot at the door.

BumPotato · 19/04/2014 22:38

I think he grabbed the phone from her and threw it in the bowl before she could phone for help. He then locked her in the toilet before shooting her while she was frantically trying the handle and screaming to get out.

This was domestic violence in the extreme, IMO.

homebythesea · 19/04/2014 22:47

bumpotato you might be right but the State did not prove this to be the case. They gave nothing but a speculative account of what might have happened backed only by some confused evidence from "ear" witnesses, a handful of tetchy WhatsApp messages and a pointing out of various implausibilities in OP's version

BumPotato · 19/04/2014 22:50

It's just the most obvious reason the phone would be in the loo.

I hope the state have enough to get him jailed.

BOEUFster · 19/04/2014 22:54

There's a programme on Pick TV (I've got the channel on Virgin Media) starting in a few minutes about the trial, if anyone is interested.

LookingThroughTheFog · 20/04/2014 06:55

Stackalee, apologies; you are right.

I get sucked in. I suspect that part of the problem is that we're on recess - there's very little to discuss that we haven't already discussed.

Plus, when people say; 'I don't understand what they could have argued about...' I tend to instantly respond by thinking 'well it could have been anything!' and then list possibilities. Similarly, why would she have eaten at night? Why would she take her phone to the loo?

Upnorth, I can see what you're saying, but if you only read Pistorius interviews, and the social network stuff he put out, then you'll be reading bias. It's his bread and butter - he's going to show himself in the best possible light.

Animation · 20/04/2014 07:16

"eye and ear witness testimony is very unreliable and can not base any kind of conclusions from that evidence."
Upnorthfelinefan - Have just pulled out some of the evidence below and I think Anette Sipp's testimony sounded very reliable to me and very sure and insistent what she heard.

"Earlier Monday a neighbor testified that she heard gunshots as well as screams from both a man and a woman on the night that the double amputee runner fatally shot Steenkamp.

Anette Stipp's testimony matched some of the evidence given by other witnesses earlier in the trial who said they also heard a woman screaming around the time that Pistorius killed Steenkamp before dawn on Feb. 14, 2013. According to Pistorius' version of events, he thought Steenkamp was in bed when he fired his 9 mm pistol. He did not describe any woman screaming.

The defense has countered that the neighbors actually heard Pistorius screaming in a high-pitched voice after he shot Steenkamp. Pistorius has said he shot his girlfriend by mistake through a locked toilet door, thinking that she was an intruder in his home.

Stipp said under cross-examination that she heard gunshots while lying awake around 3 a.m. on the night of the shooting, and then heard the "terrified, terrified" screams of a woman. Her bedroom is situated across a grassy area about 70 meters (230 feet) from Pistorius' home, and the windows of the athlete's bathroom are visible from her window.

"The screaming at that stage just continued," said Stipp, who recalled looking out from a balcony at two houses with lights on in the gated estate where her family and Pistorius lived.

She said she told her husband Johan, who previously testified, that the screaming sounded as though a "family murder" had taken place.

"There was definitely a female screaming for quite a period," Anette Stipp said. "You could definitely hear two different voices."

She said she then heard a second set of shots and the screaming stopped."

JackyDanny · 20/04/2014 08:10

homebythesea Tetchy what's app messages?
Have you actually read what was in them?

Roussette · 20/04/2014 08:46

homebythesea I am not sure you can call the evidence given by the neighbours as confused. It sounded pretty definite to me and why would they make this up? I do wonder about those who heard but decided not to testify. I really couldn't live with myself if I heard someone screaming but I chose to walk away and not give details in court.

OP posts:
homebythesea · 20/04/2014 08:46

JacyDanny yes of course I have read them. To my mind they show OP in a bad light and emphasise his self absorption. They also show that she was much more into him than he into her IMO. However I don't think they show any kind if abusive relationship and cannot be used as circumstantial evidence of what happened that night. The State have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt what actually led to the shooting as I have said up thread.

homebythesea · 20/04/2014 08:48

The problem with the 2 sets of shots evidence is that there was clearly only one set of shots and one lot of cricket bat blows. This is supported by the forensic evidence and the damage to the door

Nerf · 20/04/2014 09:00

And prolonged screaming doesn't seen to have been possible after the shots.
Which means it could have been OP.

JackyDanny · 20/04/2014 09:14

It's evidence of the tone of their relationship.
Reeva talks about being scared of his reactions amongst other typical DV behaviour.

You call it 'tetchy' I can tell you have no knowledge of DV.
I don't mean to be rude, but the exact nature of those messages are crystal clear to me and I'm not a specialist by any means.

Nerf · 20/04/2014 09:26

The whatsapp messages are dated January though, right at the beginning if their relationship - sounds like it was pretty needy and crap already . All that angst and stuff, neither of them sound carefree and getting to know each other.

LookingThroughTheFog · 20/04/2014 09:51

Does anyone have a link to the WhatsApp messages anywhere?

Swipe left for the next trending thread