Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Oscar Pistorius



KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Court adjourned now. Lots of mistakes by Oscar, he says things then says he cannot remember what he said, then he retracts or changes what he said. Not major points, but little points. For example: Did Reeva scream after the first shot? No, she did not was the reply. Would you have heard a scream? No, Cos my ears were ringing. So you do not know if she screamed or not? She did not scream. But you have just said you would not have heard her?

Last question was "You knew she was standing behind the toilet door when you shot her?" No I did not, said Oscar, starting to blub, again. Nel then says - it's 1 O'clock, can we adjourn until Monday? Judge agrees. So Oscar now has the whole weekend to think about what he has said and he cannot speak to his lawyers. Very clever, by Nel. Let him stew over the weekend and find yet more holes in his story next week.

fascinating stuff.
 




Bold Seagull

Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,797
Hove
KZNSeagull said:
Court adjourned now. Lots of mistakes by Oscar, he says things then says he cannot remember what he said, then he retracts or changes what he said. Not major points, but little points. For example: Did Reeva scream after the first shot? No, she did not was the reply. Would you have heard a scream? No, Cos my ears were ringing. So you do not know if she screamed or not? She did not scream. But you have just said you would not have heard her?

Last question was "You knew she was standing behind the toilet door when you shot her?" No I did not, said Oscar, starting to blub, again. Nel then says - it's 1 O'clock, can we adjourn until Monday? Judge agrees. So Oscar now has the whole weekend to think about what he has said and he cannot speak to his lawyers. Very clever, by Nel. Let him stew over the weekend and find yet more holes in his story next week.

fascinating stuff.
Click to expand...

It is fascinating. In a way it is sometimes frustrating the bigger questions aren't asked and we spend an hour of questioning about plug sockets but you realise that it is perhaps easy to get your story straight on the big things, but it is the tiny things that demonstrate the inconsistencies.

Nel continues his tactic of discussing other incidents then reverting straight back to the major incident itself.

OP's problem appears to be that his version of events in a way requires him to admit he intentionally shot at the door (thinking it was an intruder) but cannot admit that as it makes him potentially guilty of the lessor charges. So we do end up with the ridiculous situation of him admitting getting his gun, flicking off the safety, approaching what he thought was the danger gun raised, but he can't admit he was intending to shoot, and says he shot 'accidently'.
 


KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Bold Seagull said:
It is fascinating. In a way it is sometimes frustrating the bigger questions aren't asked and we spend an hour of questioning about plug sockets but you realise that it is perhaps easy to get your story straight on the big things, but it is the tiny things that demonstrate the inconsistencies.

Nel continues his tactic of discussing other incidents then reverting straight back to the major incident itself.

OP's problem appears to be that his version of events in a way requires him to admit he intentionally shot at the door (thinking it was an intruder) but cannot admit that as it makes him potentially guilty of the lessor charges. So we do end up with the ridiculous situation of him admitting getting his gun, flicking off the safety, approaching what he thought was the danger gun raised, but he can't admit he was intending to shoot, and says he shot 'accidently'.
Click to expand...

Well at least when he was talking about shooting today he said "I fired the gun" and "I discharged the gun", so there is nothing accidental there.
 




C

cjd

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2006
6,104
La Rochelle
KZNSeagull said:
Court adjourned now. Lots of mistakes by Oscar, he says things then says he cannot remember what he said, then he retracts or changes what he said. Not major points, but little points. For example: Did Reeva scream after the first shot? No, she did not was the reply. Would you have heard a scream? No, Cos my ears were ringing. So you do not know if she screamed or not? She did not scream. But you have just said you would not have heard her?

Last question was "You knew she was standing behind the toilet door when you shot her?" No I did not, said Oscar, starting to blub, again. Nel then says - it's 1 O'clock, can we adjourn until Monday? Judge agrees. So Oscar now has the whole weekend to think about what he has said and he cannot speak to his lawyers. Very clever, by Nel. Let him stew over the weekend and find yet more holes in his story next week.

fascinating stuff.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that he was not allowed to speak with his lawyers over the weekend. Anyone know why this is so ...???

Fascinating case by the way...and many thanks to KZNSeagull for putting some meat on the bones. Much appreciated.
 




symyjym

symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
cjd said:
I didn't know that he was not allowed to speak with his lawyers over the weekend. Anyone know why this is so ...???

Fascinating case by the way...and many thanks to KZNSeagull for putting some meat on the bones. Much appreciated.
Click to expand...

He is still under oath and he cannot communicate with his legal team at all until he has finished in the stand.
 


KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
cjd said:
I didn't know that he was not allowed to speak with his lawyers over the weekend. Anyone know why this is so ...???

Fascinating case by the way...and many thanks to KZNSeagull for putting some meat on the bones. Much appreciated.
Click to expand...

Pleasure. Hope it helps.

As symyjym says he is under oath, so it is not only his lawyers he cannot speak to, he is not allowed to discuss the case with anyone at all, in theory.
 


C

cjd

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2006
6,104
La Rochelle
Thanks to both symyjym & KZNSeagull for enlightening me.

I learn something new everyday.
 




SK1NT

SK1NT

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2003
8,731
Thames Ditton
as always thx [MENTION=9822]KZNSeagull[/MENTION]

I cannot believe how guilty this prick sounds. Nothing adds up at all.

What is even more annoying is the constant lying in front of the poor girls family just to save his own bacon. Why someone as clever and gorgeous as Reeva would be with what sounds like a total prick is beyond me.

Shame there isn't the death penalty. Also hope if he goes down he doesn't get special treat and he slums it with other scum who will repeatedly butt **** him with his own prosthetics
 


KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
For those watching, I am not sure why the alarm monitoring company records have not been put into evidence as they would record when the alarm was set and when it was turned off. Maybe it will be later, or they do not keep records, or the alarm is not monitored, which would be odd.
 


P

Pogue Mahone

Well-known member
Apr 30, 2011
10,744
I am at home this week, so I am able to watch. Anyone know what channel it's on?
[MENTION=9822]KZNSeagull[/MENTION], your updates have been brilliant - fascinating stuff, and I haven't bothered to look for other media reports as yours have been so detailed and gripping.

Thanks.
 




KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Pogue Mahone said:
I am at home this week, so I am able to watch. Anyone know what channel it's on?

@KZNSeagull, your updates have been brilliant - fascinating stuff, and I haven't bothered to look for other media reports as yours have been so detailed and gripping.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Oh dear! I hope they are accurate then!

It is on Channel 199 of DSTV, but that will not help you!! Is it on a red button on Sky News?
 


P

Pogue Mahone

Well-known member
Apr 30, 2011
10,744
KZNSeagull said:
Oh dear! I hope they are accurate then!

It is on Channel 199 of DSTV, but that will not help you!! Is it on a red button on Sky News?
Click to expand...

I'll try that, or maybe [MENTION=16159]Bold Seagull[/MENTION] could enlighten me.

As you say, you may have been lying through your teeth, and Oscar May have come across as a picture of innocence. :smile:
 








KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Short adjournment. Oscar blubbing again.

Lots more picking of inconsistencies. The most interesting in my mind was the blood spatter on the floor and Duvet. Oscar is adamant that the duvet was on the bed and says that the blood could have gone on the duvet when it was on the bed, which it could. However, his claim that the crime scene has been moved around is now even more unlikely as the police would have had to place the duvet and jeans perfectly so that the blood spatter was in precisely the correct place, which is highly unlikely!

Also, the stomach contents. He cannot explain how Reeva still had food in her stomach. even the defence pathologist said the stomach would be empty max 6 hours after eating. They ate 7 to 8 hours before she died. Hence the significance of the alarm. Reeva must have had to turn the alarm off in order to go and get something to eat, according to Oscar she did not that he is aware of.

Another one was that he used the word whisper in his evidence when he spoke to Reeva when he heard the noise from the bathroom and now says it was a low tone. He also did not state that the noise from the bathroom was a window opening and slamming against the frame in his bail application, but does now. earlier he just referred to a noise.

Also, Reeva's sandals (slops) were on one side of the bed, but she slept on the other according to Oscar. This is the only time she slept on the other side of the bed because of Oscar's shoulder, which is quite handy as she is now not on the balcony side of the bed.

What I want Nel to ask is how he RAN for his gun and to the passage, when he cannot run on his stumps.

All good stuff. Pick, pick, pick. Oscar is still arguing with Nel, even though Nel has told him several times not to as it is hurting his credibility. He has also picked up Nel on very small details (which I think is deliberate by Nel), but then Oscar cannot remember other stuff.

Mark Batchelor is in court for some reason, listening. He looks like a wrong 'un!
Speculation is rife here that Nel is trying to beat his record of 9 days of cross examination!
 
Last edited:


Bold Seagull

Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...
Mar 18, 2010
29,797
Hove
We've lost the UK feed as OP was asked to recount exactly what he shouted at the intruders and it went something like Shane Donoghue on That's Amazing, after which he burst into tears and the judge called an adjournment....

 


KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Nel asked Oscar to go thru exactly what he did in the passage on way to the bathroom. What did he shout, when. Oscar does NOT mention he heard the toilet door slamming. Nel jumps on him, pointing out that this was also not in his bail application, nor in his plea explanation (again, Oscar blames the omission o his legal team). The ONLY time Oscar has mentioned this was in court. This could be crucial as, as Nel points out, this is a highly significant event and Oscar agrees. His pants are on fire again.
 






KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,814
Wolsingham, County Durham
Now we are getting to the crux of it. Nel is tying Oscar up in knots again.

Why did you fire at the door? I heard a sound so I fired. So what were you thinking? I did not have time to think. But you have been thinking all the time in this scenario, but now, suddenly you are not thinking? Did you fire at a perceived attacker? No, I fired at the door. More of this argument, then Nel says "so now you are changing your defence from putative self defence, to an involuntary action?" I don't know the law. "You can only have one defence, do you understand that?" Yes. "You have changed your defence because it did not happen. You fired at Reeva!" BLUB, BLUB, BLUB I did not fire at Reeva BLUB BLUB BLUB.

Court adjourned
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here