Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 7

[Roussette]

here is Part 6. Nearly time for a new one.

He said what he did about the magazine rack for two reasons
1 to give him a noise that made the gun accidentally go off
2 to try to prevent the state saying the intruder fell against the mag rack and he changed aim and fired at the area where he knew it always stood

He wanted to move the mag rack away from where the bullets ended up grouped as it gives credence to the deliberate intention to kill within that enclosed space

I think how quiet the thread has been today says a little something about the evidence we have had this week. It has added very little to talk through.
Or we have all suddenly gained a life outside the trial and MN!
Or it could be neither M'Lady, we shall never know!

On a serious note, ronald that is a great summery of why the magazine rack matters so much and why it is putting OP in hot water.

I had a life today; My iPad was redundant and I conversed with a real person over a delicious lunch! Have been thoroughly underwhelmed by what has appeared as neutral evidence in terms of challenging the state. I believed that the witnesses were of little value to the defence's case.

I'm battling lethargy (in general, not just with the case). I think I'm just tired, so I'm going to let lethargy win for today.

Sometimes it feels like they are just going through the motions. Waiting for a conviction the appeal ? I gather if he is convicted and the appeals he will remain on bail. Taken from DAvid Dadic twitter.

All the main inconsistencies are there now. The story has been told

We know there are unexplained issues and experts expertly saying almost nothing is definite and we are in the ballpark of probability.
The weighing carefully of the ear witness statements value will be assessed in submissions.
Even though the defense had to change direction a couple of times to keep up with their client, their story (in the main) is in. I don't think they have anything more to add.
Except poor Wolmarans still has a bit more time up there, and it won't be easy for him. Roux needs to shake him off the fence if he can!
Two defense experts have now indicated it is not easy to make OP's story fit the evidence.
I doubt Roux is going to stick many more wild cards into the mix.
I think that it's time for us to see both sides final submission and turn the heat up on sentencing issues.

mary. Yes. I get that feeling too. Almost the calm before the storm.

We have a couple more days and then a wait for argument.

Hopefully the arguments will be televised - I can't see a reason why they wouldn't be as they will draw everything together.

I'm still as baffled at those who haven't given evidence as it would have been interesting to hear - eg Martyn Rooney who stayed with OP for a huge chunk of January and spent time with both of them, Justin Divaris and a few others.

Will be interesting to hear who the final defence witnesses are, it it does all feel a bit like the last week of school term.

Oh and Looking and PD. I'm the same. Have bee doing RL stuff and was so tired last night I didn't even watch the update on Pick.

We won't have much left to say over the next couple of weeks

Does anyone know what happens, once the verdict is given. If he is found not guilty, will he get to keep his guns? Get more licences etc.?

Interesting Bobble

I suspect if he is found not guilty, then the bail conditions no longer apply and there would be nothing to legally stop him keeping guns.

Possibly if found guilty of CH, that may be part of his sentence - banned from keeping guns for his lifetime

Disclaimer: I am not a legal expert, so may be wrong

No, Spingy me neither, and I don't know the terms of his bail.
Hasn't he just been hunting with his family in Mozambique at their safari reserve?

I don't think he will be going free anytime soon though.
He could get up to 15yrs on the ammo charge.
I think he will get 5 years on the reckless shooting charges.
As you know it think he will get off with the sunroof one.
Even without a potential pre med murder charge, I don't think he should be making any plans to go free.
It all depends on how any appeal system works, but I'm hoping the judge refuses further bail if he is entitled to it.

The fairly immediate changes to his original bail conditions inexplicably pissed me off in the first place.
Within a month they were back in court having his probationary visits removed, his passport returned so that he could compete if invited to do so, the ban on drinking removed and his being allowed to return to the house where he had killed Ms Steenkamp

I know it is unkind of me but I thought that it was a pretty swift move given how destroyed OP was.
Mebbe his family insisted.

If he is convicted and whilst awaiting appeal is released on bail with a passport he will scarper. I would.

The Pistorians have an awful lot of money to throw at appeals!

Ronald, I got the feeling it was his defence that went for that. Although now, having seen how the case has unfolded, perhaps it was him that pressed for it.

By all accounts he hasn't particularly taken total advantage of the changes. I know he has been in Mozambique a couple of times, the last time a couple of weeks ago during recess. (well he was pictured getting on a private plane, so I assume that's where he was headed) but he has hardly been living the life of Riley.

And he has turned up for trial and not fled, which is what bail is for,

I totally agree with your last point. If I were him, I would disappear too.

I suppose it depends what the verdict is and what the likely sentence will be.

So, I don't think he will get bail this time, as it is probably more likely he will scarper (I used your word, as it is a great word )

But I can see this going on for some time, appeal, appeal, appeal.

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this week's evidence. I have no idea how to judge who is correct about the order of the bullets.

Would an appeal automatically be worked by Nel and his team, or would it be considered an entirely new thing, so the State might field another prosecutor?

Another interesting question Looking.

I think here, well in Scots Law anyway, it is heard in a different court, with different judge, so I am presuming it will be a different prosecutor.

They might do that to ensure objectivity - a fresh pair of eyes

Again, other than jury service, I have no knowledge of how court works, so maybe some expert could post on this

Book Me too, completely bamboozled by it all.

Ill be honest Ive kept of the board this last few days because Im just dismayed (had my eyes opened maybe) to how bad the SA justice system is at present.

We`ve had forensic experts who have nothing to be expert with, most evidence was either destroyed or not bothered with, lax record keeping (unbelieveable) and Ive even felt that both Roux and Nel have not had all of the correct witnesses to cross examine, wtf was the SW/probation officer all about really.

yy from what we`ve seen the judge appears fair and considered, but most of us have watched and listened throughout and really what can she say? Its easy for us to sit here and say we either think he is or not guilty but theres so little to go from either side really. If hes convicted theres always going to be doubt and exactly the same if hes not.

I really really am thankful for our own system, our own forensics and I have to say, sentencing procedures. After this trial we can never be absolutely sure that he killed deliberately, there has been nothing to prove that, it doesnt matter what we think as indiviuals there needs to be proof and even I, who thinks he may be guilty, would not be happy to see someone sentenced for 25 years with no or very little evidence (I believe this happens in the US, which I totally disagree with) Its the police and forensics job to find that proof.

Perhaps Im just fatigued by it all.

Am I agree totally with Ronald if I were him and I get bail if convicted you wouldnt see me for dust, I think very few people (if they had the means) would stay.

Excellent post OneStep.

I'm sure he killed deliberately
He gave whomever was in the toilet no opportunity to leave with their life
He gave them no chance to escape, surrender or be captured.
Without seeing if they were armed and with a door between them he deliberately fired four bullets into a tiny toilet

For that I would like to see him punished. I know that that might sound harsh to some but he ended a life unnecessarily.

I will never know who he thought was in there and I'd rather continue to hope that he didn't know it was Ms Steenkamp and the the early defence witnesses were mistaken. How truly horrible if their evidence is true.

I don't buy the accidental nature of how he likes to term his killing someone. Gun was directed at door etc
I wonder how often he has been allowed to do that in his life and how many excuses have been made for bad behaviour simply in response to his greatness.
I'll be the isn't the only rich or famous person equally spoiled.
There must be people close to him who feel some measure of responsibility for his current situation.

I find it hard to feel or have empathy for his fear in a situation where he advanced toward danger, past an exit and crucially without hitting the panic button.
In SA we know to hit the panic button, we always hit the panic button and he knew that there were multiple trained armed guards a few hundred yards away.
Then he didn't buy time or wait for help to arrive.

Dreadful stuff. I want to feel differently about OP's case but I am finding it hard to keep hoping.

Ditto Ronald. As much as I want to believe everything he says is true (fear made him shoot) there is no getting away from the fact that he advanced on that toilet cubicle with a lethal weapon and fear doesn't make you pull the trigger four times which is why he must be punished.

I don't think we will ever know if he knew it was Reeva in that toilet - that's something he will take to the grave with him.

I think he will be found guilty of something and I just think the next few years will consist of appeal after appeal until he gets out.

But wouldn't he need a reason for a appeal?