Oscar Pistorius shoots girlfriend
Discussion
There is so many questions that could have been asked (meal times, what time she arrived and general mood etc) it is simply unfavourable that he will not be called as a witness.
The fact his very presence at the crime scene during the entire incident has only become apparent so late in the case almost implies a cover up by SA to deny the wealthy all still haveslaves house keepers.
The fact his very presence at the crime scene during the entire incident has only become apparent so late in the case almost implies a cover up by SA to deny the wealthy all still have
This persons initial evidence would have been heard by the police and the prosecution service. If he had supported OPs account then charges would not have been brought. I'd snuggest he's looked on as an unreliable witness for both prosecution and defence. The defence don't want to put someone forward who is obviously seen to be lying for his employer, and the prosecutors don't want someone who is lying to introduce a level of doubt.
TTmonkey said:
This persons initial evidence would have been heard by the police and the prosecution service. If he had supported OPs account then charges would not have been brought. I'd snuggest he's looked on as an unreliable witness for both prosecution and defence. The defence don't want to put someone forward who is obviously seen to be lying for his employer, and the prosecutors don't want someone who is lying to introduce a level of doubt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6EaoPMANQMTTmonkey said:
This persons initial evidence would have been heard by the police and the prosecution service. If he had supported OPs account then charges would not have been brought. I'd snuggest he's looked on as an unreliable witness for both prosecution and defence. The defence don't want to put someone forward who is obviously seen to be lying for his employer, and the prosecutors don't want someone who is lying to introduce a level of doubt.
I doubt the housekeeper would ever offer evidence against his boss. he'd never work again in SA .. and there arent many housekeeping jobs in Malawi ( average wage IIRC around $1 - $2 per day .. IF u have a job )It beggars belief he slept through the commotion ... and his presence in the house belies OPs story and 'fear of intruder' .. he knew the guy was on the ground floor - and hence would have had some chance to detect / hear an 'intruder' and alert his boss.
So OPs story that he was 'alone and vulnerable' starts to crumble a bit further ...
edit : just returned from a break where I met several South Africans ... the bar discussion turned to the OP trial. The guys from SA said the general opinion amongst them and friends at home was he was 'as guilty as sin'.. and his 'story' was just utterly ridiculous.
Edited by alfaman on Wednesday 7th May 06:31
Edited by alfaman on Wednesday 7th May 06:32
Bonefish Blues said:
TTmonkey said:
GALLARDOGUY said:
pidsy said:
complaint made agains OP in court.
apparenly, whispered "how do you sleep at night" to one of her friends.
What a fool.apparenly, whispered "how do you sleep at night" to one of her friends.
It's as if he's got Max Clifford doing his PR!
pidsy said:
Bonefish Blues said:
TTmonkey said:
GALLARDOGUY said:
pidsy said:
complaint made agains OP in court.
apparenly, whispered "how do you sleep at night" to one of her friends.
What a fool.apparenly, whispered "how do you sleep at night" to one of her friends.
It's as if he's got Max Clifford doing his PR!
HTP99 said:
When is this all due to wrap up as it seems to be dragging on somewhat?
Roux has given his word that he will be finished by next Tuesday. I don't know what happens after that - here it would be closing arguments, judge's instruction to jury etc.No idea if that happens in the absence of a jury, or what happens next - does the judge go into a huddle with her observers, does the court adjourn and we get a verdict later? Haven't a clue
What is likely to happen about this?
The Guardian said:
Oscar Pistorius has been accused of trying to intimidate a friend of Reeva Steenkamp by turning to her in court and asking: "How can you sleep at night?"
The South African Paralympian who is on trial for Steenkamp's murder, flatly denied speaking to Kim Myers but witnesses, including a police officer, claimed they heard Pistorius as he left the dock during an adjournment. A complaint was lodged with South Africa's national prosecuting authority.
Ian Levitt, a lawyer, said: "My client Kim Myers was approached by Oscar Pistorius in court today and, in a very sinister tone, was asked: 'How can you sleep at night?' My client views this unwelcome approach as extremely disturbing and I have been in communication with the national prosecuting authorities as well as the investigating officer...... Police warrant officer Barend van Staden confirmed that he had heard Pistorius say: "How can you sleep at night?" and reported it to the chief prosecutor, Gerrie Nel.
But when reporters questioned Pistorius about the claim, he replied: "No, I haven't spoken to her".
The South African Paralympian who is on trial for Steenkamp's murder, flatly denied speaking to Kim Myers but witnesses, including a police officer, claimed they heard Pistorius as he left the dock during an adjournment. A complaint was lodged with South Africa's national prosecuting authority.
Ian Levitt, a lawyer, said: "My client Kim Myers was approached by Oscar Pistorius in court today and, in a very sinister tone, was asked: 'How can you sleep at night?' My client views this unwelcome approach as extremely disturbing and I have been in communication with the national prosecuting authorities as well as the investigating officer...... Police warrant officer Barend van Staden confirmed that he had heard Pistorius say: "How can you sleep at night?" and reported it to the chief prosecutor, Gerrie Nel.
But when reporters questioned Pistorius about the claim, he replied: "No, I haven't spoken to her".
Efbe said:
Jasandjules said:
jogon said:
Surely this chap is critical to the case yet not been called by either defence or prosecution.
Well, a cynic might suggest the defence don't want him because he will not be able to lie about hearing nothing under cross examination and the prosecution don't want him because he would be a hostile witness and might, just might, support Oscar's case....Okay, perhaps he would be an unreliable witness, and I could understand that neither side might want to put him on the stand, but isn't the very fact that he was there, that there was another person in the house the whole time, relevant? He was there, standing in the street, at some point, so someone or something must have woken him up. It seems bizarre to me that Pistorius wasn't asked why he didn't summon him straight away, to help, to phone an ambulance or whatever.
TheSnitch said:
I'm still confused about this.
Okay, perhaps he would be an unreliable witness, and I could understand that neither side might want to put him on the stand, but isn't the very fact that he was there, that there was another person in the house the whole time, relevant? He was there, standing in the street, at some point, so someone or something must have woken him up. It seems bizarre to me that Pistorius wasn't asked why he didn't summon him straight away, to help, to phone an ambulance or whatever.
It may be relevant and could put a very different slant on things.Okay, perhaps he would be an unreliable witness, and I could understand that neither side might want to put him on the stand, but isn't the very fact that he was there, that there was another person in the house the whole time, relevant? He was there, standing in the street, at some point, so someone or something must have woken him up. It seems bizarre to me that Pistorius wasn't asked why he didn't summon him straight away, to help, to phone an ambulance or whatever.
How about this; OP wakes up at 3am (or whenever it was) to find Reeva missing. He searches the house looking for her taking his pistol with him. Finds her down stairs in the kitchen chatting with the help after him having made her a late night snack.
Being the arrogant, narcisistic, volotile little prick that he is, he immediately gets the wrong end of the stick and assumes they are doing something they shouldn't be. He chases her round the house, she hides in a room she knows is lockable, he shouts 'Get the f
k out of my house' and blasts through the door. OP can only tell a story of a burglar and the helps' best idea is to stay quiet or he'll never work again - or worse!
Having said all that - this is mere speculation (and wild speculation at that) I still adhere to my current view that the prosecution haven't adduced enough evidence to prove that he intended to shoot her.
ajl.
I have a feeling that at the end of all this, Roux may go on trial himself charged with ''defending without due care and attention''
Today was more car crash stuff.
We had an anaesthetist giving evidence on gastric emptying - she was fine, but her knowledge comes from a clinical perspective, and how long prior to surgery they like to starve patients to ensure they arrive in theatre with an empty stomach, and knew nothing about gastric contents and time of last meal as a predictor of time of death. She also reeled off a long list of things which could delay gastric emptying, none of which applied to Reeva Steenkamp!
She was followed by a witness who apparently only popped up on Tuesday - ie two days ago. She was some sort of social worker/probabtion officer who had been assigned to Pistorius when he was first bailed. She had watched coverage of the trial and disagreed with suggestions that OP was laying it on for the cameras with all the vomiting and wailing. So she decided to pop in to tell the court that no, he was properly heartbroken
Well, you can imagine Nel's response, he was on her like a ferret up a trouser leg. It was entirely subjective - nothing more than her own unqualified opinion.
However, while she was in the witness box she managed to land OP even more in the st by telling how he said the shooting was ''an accident'' - not what his defence has been claiming.
She was an absolute liability.
The defence ballistics expert is now on the stand, resuming tomorrow. He's about 120 years old, rather deaf, forgets what he is saying half way through saying it and spent the first 15 minutes giving the court his life history, before enthraling them with his description of how he recreated the shooting by firing different bullets from a different gun into a different door.
I can't wait for the cross examination.
Today was more car crash stuff.
We had an anaesthetist giving evidence on gastric emptying - she was fine, but her knowledge comes from a clinical perspective, and how long prior to surgery they like to starve patients to ensure they arrive in theatre with an empty stomach, and knew nothing about gastric contents and time of last meal as a predictor of time of death. She also reeled off a long list of things which could delay gastric emptying, none of which applied to Reeva Steenkamp!
She was followed by a witness who apparently only popped up on Tuesday - ie two days ago. She was some sort of social worker/probabtion officer who had been assigned to Pistorius when he was first bailed. She had watched coverage of the trial and disagreed with suggestions that OP was laying it on for the cameras with all the vomiting and wailing. So she decided to pop in to tell the court that no, he was properly heartbroken
Well, you can imagine Nel's response, he was on her like a ferret up a trouser leg. It was entirely subjective - nothing more than her own unqualified opinion.
However, while she was in the witness box she managed to land OP even more in the s
t by telling how he said the shooting was ''an accident'' - not what his defence has been claiming.She was an absolute liability.
The defence ballistics expert is now on the stand, resuming tomorrow. He's about 120 years old, rather deaf, forgets what he is saying half way through saying it and spent the first 15 minutes giving the court his life history, before enthraling them with his description of how he recreated the shooting by firing different bullets from a different gun into a different door.
I can't wait for the cross examination.
Edited by TheSnitch on Thursday 8th May 18:07
Edited by TheSnitch on Thursday 8th May 18:08
That's the way I heard and watched it too. However, nothing in this farcical trial will surprise me anymore. In an English court the jurors would have been bussed to the scene and much of the evidence been brought to question. IE in this case , could a window be heard opening? How loud was the fan? Could the housekeeper really hear nothing etc etc.
I know it is down to one judge, but surely she should have been presented with the actual crime scene, not just a dodgy door and photo's. It's all a sham.
Prosecution will have to work its butt off for a conviction before next Tuesday, which I believe is the deadline set.
I know it is down to one judge, but surely she should have been presented with the actual crime scene, not just a dodgy door and photo's. It's all a sham.
Prosecution will have to work its butt off for a conviction before next Tuesday, which I believe is the deadline set.
lady topaz said:
That's the way I heard and watched it too. However, nothing in this farcical trial will surprise me anymore. In an English court the jurors would have been bussed to the scene and much of the evidence been brought to question. IE in this case , could a window be heard opening? How loud was the fan? Could the housekeeper really hear nothing etc etc.
I know it is down to one judge, but surely she should have been presented with the actual crime scene, not just a dodgy door and photo's. It's all a sham.
Prosecution will have to work its butt off for a conviction before next Tuesday, which I believe is the deadline set.
You think the prosecution has it's work cut out? Are we watching the same trial?I know it is down to one judge, but surely she should have been presented with the actual crime scene, not just a dodgy door and photo's. It's all a sham.
Prosecution will have to work its butt off for a conviction before next Tuesday, which I believe is the deadline set.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff