Oscar Pistorius trial part 3

(1000 Posts)
JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 19:08:29

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.

JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 19:15:19

This is the documentary I mentioned at the end of the last thread

m.youtube.com/watch?v=0P_kmqDfI2w

What struck me most was how isolated he seemed to be, waiting for the race towards the end of the programme, and how it was a big deal for him but just didn't seem to register for others....

StackALee Sat 12-Apr-14 20:11:58

'on the 13th February Reeva Would have gone out with her friends and I with my friends' from the Bail Afidavit.

I knew it had been said, so as I said impervious thread I think this could be of some significance given that he has been shown to have been quite jealous and controlling. No one can know for sure if they argued and what about but the fact that she was out with friends the day that OP shot her could be relevant.

JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 20:27:52

I got the impression she changed her mind and went to his instead? Maybe it was the catalyst.

I keep saying - we just don't know. We do want to know though.

StackALee Sat 12-Apr-14 20:34:00

Ah, yes, sorry. She called and said she would rather spend time with him.
I wonder if whatever she did before that evening or the days before will form any part of the prosecution's case?

It's on sky news - the week round up. I've got about 5 minutes before DH complains and turns it over.

StackALee Sat 12-Apr-14 20:34:49

Did OP get her anything for valentine's day?

JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 20:45:45

I think he said this week on the stand that he did?

AnyaKnowIt Sat 12-Apr-14 20:48:53

I don't remember if he did

Madcatgirl Sat 12-Apr-14 20:50:43

He said he bought a bracelet and they were to pick it up from the jewellers on the 14th.

(Name change from manchester)

RonaldMcDonald Sat 12-Apr-14 20:55:11

Mmmm Pistorius said he was going to take her to the jewellers to let her pick something she liked
The bracelet being spoken about wasn't a valentine gift. He hadn't purchased one.

My brother's q is how come on valentine's eve if they both woke up and were a bit hot...how come they didn't ....er...you know

Wakening up with new gf who was also awake and asking, "Can you not sleep baba" ...would have only ended one way - 3 mths into a relationship, on Valentines etc

LouiseBrooks Sat 12-Apr-14 20:55:31

JillJ72 thanks for that video. It was really interesting.

I'm going to go back and try and watch some witness testimony from the beginning of the case. I want it fresh in my mind for when the other defence witnesses start.

BTW, he said he got her a bracelet for Valentine's Day.

MajesticWhine Sat 12-Apr-14 21:03:16

I wonder if whatever she did before that evening or the days before will form any part of the prosecution's case?
My understanding is, the prosecution case has been made now, so they can't introduce any of this. They can only cross-examine the witnesses for the defence. They didn't seem to try very hard to demonstrate evidence of an argument, apart from her messages to OP. No-ex boyfriends, no friends testifying, nothing about her being unhappy with him.

LouiseBrooks Sat 12-Apr-14 21:07:33

Majestic I got the impression that everyone was a bit surprised the prosecution closed their case so early. Maybe Nel just thought he'd destroy Oscar during his testimony and that would be it.

Wow really no more evidence from friends or family to come for the prosecution? I hadn't realised.

JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 21:20:20

That's what just not make sense to me. I thought they'd really go for it and they didn't. They raised questions about his behaviours by virtue of the text messages, and intimated an argument by virtue of the witnesses, but they didn't have irrefutable evidence, and that was the state's case - they would prove without a doubt premeditation (although I think that was lessened as part of the bail app going through?).

RonaldMcDonald Sat 12-Apr-14 21:22:28

There is lots of evidence before the court. They pick and choose what to put before the court on the day.
In written reasoning, after the end of the trial they can call on any of the evidence, tested or not...it is up to defence to rubbish prosecution evidence as they know what is in there as they have had full discovery and vice versa.
A lot of it is a guessing game to see who will go where and argue most convincingly.

AnyaKnowIt Sat 12-Apr-14 21:24:35

Ah, didn't know that Ronald thanks

LouiseBrooks Sat 12-Apr-14 21:27:09

The prosecution have finished their case. They can't call anyone else and this has been one of my issues all along. Why haven't they produced anyone? I'd say they haven't because they can't. Even Sam Taylor only said he shouted at her. Lots of people shout. Lots of people have marriages/relationships with screaming matches being a not uncommon occurrence but it means nothing.

JillJ72 Sat 12-Apr-14 21:28:24

Anya thanks for linking from pt2 to this thread, pt3.

RonaldMcDonald Sat 12-Apr-14 21:29:09

I think saying that premeditation can not be shown without proving previous violence or abuse isn't actually true.

It is nice to think that there will be signs or escalation but not always and often we are looking in the wrong places for evidence of escalation.

Jails would be a lot more empty if we had to show not just the offence in hand but also a corroborating pattern of behaviour before the offence to gain conviction.

Premeditation doesn't mean planned it in a Wylie coyote fashion. It doesn't mean considered murdering her on other occasions.
Premeditated can be split second

emotionsecho Sat 12-Apr-14 21:30:18

Interesting week of evidence.

I just can't believe some of the scenario he is trying to paint. Firstly, if he was so security concious why is his house so insecure? He has stated that he left his car outside (not bothering to put it in the garage), didn't worry about leaving a broken window downstairs un-repaired for a period of time, dodgy lock on bedroom door, etc., etc. If he was that worried about intruders, etc., he would not be so sloppy about security and he openly admitted the stuff about the car and broken window on the stand.

Secondly, I can't understand the opening of the bathroom window. Why would Reeva open the bahroom window, a window not protected by burglar bars whilst he is shutting and locking the windows in the bedroom? In his version it is nonsensical that she would do that.

I'm thinking something like this happened on the night, OP fell asleep after having told Reeva to close the doors and bring the fans in before she went to sleep (still think the fans are a bit of a red herring), OP woke up saw the doors were still open and fans outside and snapped/had a go at Reeva, argument escalated, he got up to shut the doors, she got up wanting to leave, he grabbed her jeans off her and threw them on the floor, they landed on the duvet that had fallen off the bed when she got up. Reeva couldn't leave by the bedroom door as he was blocking the way, so she went to the bathroom and opened the window to either shout for help, get a phone signal, or just get out of his way, he chased after her, with his gun, shouting and mocking her, she ran into the toilet cubicle and locked the door and he shot her through the door.

This would explain the shouts/screams heard by the neighbours.

On Friday OP said he quietly told Reeva to call the police then went down the passageway shouting and screaming, then yelled at her to call the police and if that was the case why hadn't she started to dial them before the shots were fired? My guess is he never said anything of the sort.

I just can't see any way to explain why Reeva opened the insecure bathroom window, why OP didn't see or hear her getting out of bed when he was so close to the side of the bed she was on, why either he or she didn't switch any lights on particulalry when they were both awake, why if she knew he was coming down the passageway when she went into the cubicle didn't she say something to him (I believe she knew it was him and went into the cubicle to hide from him), why he went to the bathroom area with a loaded gun with the safety catch off if he did not intend to shoot anyone.

I think the New Yorker article is spot on.

LouiseBrooks Sat 12-Apr-14 21:30:25

Ronald, this is true but I think actual testimony from someone on the stand would be more effective I'd think than just including a statement.

AnyaKnowIt Sat 12-Apr-14 21:31:31

No problem Jill, didn't want anyone to get lost

pettybetty Sat 12-Apr-14 21:35:31

Something I thought of last night after hearing his testimony about the highway incident when he was shot at:

In South Africa, when I was 16 (more than 20 years ago...) my mother and I got attacked when we were in our car, and had taken a wrong turning off the highway and landed up in a township type area.

One man stood blocking our way, and as we slowed down, another came and tried to break into my window with a panga (a long cane cutting knife - pretty terrifying), and slashed both tyres on my side. My mother, star that she was, managed to drive slowly, get this guy out of the way, and drive on 2 flat tyres completely ruining the car. To add to the experience, a whole lot of people on the side of the road picked up stones and threw them at the car as we drove, all hitting on my side.

If I was interrogated about this now, I can still tell you where we drove to (a factory about 2 miles down the road [Johnson & Johnson in fact), who we spoke to, who we called and can think of many ways to corroborate our story. There is no way that he could have had his traumatic experience on the highway and not remember.

This thread is not accepting new messages.