(03-03-2014, 09:10 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Glad that Wild About Trial is carrying the Pistorius trial

Thanks for that!

Jesus. I don't know as that attorney would get away with that approach here. I'm listening to him now.

Goddamn! I'd like to hit HIM with a cricket bat.

(03-03-2014, 09:27 AM)Duchess Wrote:

Goddamn! I'd like to hit HIM with a cricket bat.

So, finally prosecutor Nel objects to the badgering of his witness and Roux objects to the semantics of the objection.

He's a bulldozer alright.

DAY 1

I think the neighbor, Ms. Burger -- who claims to have heard blood curdling screaming followed by gunshots -- was a very good witness for the prosecution.

She seemed more confident and composed with Roux than did prosecutor Nel (and way more so than officer Botha at Pistorius's early hearings). She didn't back down from her claims, didn't allow him to make her doubt her own memory or what she heard, refused to answer for what her husband and police officers did or didn't hear/do the night of the shooting...

Good way to end day 1 for the prosecution:
Roux ended the day by again questioning Ms. Burger intensively about whether what she heard was definitely gunshots and suggested that she may have heard Pistorius trying to bust the toilet door with a cricket bat instead.

Burger replied: "Most people in South Africa know the difference in sound between gun shots and a cricket bat. I am 100 per cent certain I heard gunshots that evening. I know what one sounds like".

Burger also repeated her previous assertion that she cannot understand how Pistorius could have not heard the screaming.

There is no doubt that gunshots were fired that night; uncontested by the defense. I think what Roux was trying to do was suggest that Ms. Burger is confused about the sequence of what she heard. He wants the court to believe that her perceptions and recollections are faulty.

IMO, Roux was attempting to plant the possibility that the screams she heard came after the banging noises (and that they were actually the screams of Pistorius when he realized it was Reeva in the toilet). Obviously, in Pistorius' version of events, Reeva wouldn't have screamed because there was no turmoil in the house and she didn't know her boyfriend would be "mistakenly" shooting her through the closed door. The screams before the gunshots are a huge problem for the defense.

I don't think Roux succeeded today. Ms. Burger was clear in her account: she heard terrible petrified screams, then gunshots, then a man screaming, "help!".

(03-03-2014, 10:05 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: I think the neighbor, Mrs. Burger -- who claims to have heard blood curdling screaming followed by gunshots -- was a very good witness for the prosecution.

She did great! I was so glad she didn't allow herself to be intimidated.

I used to be a huge fan of defense attorneys, not so much anymore.

Prosecution Witnesses - Day 2

Got to sleep in a bit this morning -- only saw the last half hour of court today.

This is based on reports from live Twitter coverage.

Prosecution Witness 1, Ms. Burger, back on the stand
Ms. Burger was back on the stand and Roux continued his cross-examination, more of the same questions trying to get different answers from the witness. Finally, prosecutor Nel objected and the judge agreed that all had been asked and answered repeatedly. Burger was reportedly in tears and exhausted when she was dismissed, but held up well. Very strong witness, IMO.

Don't know if this trial is a fair representation of general court proceedings in South Africa, but the defense attorney here is getting a lot more leeway in terms of badgering and conduct, and the prosecutor and judge are much more laid back and less authoritative than in the US.

Prosecution Witness 2 called: Pistorius Neighbor, Ms. Van der Merwe
She was a weak witness and was handled much more gently on cross-examination by Roux than was the state's first witness, Ms. Burger.

Roux said that Oscar's bathroom and bedroom are on opposite side of house to Ms. Van der Merwe, but yet she says "I was terribly frightened (when I heard the shots). I sat up in bed. It was a long time ago and I can't remember any more". Roux suggested that Van der Merwe didn't hear any argument.

Van der Merwe answered quietly, "yes, I did" then admitted that she cannot say whether there was silence before the shots.

IMO, she's not an asset for the prosecution, nor a problem for the defense - too unsure and leaves the door open for Roux to claim she heard Oscar screaming only, not Reeva.

Prosecution Witnesses Day 2 (continued)

I watched this portion of the trial as it occured via streaming.

Prosecution Witness 3 - Mr. Johnson (Ms. Burger's husband).
Ms. Burger's husband, Mr. Johnson, testified about what he heard early Valentine's morning 2013 and the aftermath.

He heard what he thought was a home invasion because there was screaming of both a woman and a man and gun shots. He originally thought there were 5 or 6 gunshots, but understands that it was actually 4 shots.

He first heard a woman screaming "help", then gunshots, then a man screaming "help, help, help".

In his mind, he thought that a burglar had forced a man to watch his wife being shot.

His wife heard the incident as well -- Mr. Johnson called the estate's security to report the incident.

Turns out, he called the security for the estates where he and his wife had previously lived as she hadn't changed the security number in her cell phone. (HOTD: hope like hell that prosecutors have that call verified, recorded would be even better).

Neither he nor his wife called the Silverwood or Silverlake (adjacent) security - they were processing what they'd heard and very disturbed; also thought they heard security approaching the incident at this time. They assumed that nearer neighbors had called and would be giving witness statements.

Mr. Johnson couldn't sleep. He was worried about his safety and his wife's -- believing that if a home invasion could happen to another couple in the highly secure complex, it could happen to them. He was contemplating enhanced security for their home. He went to work early, around 6:30 a.m. He called a friend and told him what he'd heard and asked the friend if he'd heard about the incident (I believe the friend works in some kind of security or legal capacity - no sure), then he told several colleagues what he'd heard. (HOTD: wouldn't be surprised if some of these colleagues are among the 107 witnesses expected to be called during the trial.)

The friend called back and told him that there was a rumor that Oscar Pistorius had shot his girlfriend in the adjacent estates. Mr. Johnson had a hard time matching that with what he and his wife had heard because they heard both a female and male screaming for help during the incident. He called his wife, who was surprised as well. At this point, the shooting was hitting the internet and television news in a big way.

Mr. Johnson talked to a couple of neighbors. Neither of them heard the screaming, but one heard the final gunshots. These neighbors had air conditioning running and/or ceiling fans, filtering out noises.

Burger and Johnson assumed neighbors nearer to Pistorius' home would have heard the whole thing and given witness statements, plus they did not want to subject to what they knew would be huge worldwide exposure. They did not call police and headed off for a planned weekend away.

On the way to their destination, they listened to the Pistorius pre-trial hearing/bail application on the radio and were shocked to hear the defense attorney state that there was one neighbor who heard something, but wasn't sure what she heard (which the defense attorney claimed was Pistorius screaming, not Reeva). At this point, they knew they had to come forward, out of moral obligation.

Mr. Johnson will face cross-examination by Roux tomorrow. I expect fireworks - Mr. Johnson seems less steely than his wife, but confident in what he heard.

More stuff

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ma...ve-updates

For anyone interested in catching up with the trial.

Video: Pistorius Trial Day 1
(go to 1:15 - the trial was delayed and the blank time was recorded)
The two cooperative judges who will be consulting in verdict with Misipa are sworn, charges are read, Pistorius pleads.


Video: Day 1 continued
Prosecution star witness, Michelle Burger testifies and undergoes cross-examination


Video: Day 2
Michell Burger cross-examination continues, other witnesses called.


Video: Day 2 continued
Mr. Johnson testifies, trial adjourns for the day.

Hmmm...the picture being painted so far seems to be Reeva locked herself in the bathroom as a result of Oscars behaviour, she seemed to be in obvious fear for her wellbeing or life even.

I think Oscar has a fantastic attorney, the sumbitch makes my head spin.

Yes he's another smart talking educated bully just like the tosspots who defended Zimmerman.

“Ah an unarmed teenage nigga is dead and we helped the killer get away with it! Ice crams for everyone! I'll post a pic online to really rub the noses of the kids family in it!”

Where are the Steenkamps?

Neither of the Steenkamps attended any preliminary hearings. Mr. Steenkamp reportedly suffered a stroke very recently; not well enough to travel.

Mrs. Steenkamp attented the first day of trial. She told reporters that she was there only because she wanted to see Pistorius face-to-face, for him to look her in the eye. That didn't happen.

After sitting through the first day of the trial dressed in black, she gave an interview to NBC Today show in the United States.


June Steenkamp during first day of testimony

From June Steenkamp's NBC interview:
"I don't want to live with bitterness," she told the Today show in her first live interview since the trial started. "One must forgive. I've lost everything that's important to me, and still, I can forgive. I can forgive."

"I wanted to see Oscar face-to-face," she said, "and let him know I was there." But Pistorius "never looked my way, or he didn't have an opportunity to do that," she said.

June Steenkamp added it doesn't matter what happens to the man accused of murder, because her daughter "is never coming back."

I feel for Reeva's parents and her second family with whom she was living when she was killed (they are attending the trial).

If it were my daughter who was killed, I would be at that trial every damned day and I think it matters a great deal what happens to Pistorius. While Reeva's not coming back, Pistorius should be handed a punishment to fit the crime and, if he's guilty, poses a threat to others if not held accountable. The "forgiveness" part, well, I'd try. Mostly, I'd be focused on justice for my daughter. But, I understand that hearing the details is probably very painful and everyone grieves in their own way. Wishing the Steenkamps peace.

DAY 3

Ear Witness Cross-Examination
Mr. Johnson was cross-examined by Roux. He doesn't seem to have crumbled, but his demeanor isn't as strong as his wife's (IMO). Roux suggested the same thing to Johnson as he did to Burger; that Johnson had actually heard the cricket bat rather than gun shots after the first screams. Roux brought the cricket bat into court. Johnson was dismissed.

Burger's and Johnson's witness accounts were evidence unknown to me before the trial started. I think their statements very much bolster the prosecution's charge of premeditated murder.

If Roux doesn't present witnesses or facts that clearly impeach their characters and motives, I think Michelle Burger and her husband Charl Johnson are a big threat to Pistorius's chances of selling a mistaken identity defense. If the judge finds the couple credible, the female screams they heard before the shots make it virtually impossible to believe Pistorius was shooting at what he thought was an intruder and instead points strongly to a domestic dispute murder, IMO.

Gun Charges - Three Witnesses Called
Witnesses to the charges associated with firing a gun in a restaurant were called today as well. Pistorius' friend Kevin Lerena told the court that Oscar wanted to see another guest's gun during a group dinner at a restaurant. The gun owner was Darren Fresco. Fresco told Oscar that there was a bullet in chamber and passed it under the table - Pistorius accidentally discharged the gun (and a witness says there was a child at the next table). The noisy restaurant went silent. Lerena's toe was grazed. He was in shock. Pistorius asked if everyone was okay and then asked Darren to take the blame, which Darren did.

The restaurant was called Tasha's. The owner and his wife, Richard and Maria Loupis, who were both present when the gun went off, testified - not really critical testimony as far as I can see. After it happened, they were told that Darren Fresco had accidentally discharged the gun, the group apologized, Pistorius paid the bill and the group left.

Live Tweets Day 3 Coverage:
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_...3-20140305
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_...2-20140305

I think the prosecution are really pursuing the restaurant incident to try and get it into the judges mind that Pistorius is a deceptive twat willing to do anything to escape justice.

Roux has been all bark and no bite for me so far.

I see bookmakers are taking bets on the outcome of the trial.

⁹⁄₂ if he's found guilty.

¹⁰⁰⁰⁄₁ if he walks.

Wacca wacca! I'm here all week folks!

(03-05-2014, 04:30 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: I think the prosecution are really pursuing the restaurant incident to try and get it into the judges mind that Pistorius is a deceptive twat willing to do anything to escape justice.

Roux has been all bark and no bite for me so far.

I think you're right that Nel wants the judge to see that Pisotorius has a history of making up stories to save his ass when he gets into trouble with a gun.

A second reason that Nel is pursuing the old weapons-related charges is, IMO, to increase the chances of Pistorius serving time (or longer time) if he's found not guilty of the premeditated murder and gets a light sentence if convicted of only culpable homicide. Worst case: even if Pistorius walks completely on both possible murder charges, he could do some time if found guilty on the weapons charges. Back-up and cushioning - I think it's wise.

Despite his loud barking, Roux hasn't succeeded in making me doubt the prosecution witnesses so far either. There are still about 100 other witnesses on the list, so he may have something more up his chomping sleeve down the road?

DAY 4

Ear witness Charl Johnson was again called to the stand, with his personal notes of the incident which he said he wrote down a year ago to jog his own memory in the future (per advice of an advocate friend).

Roux was all over him and it was difficult to follow what the hell Roux was trying to accomplish.

In his final attempts to discredit this witness under cross, he asked Johnson if he had spoken with his wife Michelle Burger about what happened that night; Johnson confirmed that he had. Roux appears to be trying to convince the court that Burger's and Johnson's personal statements are faulty because they influenced each other. IDK. They were laying in bed together when it happened. They're married. I'd think it weird/suspicious if they DIDN'T talk to each about it.

Next, Roux accused Johnson point blank of "designing" his statement in order to "incriminate" Oscar Pistorius. Johnson denied that accusation and said his purpose in coming forward was to give a neutral account of what he'd heard -- out of moral obligation.

Then, Roux again suggested that Johnson heard a cricket bat banging the bathroom door instead of gunshots after the female screaming (which Roux contends was actually Pistorius screaming). Johnson countered that he owned a 9mm and knows what it sounds like.

Lastly, Roux accused Johnson of lying and said that he was simply too far away from the incident to hear it. Johnson told the court that sound travel very far in the estates and that they can even here jackal calls from a nearby game reserve.

Johnson was dismissed. He, like his wife, was a strong and convincing witness for the prosecution, IMO.

Prosecutors did a good job of keeping the details of the their witness' statement out of the press over the last year. Roux knew about the witnesses and statements from discovery, of course, but I think he failed big time in his strategy of trying to convince the couple and the court that Burger and Johnson never heard female screams and that they heard a cricket bat instead of gun shots. He then failed again in his insinuation that they never heard anything or were out to get Pistorius. Big points for the prosecution, IMO.

DAY 4 (cont'd) - WITNESS/DOCTOR TESTIFIES

Johan Stipp, a radiologist and another neighbor at Silverwood estates said he was woken by three loud bangs. He got up out of bed and looked out of his balcony. He saw the light on (HOTD: this is very bad for Pistorius; Pistorius claims there were no lights on in the house when he assumed an intruder was in the toilet and that he didn't dare turn any on).

Stipp then heard screaming, what shouted like a woman screaming three or four times. He then phoned security. He thinks he heard shots and then screams.

Mr Stipp said: "I went inside bedroom and called Silverwood Security, then tried 1011 - that seemed to be out of order, while I was thinking what number to dial next, I then heard three more bangs. I told them what I heard and I said 'please send someone'." I then heard a man's voice shouting 'help, help, help'.

He drove car to Pistorius' house. There was a woman standing in the door. Dr. Stipp offered to help and he was shown a woman lying on her back on the floor. "As I approached her he (Pistorius)had left hand on right groin and right hand had fingers in her mouth. The first thing he said was 'I shot her, I thought she was a burglar and I shot her".

She had a gunshot wound on her upper arm and thigh. He talks rather graphically about brain tissue being mixed with hair. Pistorius was crying, saying he'd dedicate his life to God if she would only live. He said he knew quite quickly he could not revive her. He had his head in hands and was distressed.


Pistorius during Stipp's account of assessing Reeva after the shooting

Cross-Examination by Roux
Roux trying again to tell the witness that what they heard was Pistorius breaking down the door with a cricket bat, not gun shots. Stipp used to be in the military and says he is very familiar to the sound of a gun shot.

Roux: "All three specialists I consulted said that that person, after the shots, would not have been able to scream." Stipp agrees.

Nel for the prosecution says Reeva's screams came before the fatal shots at 3.17. He agrees after the last shot she would not have been able to scream and she would have been dead.

Roux saying the male and female voices Dr Stipp heard were only male, and belonged to Pistorius. According to him there were no shouts from Reeva.

Stipp confirms he's sure he heard male and female voices that night "intermingled" (HOTD: another big blow for the prosecution).

Dr Stipp: "he definitely wanted her to live. He looked sincere to me, he was crying, there were tears on his face. He was actively trying to assist her, with one hand on the groin wound and another trying to help her to breathe."

Day 4 -- March 6 2014 -- References

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3



Live Tweets of March 6^th coverage
Part 1: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_...4-20140306
Part 2: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Oscar_...2-20140306

(03-06-2014, 11:12 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Stipp confirms he's sure he heard male and female voices that night "intermingled" (HOTD: another big blow for the prosecution).

Huh?