Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 8

[Roussette]

here is Number 7.

@OscarPistorius: Thank you to my loved ones and those that have been there for me, who have picked me up and helped me through everything.

Nerf perhaps Nel's point was that Reeva didn't need the toilet but ran in there to hide during the row?

Doh sorry. Thought it meant she had used the loo. Got it now.

Haven't been on this thread in ages (newborn!) but did was it ever questioned if Reeva flushed the toilet? Sorry to be graphic but if she hadn't then it would've been clear she had been going to the toilet because it would be there to see, and if she had then he would've heard the toilet flush and figured she was in there?

Hmm was that tweet really necessary, surely you thank your loved ones and those who have been there for you face to face privately? Do you really have to announce it to the World at large?

In very bad taste imo.

With Frank, could it simply be that his testimony couldn't be relied on. If all he was going to do would be to repeat 'I heard nothing; I know nothing', then would you bring him to court just to have him commit perjury? And then be torn apart by one side or the other.

I'm just surmising Nerf, one side seems to take one view and the other side the other, it doesn't really fit smoothly with either side.

HowAboutNo I don't think it was ever clarified one way or the other.

Thanks emotions ... Strange though!

I suspect the contents of the loo bowl wouldn't stand up to much analysis.

I have no thoughts on the tweet really, I imagine he has a lot of online support and needs to keep them onside - this reaches everyone who has posted a nice message.

No real thoughts for or against the tweet. Notwithstanding his own trial, he and his family have had some real challenges and maybe to say nothing would be construed as really rude, just as saying something is construed as really inappropriate.

I guess it's something for us to get our thoughts round - how social media changes the way we interact and whether we are seen to be doing the right thing or not, depending on our own perceptions. I guess even the most hardened criminal in prison has access to the internet and can post to the www? Doesn't feel right, but it can be done?

I basically agree with Nerf and Jill. If you're going to use social media in this way (to put your thoughts across to a large fanbase) then you're going to send that sort of tweet.

My personal opinion is that he would have been better advised to put Twitter down and never pick it up again. He is probably the most judged person in the world right now, and anything he puts out there is opening him up for for attack. However, as he wants to use it, that sort of tweet is going to be par for the course.

(Not really compatible, but I did a Facebook post about how awesome my son's SEN teachers and helpers were this year. None of them would read it, and I thanked them personally too, but I wanted other people to know how grateful I am to them.)

Plus, I preferred it to the inspirational shite he was pumping out a few weeks ago.

I suspect the contents of the loo bowl wouldn't stand up to much analysis.
YY Nerf iirc they stated early in the trial that because Reeva fell onto/over the toilet bowl, they couldn't analyse the contents as there was blood, etc.

I think OP has had support from people across the globe including all those supporters who used to turn up at court for autographs and photos so I don't think badly of him for thanking them.

As for Franck, I do wonder if there are people who have heard his story and do know what actually happened that night. I remember a friend who lived in an area where a crime was committed and it was common, local knowledge what had happened, where the weapon was hidden, etc, but everyone was too frightened to go to the police to tell them. tbf the local community couldn't understand how the police didn't know when everyone else did!

Absolutely Looking today's tweet was far more appropriate in terms of inappropriateness.

Haven't had a chance to see any of it at all today - thanks for the link to the defence heads/rebuttals, will read later.

Point taken on the tweet/social media, it jars wih me though.

On the subject of Frank, it does seem strange that a potential material witness hasn't testfied, I understand the issues surrounding, but could he not have given evidence in camera with only the Judge and Assessors, Nel, Roux and OP?

Nerf I must admit I've thought worse things at different points during this trial. When there's an information gap, it does mean your imagination can run away.

I was reading some of the defence heads of argument and I suddenly realised why it was so important to Roux that the first noises are the gunshots. If the second noises are the gunshots then OP didn't have time to knock down the door before he called Stander to say he had shot Reeva ie it would mean he knew it was Reeva without knocking down the door.

I wonder if anyone will ever know the truth of what happened that night . . . because I do agree with Nel that OP was so busy fighting for his life when he was on the stand that telling the truth wasn't his main motivator.

Sue, I've reported my post, it just felt mean and a tiny step beyond being surprised/shocked that frank could not testify.

If the second sounds were gun not bat what does that mean? That he tried to knock the door down then shoot the lock? Why not say that?

Ah, my first comment wasn't linked to my second para!

That he tried to knock the door down then shoot the lock
I wasn't meaning that.

I was thinking specifically about the Stipps' testimony and I've always just assumed that they missed the bat sounds because after the gunshots they were talking to each other, calling security, and, in Dr Stipps' case, heading over to OP's house. However that does raise the question about what caused the first sounds that they heard but I guess that could have been doors banging. I really do think Nel should have explained that.

Oh okay, sorry thought you meant maybe gun then bat.
No idea what I think anymore tbh.

Book sadly I don't think anyone, apart from OP, will ever know the truth of what happened that night. I agree with you I think OP was far more concerned for himself and how what he was saying would affect him than telling the whole unvarnished truth of that night. Trouble is, people have now formed their own opinion on him and the events of that night by filling in the gaps for themselves so it has probably had that effect anyway.

I sometimes think we'd have a better idea of what happened if OP hadn't taken the stand.

I do think media training impacted on his ability to respond naturally to questioning, add to that the fact that being questioned on the stand was the most important interview he ever had, and I can understand why he became defensive and argumentative but his need to provide an explanation for every possible aspect of the State's case made him unconvincing imo.

Marking place so I can come back tomorrow to find the arguments. Haven't been able to follow the last two days much, is it all still confusing.

Even if there's a guilty verdict, he may still be out for some time yet, while he appeals. Seems crazy amuybf if time for this to be still going on. Though journos on twitter seem to suggest this is actually pretty speedy case.