Oscar Trial – Has the State’s Case Been Proven?

OP and Roux

There are only two questions at the core of this trial. Did Oscar intend to kill a person and did he know that person was Reeva.

All of us collectively have spent over a year pontificating about the “whys” and “hows” of this case but at the end of the day, why he did it or what they may or may not have fought about, is actually not important to the verdict.

It’s very easy to get bogged down in those details, and that almost always plays in favor of the defense predominantly in a jury trial. However, a Judge knows that many questions in these types of cases are almost never resolved. Judges rely on the facts of the case, not the possible scenarios.

Does it feel more comfortable to know “why” when these murders happen? Of course it does. As humans, it’s our nature to want to know why. But the reality is that it is an extremely rare circumstance that we ever truly know why anybody kills.

For those who believe that there’s too much doubt to convict OP because there’s no evidence of a fight, or because OP was a good and kind person who would never do something like this, or because he seemed genuinely upset afterwards… perhaps consider this…

Oscar was a gun owner and gun enthusiast, by his own admission. Based on evidence presented at trial, his gun was partially for protection and partially for bravado. He admittedly carried it around wherever he went and acted carelessly with it on more than one occasion. Is this important to the case? Yes it is. It shows that it’s “possible” for something to go wrong.

Is it a reality that people who own guns versus people who don’t own guns have a higher risk of injury or death? Yes. This is not a PSA on gun dangers; it is simply an acknowledgement that somebody in possession of a deadly weapon is capable of causing death.

And then add in Oscar’s penchant, and again his own admission, for becoming frustrated easily, having a short fuse and often being stressed out. The two are a dangerous combination. You don’t need to be a monster, a sociopath or even a terrible person for a killing to happen in a bad moment under these conditions. It happens every day to very average people.

But back to my original point for this post… does any of that really matter to the verdict? I say, no, it does not.

DID OSCAR INTEND TO KILL A PERSON – MURDER? I adamantly say YES. Here are the facts of the case:

1. When presented with a moment that OP perceived to be dangerous, he consciously chose to retrieve his weapon. Whether you believe his story that the window opening startled him, or believe the State that he and Reeva were in a fight, it is common cause that he retrieved his weapon for a purpose.

2. OP was adequately trained on this weapon.

3. OP consciously chose to keep this weapon loaded and one up at all times.

4. OP consciously removed the holster and safety from the weapon during the incident.

5. According to OP, he consciously chose to keep the lights off so as not to give away his position.

6. According to OP, he consciously yelled at THE PERSON to get out of his house.

7. According to OP, hearing the toilet door slam and seeing it closed solidified for him that A PERSON was inside of the toilet room.

8. OP was aware that he was not the only person in the house that night – he knew Reeva was there in the very same bedroom suite with him.

9. He never asked/didn’t try to identify who was in the bathroom. He just knew it was A PERSON.

10. According to OP, his finger was consciously on the trigger of his loaded, one up, weapon.

11. Although not admitted by OP, his gun was aimed directly at the toilet door. Behind that door was A PERSON. The ballistics evidence proves that the shots were not wild – they were consciously pointed at the door. OP slipped up when he said he didn’t fire a warning shot in a different direction because the bullet could have bounced off of the shower door and hit him. He was aware and conscious of his own safety and in which direction he was shooting – pointing it towards THE PERSON.

12. Admitted by OP, a noise in the toilet room, which would have been caused by A PERSON, prompted him to shoot.

13. He shot four times.

14. He left the gun, with remaining bullets, cocked and ready to fire. This means, he consciously stopped shooting at some point. He didn’t empty the entire gun. He stopped after four. A conscious act.

15. THE PERSON in the toilet room never spoke a word, was never seen, never indicated that they had a weapon and never presented a threat. This is not putative self defense. Hearing a window open in the bathroom when you are sharing your bedroom with a person that you are aware is awake, is not sufficient cause to believe that you are under attack and you have no choice but to kill.

16. OP cannot logically claim that every single action he made that night was carefully thought out, except for one, the four shots that killed Reeva. It doesn’t work that way. No experienced Judge, or quite frankly, clearly thinking person, would ever believe that a person who has been deemed mentally competent by a team of psychiatrists and a psychologist “wasn’t thinking” when he pulled the trigger, considering all of his earlier actions during the incident.

THIS IS WHY I BELIEVE THAT HE HAS BEEN PROVEN GUILTY OF MURDER, NOT CULPABLE HOMICIDE. HE SHOT AND KILLED WITH INTENT.

DID OSCAR KNOW IT WAS REEVA? I say, yes. Here is an abbreviated list:

1. The fans and the balcony light. When the incident first happened, OP claimed that he had to go “out” on to his patio to retrieve his fan. Now on the stand, the fans were never outside, just halfway outside in the doorway. He never had to go “out” to move anything. In fact according to Oscar’s version, he was only standing a few feet away from where Reeva was in bed, she was awake AND the balcony light was on. The likelihood that he would be clueless that she moved is very slim. He had to add in the second fan, because two fans were found in the room and it takes longer to move two fans than one. He screwed up though when he told the court that both fans were left on the entire night. The police found one fan in the corner, unplugged, and the other fan was in front of the door (unmoved) and not on. His story does not match the physical evidence.

2. The right side of the bed. That area was cluttered with cords, iPad/iPad cover, shirt, clippers standing up on a charger. Yet, OP claims that he walked around that area on his stumps, and later sat there to put on his prosthetics which had been left in that same area. His account of walking around in that area during the incident cannot be possible with the items on the floor.

3. The duvet. It was found on the ground in front of the bed (blocking a clear entrance to the balcony). It also had blood spatter on it which was very likely caused when OP carried Reeva’s body out of the bedroom. If the duvet was lying in that area during the incident, it would have been impossible for OP to run to the balcony and open the doors, especially on his stumps, without falling. He did not testify to falling. Instead, he testified that the duvet was absolutely always on the bed and the police moved it. The physical evidence does not support these false claims.

4. Lack of bloody hand prints. OP was covered in blood after pulling Reeva out of the toilet room. We saw the photos of him that morning. He claims he had to deactivate his alarm (on a remote) to get out of his bedroom, then he had to unlock the bedroom door and open it, and then run downstairs to open the front door. There was no evidence presented of bloody hand prints on his alarm remote, bedroom door, front door or iPhones. Why? There are a few possible reasons: He either ran out of the bedroom and downstairs to open door and make calls BEFORE he pulled Reeva out of the bathroom (which would be inconsistent with his story) or he washed his hands immediately after he pulled her out of the bathroom before calling anybody or going downstairs. There is no dispute that he made some calls within minutes after the shooting. If there are no bloody prints on the 0020 phone that was used, then he either washed his hands first or he hadn’t pulled her out of the bathroom yet. Both scenarios do not match his story of desperately battling to get her out of the toilet room immediately upon thinking it was her in that room. Something doesn’t add up here.

5. The screams. OP claims that Reeva never uttered a single word during the entire event from the point that he got out of bed, even though she was awake (and he states that he knew she was awake). However, multiple witnesses distinctly heard a woman’s voice and a woman’s screams before and during the gunshots. Mrs. van der Mewre heard a woman’s voice arguing from 2am-3am, when OP and Reeva were supposedly asleep according to OP. Burger, Johnson, and both Stipps heard terrified female screams up until the last bangs. Then silence. The only way that the defense could try to explain this was to say that Oscar screams like a woman and every one of the witnesses was mistaken. They claimed they would prove in court that he screams like a woman, they even did audio tests prior to trial, yet nothing was ever played for the court. Obviously those tests failed as miserably as OP’s own testimony on the stand. The ear witnesses that the defense brought to trial, Nhlengethwas and Motshuane, ended up supporting the state’s case. They stated they heard a man crying after the bangs. The fact that they saw the security vehicle/Stander’s mini-cooper within minutes of hearing the cries, fits the timeline that the gunshots were at 3:15+ (not earlier as the Defense says). When trying to understand some of the differences in ear witness testimony, it is essential to identify who heard screams and who heard cries. The people who heard screams, heard them BEFORE THE BANGS. They all identified those screams as a woman. The people who heard cries, heard them AFTER THE BANGS. They identified those cries as a man. Reeva screaming before the shots. Then silence = death. Then Oscar crying afterwards. Use that equation when listening to the ear witness testimony, and it tells the story!

6. Stomach contents. I recognize these are highly subjective. But it is relevant circumstantial evidence in that it supports the van der Mewre evidence of hearing a woman around 2am that morning. It opens up the window of opportunity that Reeva was indeed awake and not asleep as OP states.

7. The bathroom light OP testified that the bathroom light was off during the gunshots. He didn’t turn it on until later, after running from room to room. Annette Stipp, who was awake at the time of the first bangs, around 3am, saw the bathroom light on immediately after hearing the bangs. Dr. Stipp also saw it on. That bathroom light was on during the event! This is a huge discrepancy in Oscar’s story.

8. The aim OP refused to admit that he aimed at the door during his testimony. He claims his gun was pointed in the general vicinity of the door (paraphrasing a bit here). But the trajectory of his shots not only support that he was aiming at the door, you take a look at this picture and decide for yourself if he was pointing at Reeva. Ballistics proved that there was time between the first shot (the hip) and the subsequent shots when she was down on the magazine rack. He shot once, and then continued to shoot three more times. Three of those bullets hit her.

bathroom

30

9. The police/security. On one hand, OP states that he is extremely security conscious and has outfitted his home with all sorts of extra security measures. He states that when he initially heard a noise that he perceived as an intruder, he repeatedly yelled to Reeva to call the police. Yet, he never used his panic alarm and he never once asked the police for help. He claims he does “not remember” speaking to security guard Baba at all that night, yet Baba testifies that Oscar did speak to him and told him “everything is fine”. OP is able to remember other phone calls that he made just moments before, but does not remember the suspicious and incriminating “everything is fine” phone call. Selective memory, especially during crucial moments of a crime timeline, is a HUGE indication to me that the person is not being truthful. Circumstantially, you can absolutely surmise that OP did not want the police at his house. OP calling the Standers first before anybody else supports this. Then add to that OP moving the body and asking the Standers to take Reeva to the hospital themselves, even though she had a gaping hole in her head with brain matter coming out, indicates that he wanted Reeva’s body out of the house. I don’t know anybody who would move a body under those conditions.

There are SO many elements of OP’s own story that are not supported at all by ear witnesses, physical evidence, ballistics evidence, medical examiner evidence and his own defense witnesses. Those “expert” witnesses simply were not able to support his claims. They all came to court with reports that had been written within days and weeks before their testimony – after all of the crucial State’s witnesses, as well as OP, had already testified. You can absolutely add that to the pile of circumstantial evidence against OP.

There are many, many more items that I could list here but I wanted to highlight some of the crucial ones. Does it matter what they were fighting about, or even if there was a fight? Does it matter what the Stipps heard closer to 3am? Does it matter whether or not OP immediately felt regret after pulling the trigger? I say, no, it does not.

There is a mountain of evidence that points to OP’s story not being true. If you don’t believe Oscar’s story, then it’s simple. He knew it was Reeva in the toilet room and he killed her with intent (per my points above).

326 Replies to “Oscar Trial – Has the State’s Case Been Proven?”

  1. Great analysis and summary, could not have written it any better. just one correction: you stated: “He has had to add in to his evidence that he immediately screamed after the shots were fired due to the Stipps hearing the female screams immediately after the 3:15+ bangs.” should read immediately after the 3:00 first set of bangs” Roux desperately tried to get the Stipp’s to say that the screams they heard seconds after the 3:00 bangs, was a many minutes delay trying to say it was Oscar’s screams after the gunshots.
    The Stipp’s did not hear any more female screams after the 3:15 gunshots.. It was really 3:12 when the shots went off to kill Reeva.

  2. Juror13. do you have access to the “entire” REDIRECT of Dr. Stipp’s by advocate Nel? On utube Day 5 part 1 ends with Nel’s redirect of Dr. Stipp but not the end of it, Day 5 part 2 begins with S. Taylor…? any link for that?? thanks…

  3. You have mapped it all out so clearly and logically – great job!

    Just one query about point 16. Don’t you mean “OP CAN logically claim that every single action he made that night was carefully thought out…”?

    1. Hi William, I think maybe you’re misunderstanding that sentence. I’m saying that it’s NOT logical for OP to say he was conscious for every decision EXCEPT firing the four shots.

  4. Brilliant summary and totally agree with point 4. I think he must have looked around at some point checking to see if he had disturbed any of the neighbours. Maybe once he realised lights were coming on all around he had to change his plans – he had already opened the front door, got bin bags to hand and possible involvement of mystery man, Frank. Hence the phone call to Stander and following events.

  5. Hi Juror 13. Fantastic post. Very clearly written. Just two details to correct. In point 4, the phone is 0020 not 0200 and in point 5, it is Stander’s mini-cooper not mini-copper.

  6. love ur statement, i agree, he is so guilty he should just go to jail serve 10 / 20 years he should take responsibility for his actions. Bullshit baffels brains. he needs to suffer for what reeva went through.

  7. Point 15 needs to be scrapped and replaced with a whole new section “Did OP in his subjective mind believe he was under attack and had to fire four shots to ward off that attack?”

    This, and only this, gives you the answer to whether you believe he fired in putative self defence.

  8. Wow! Great reflection on what happened. I was unable to watch live and have been getting scraps of info from various news chanel reports. Your summary is so comprehensive and I agree completely.
    Your remarks concerning the two very basic questions at hand forces ones brain to stop trying to work out all the inconcistencies to bring it back to a simple yes or no answer.

    Does he feel remorse…? I think he does, not entirely sure its for Reeva though. His life will never be the same, guilty or not, he has to live with it either way.
    His initial statement right after that night: “should there be a trial” got me thinking that he never thought for a moment that his story will be disputed and that he almost saw himself above the law from the word go.

    1. This is so true. I remember that statement of OP, “……should there be a trial”. He was totally convinced that, because he is Oscar Pistorius, and has access to what was commonly believed to be “the best lawyers”, who got him out of trouble on countless occasions, it would be easy as pie. He never thought he would come up against, the brilliant Adv. Gerrie Nel. His concocted story of putative self-defense against a phantom intruder, soon morphed into a number of equally ridiculous versions under the cross examination of Gerrie Nel. That is why he [OP] became frustrated, angry and argumentative on the witness stand when Gerrie Nel shredded to bits his fabrication of events. OP realized that even his staged retching, vomiting and wailing did not get him off the hook. Then came the totally incompetent defense experts who conducted hurried tests and tailored accounts to try and fit in with the state’s witnesses and ballistic and forensic evidence. Gerrie Nel made them fumble, stumble, stutter and contradict themselves that they were sorry they ever tried to cover for OP. The wise ones decided in the end not to testify at all in the aftermath of the few defense witnesses who had been brazen enough to do so. The prize for the most incriminating witness of all MUST go to the gunman himself. None other than Oscar Leonard Pistorius!

  9. This is a comment I made April 18, 2014

    OP’s testimony if true breaks the laws of physics:

    OP claims that he pointed the gun in front of him with bent elbows towards the toilet door. He claims that when he heard “wood moving” this triggered him to discharge four shots from the gun. He claims there wasn’t time to think and he didn’t think while the four shots were being discharged.

    If this testimony was true there is no way one could match the evidence of the holes in the door without breaking the laws of physics: the force of the first gunshot would create a force directed down the arm to the bent elbows, this force would cause the elbows to move and bend further and cause the shoulders to pivot such that any further bullets would be directed BELOW the first and in a line …

    Any other pattern requires the arms to be in a locked position with straight elbows and / or conscious thinking time to redirect the aim.

  10. Where does Oscar say he carried a gun around for bravado?

    Yes it is more likely for a gun owner to shoot someone than a non gun owner. Just like it is more likely for a car owner to run someone over with their car than a non car owner. A car can be a deadly weapon capable of causing death.

    1) Oscar acted under the assumption of extreme conditions (intruder in his home) and true physical disadvantage to protect himself and Reeva. He retrieved his gun for protection, he was acting under the misinterpretation of a sound and his own long known fears of an intruder.

    2) Adequately trained while not under duress. Extenuating circumstances, extreme situation and so on.

    3) Many people in SA probably keep their weapons loaded and at the ready.

    4) It would seem bizarre to have a weapon at the ready and not immediately get to it if you perceived an intruder was in your home.

    5) Still thinking, still believing he and Reeva were in danger, still filled with fear and at a grave physical disadvantage. Nothing to see here.

    6) Consistent with the most credible scream testimony.

    7) Yes a person he believed to be an intruder who would harm him and Reeva.

    8) Yes he knew that Reeva was there and he thought she was still in the bedroom his horrific and deadly mistake.

    9) He thought it was an intruder meaning to do him and Reeva harm I hardly doubt it would cross his mind to ask who they were.
    Yes. In his mind he was ready to protect himself and Reeva from an intruder.

    10) Where it should have been if there really was an intruder in his home.

    11) The ballistic evidence shows that 4 shots were fired through the door they were not a tight range of bullets. It is your opinion that Oscar “messed up” when he said that he did not fire a warning shot because he was fearful of a ricochetting bullet harming him. He was fearful and in a fight mode it was not until he heard a noise in the bathroom which he perceived as the intruder coming out of the bathroom that he made the claim that he acted without consciousness.

    12) Yes. In his mind to protect himself and Reeva.

    13) Yes he shot four times.

    14)You can not say whether this was a conscious act or a stunned stopping of his actions based on the horror of the whole situation to say it was a conscious act is to not understand the human mind. It is a subjective opinion of the event.

    15) Someone breaking into a home being warned to get out and trying to enter further into said home is certainly an act of aggression, that is what Oscar perceived was happening.

    16) Oscar is not making that claim.

    I’ll address your “He had to know it was Reeva” later. I do not believe he knew it was Reeva, I believe it was a terrible accident.

    1. Respectfully, I believe your arguments are based on emotion and not on the physical and circumstantial evidence of the case. Oscar’s story is not supported by the evidence.

      Also, I did not state that Oscar claimed he had a gun for bravado. I stated that evidence in court showed it was partially for bravado. (Shooting range video, Tasha’s, Vaal River taking gun on boat/shooting out the roof, etc)

    2. If Oscar Pistorius was even remotely interested in protecting Reeva, she would be alive today. 1…2…3…4 bullets fired with such precision and aimed exactly where Reeva was cowering and screaming for her life= premeditated murder!

  11. You are correct, it is my error when it comes to Oscar and bravado and his gun, it is your interpretation that the court proceedings show this, you didn’t say Oscar said he had a gun partially for bravado.

    Johnson and Burger contradicted each other. The other ear witnesses were certainly acoustically challenged when it came to interpreting what they heard due objectively to distance and also to Oscars hgh pitched voice when he becomes emotional.

    Masipa even corrected Nel when Nel claimed that Burger heard voices, as it was “a voice” she heard and it only could have been Oscar’s voice.

    Respectfully I am looking at the evidence not feeling or viewing things emotionally or through the lens of popular bias.

    1. There has been no evidence presented in court to prove that Oscar screams like a woman. The defense admittedly did scream test but never submitted them to the Judge. One can surmise this is because it didn’t help their case.

      Burger, Johnson and both Stipps all defiantly state that they heard a woman screaming in fear for her life. Those screams escalated, then shots were heard, then silence. They all match.

      The male crying heard afterwards (Oscar) was witnessed and described as male by Mr van der Mewre, Nhlengetgwas, Montshuane and Carice. All of those witnesses hearing a male also experienced the vehicles arriving momentarily after. This is consistent with the gunshots being close to the 3:15 timeframe. Screams before shots (Reeva) and cries after (Oscar).

  12. I CAN WALK ON WATER AND FLY THROUGH THE AIR BY FLAPPING MY ARMS.

    or MY SCREAMS AND SHOUTS SOUND LIKE THOSE OF A WOMAN…yet I am a man and I do not suffer from erectile dysfunction and nor do i inject quack medications into my appendage to treat such a condition.

    Both claims are highly improbable. But as I assert it then should a court accept these as facts or reliable or even being reasonably possibly true.
    The answer is NO. This is because it is improbable so to accept the assertion then I would need to provide supporting evidence.
    If no evidence to support this assertion is provided then the court is not likely to accept is as being a fact in the case.

    If witness testimony is given that is contrary to a claimed assertion then the claimed assertion will by virtue of the consideration of this evidence make a decision of fact. That being that the asserted claim is false and the contrary position is the decided fact.

    In the OP trial the judge WILL find that OP’s screams and shouts do not sound like those of a female as that is the only reasonable decision she can make from the evidence.

  13. Fawn, you are simply echoing OP`s testimony, and ignoring the facts.

    Roux claimed that he would PROVE OP screamed like a woman, to explain why THREE credible witnesses heard a woman scream, where is the proof?? How can this evidence possibly be ignored now?

    Clarice Stander lived the furthest from OP`s house yet she clearly identified a man screaming for help. Why then are we questioning the hearing of someone who lives next door to OP??

    Roux asked a music producer to record the bat/gun sound? Why not get a proper sound expert like Mr Lin, and not someone who`s job it is to “produce” a sound?

    Why was Mr Lin only asked to do the sound test a week before testifying (15 MONTHS AFTER SHOOTING!)? And what was the point since he himself said it was impossible to recreate the circumstances now.

    Since OP has now been given a clean mental bill of health, tell me what the hell was Vorster talking about? All OP supporters jumped on the GAD bandwagon to explain shooting, but this was total rubbish.

    Speaking of rubbish, what the hell was Derman talking about when he says OP has very limited mobility!! The whole world then saw opposite.

    That`s two “expert” witnesses who have been proved 100% wrong, was any of the States witnesses this wide of the mark?

    OP simply cannot excuse not checking if RS was still in bed. Time and his disability was NOT a factor.

    OP clearly lied about his conversation with Roux regarding the ammo charge. Unless you think OP can lecture Roux about law.

    Why didnt Roux have any proof that the gun in Tashas COULD go off by itself, if that’s what OP told him? Why didnt Roux challenge Mangena when he said its impossible??

    Mangena`s testimony was solid. Bullet two missed and caused the marks to her back, which means she was in defensive position when shot and had time to scream, which THREE witnesses heard.

    I could go on but we`d need our own expert to measure OP`s bullshit

  14. I believe Oscar’s feminine high pitched voice when he became emotional in the courtroom will speak for itself when it comes to him sounding like a woman. The Judge and her assessors are not void of reasoning skills.

    Burger and Johson were 177 meters away. The Stipp’s home was 72 meters away. Security which was very near Oscar’s house heard no fight when van der Merwe (100 meters away) had her pillow over her head due to fight she heard.

    Nothing there is anywhere near evidence beyond a rational doubt.

    1. You are correct when you say the Judge and assessors are not void of reasoning skills. They will not ignore the facts of the case just because OP would like them to. Masipa did not appear to be inspired by OP’s childish behavior on the stand.

    2. Even the two women that the defense hauled into court and asked to reproduce the screams that OP supposedly made, sounded so ridiculous, and I’m sure the one still has a sore throat today, trying to help OP out. After all of that she concluded, “that is how it sounded my lady……but like a man’s voice.” Do you get anything more ridiculous than that?

      1. She aided the State’s case, because she was able to recognize it was Oscar’s male voice ‘crying’ not ‘yelling’ . This was a while after the shots that killed Reeva..However, the 4 other witnesses that heard the ‘screams’ BEFORE the shots were all certain, it was a FEMALE terrififying voice.

  15. There are too many things that don’t make any sense. Another is the question of Oscar’s Pistorius Back.

    Initially he said he went to get the Fan from the balcony area and then walked back to put the fan inside. Hence his back was to the balcony when putting the fan in and he was facing the bed and facing the hallway.

    When it was pointed out he would have seen the bed and seen that Reeva was not in the bed, he said his back was to the bed and he was facing away from the bed when putting the fan in the room.

    When it was pointed out he would have seen the light from the hallway as Reeva made her way to the toilet (using her cell phone) he said his back was to the hallway and he was facing some other direction.

    With his back in three different directions at once this seems to be another breaking of the law of physics.

    1. Yep. In addition, he has an extraordinary ability to remember exactly which direction his back was facing at all moments but has no recollection at all of speaking with security that night. Amazing how that works.

  16. Agreed evidence/facts.

    In argument the PT may agree with some parts of OP’s oral evidence and not other parts.
    Where there is agreement on these parts it is extremely likely the judge will accept those bits of evidence to decide a fact.

    One very interesting bit from OP on the 15th april was when he placed himself in the toilet cubicle a couple of minutes after the “INCIDENT” (which can only be the shots being fired). OP was caught off guard here and the reasoning he tried to use when this slip occurred backs the couple of minutes claim.

    The PT are likely to agree this part of the evidence given by OP from which the Judge will almost certainly decide to be fact. IE —that OP was in the toilet cubicle 2 minutes after the shots were fired.

    This fact has the effect of ruling out OP’s version(s) involving mistaken identity as being impossible as he cannot be in the toilet soon enough to meet that declared fact. However, it is the case that OP being in the toilet 2 minutes after the shooting is conversant and compatible with the PT version of events.

    by his own words OP has shown his versions involving mistaking Reeva for an intruder cannot be true. HE IS NOT INNOCENT by his own words.

  17. Where did OP say he picked up the gun from after he heard the “noise”: did he say it was at the foot of the bed and under the bed? … rather than say at the top of the bed or in his bedside drawer – which would have been within an arms reach from where he slept.

    1. OP stated that he had put his gun under the upper left hand side of his bed, near the pedestal/nightstand, when he got home on Feb 13. When he heard the noise in the early morn hours of Feb 14, he says he retrieved it from that spot. He had to kneel down to get it. He states that he never looked in Reeva’a direction (right side of the bed) when he did this.

      At the time that he heard the noise, he states he was in front of the stereo trying to cover the LED light. He had to make his way to the bed to get his gun.

  18. So it was under the part of the bed where his head would have been (rather than where his legs would have been)?

    It’s strange that Reeva was awake on the right hand side of the bed according to OP. OP got out of the bed from the left hand side walked around the bed to get the fan – during which time Reeva didn’t cross his path, then he came back in around the bed again to get the gun – again Reeva didn’t cross his path on her way to the toilet. There is such a small period of time for which Reeva could have got out of the bed to go to the toilet and she would have had to drag herself across the bed (right to left) and got out from the left hand side of the bed – so that she didn’t cross his path.

    Quite separate from this I would just like to point out that Valentines Day is a classic day for splits to occur between relationships. We know that Reeva had a valentines card for Oscar – did Oscar have a Valentines card for Reeva?

    1. Yea, the details of how they were “supposedly” in bed and what transpired next make no sense.

      He awoke and she commented “can’t you sleep?”, he sits up, rubs his face, gets up and goes around the bed to bring the fans in.

      Without saying a word or turning on a light, Reeva crawls across the bed to get out. His back was to her during the 30-60 seconds that it probably took to move the fans.

      The balcony light was on so any crack in those curtains would produce light.

      As he picks up the jeans to cover the LED on the stereo that was so bothersome, she is now supposedly opening the window in the bathroom and he goes in to combat mode instantly.

      He claims the fans were both on, so they would have been making noise right in his face, but the window opening was so loud that he immediately knew he was in danger.

      And of course, the police found the fans off (one unplugged) and in locations that were inconsistent with his “story”.

      That’s all it is… Just a story in Oscar’s mind.

      1. Oscar kept on referring to “my version” which was very telling. He even admitted to “working on my version”!

        I only started watching the trial about midway through. My immediate reaction when I first heard OP’s voice was: “That is not the voice of a man who is telling the truth!”

  19. The ear witnesses said they heard a screaming woman. It is their interpretation of a voice heard from a long distance away. One said she heard a woman screaming after Reeva was most certainly unable to scream. You are confusing subjective interpretation for factual accounting. The evidence is simple. The judge will separate the wheat from the chaff.

    Good day to the flapping guy but I can’t engage in a conversation with irrational wollywood.

    It is an error to say I am only echoing Oscar’s testimony. Willful error or ignorant error I don’t know. If it is willful perhaps you should reexamine your “facts” as facts should stand on their own, no matter how bright a light is shone on them.

    If you think the judge and her assessors will not be swayed by their own interpretations of the pitch of Oscar’s voice then high diddly and a good day to you 🙂

    1. I don’t see how your opinion of Oscar’s pitchy voice on the stand holds more credence than witnesses who were there that night and heard the actual event.

    2. When the trial started I honestly believed that OP’s version was a possibility but what swung it for me was the testimony of 4 reliable witnesses who heard a woman screaming desperately for a prolonged period of time (15 minutes). Predictably, Roux ruthlessly tried to discredit these witnesses, all of whom refused to concede that it could possibly have been a man screaming. It is just absurd to assert that all 4 ear witnesses were mistaken or are lying.

      For OP’s version to be true the police would have had to have moved both fans, switched one off and unplugged the other, thrown the duvet on the floor so that the blood spatter on the bed lined up precisely with the spatter on the carpet, opened the curtains and switched on the light. Why would the first cops on the scene do this? Were they cops or a furniture removal company!?

      I have carefully followed every word of this trial, re-watching key pieces of evidence and I take exception to your comment that those of us who believe he’s guilty are looking “through the lens of popular bias”. Most of us are capable of using common sense to work things out for ourselves.

      Actually, I’m not sure why I’m even bothering to argue here. He is a murderer who has lied under oath, in the presence of his god and Reeva’s family. Lock him up and throw away the key!

    3. “If you think the judge and her assessors will not be swayed by their own interpretations of the pitch of Oscar’s voice then high diddly and a good day to you” – the pitch of OP’s voice on the stand was hardly that of a woman & if anything it was very affected. Roux never produced their promised evidence that OP sounds like a woman. The most interesting thing about OP’s histrionics on the stand “she wasn’t breathing” sob, sob sob, along w/ his entire family’s boohooing & Aimee’s constant comforting hugs is that was all orchestrated for show. Did you happen to notice that no one seemed to be crying or even appeared emotional during the reenactment done at Uncle Arnie’s mansion? Aimee, playing Reeva – it doesn’t get any sicker than that. And, did you happen to catch this tweet?

      Andrew Harding Africa Correspondent
      tweets: #OscarPistorius family source tells us athlete’s description yesterday of shooting is “first time” he’s managed to speak of it to them.

      The Pistorius’ clan making a spectacle of themselves in court acting as if OP had never spoken of what happened, while all the time they had been part of this detailed reenactment is really disgusting. They are ugly, nasty people who obviously have no soul to be able to conduct themselves in such a deceitful manner.

      1. Very interesting about the tweet saying the pistorius family had never spoken with oscar about the incident when they In fact had re-enacted the whole scene, according to oscars version of course.

        I have to say that it was one of the creepiest most horrific things I have seen when I saw aimee acting as reeva being carried around the house.
        That is down right sick!!!!!!!!!!!

      2. According to sources OP uncles own many companies including Big Game Hunting companies where wealthy clients are taken to Mozambique and elsewhere for shooting elephants, lions … Uncle Theo is called a big game hunter and there is a photo of him next to a dead elephant he has shot in Botswana.

        The family also own / have interests in many mining companies and land development companies and well we know that these types of activities can be hazardous for workers.

      3. That makes my blood boil.People who shoot animals are despicable.They must be very insecure and must feel the need to do this to make themselves feel macho.My god,the whole family is twisted.
        I agree he may be let off because of his family etc.I like to think that a judge would not be swayed by that and that they would want to deliver justice.We will wait and see.If he goes free I think something else will happen or someone may take justice into their own hands.There will be no escape.

      4. That big game hunting is disgusting. Killing for fun/sport, as opposed to killing for sustainability, just perplexes me. I don’t know how people can destroy things just for the sake of destroying them. There is certainly some craziness in this world.

        As for people taking justice in to their own hands, yes that could be a possibility but I certainly hope not. As much as I dislike Oscar, and certainly hate everything I believe he has done… the last thing I would ever want to see is street justice. That just makes us all barbarians. As humans, we have to hold ourselves to higher standards than that.

      5. The sad fact is nothing nothing will bring back Reeva Steenkamp. If a huge pile of money ends up in the Steenkamp’s bank account, or they are given some properties dotted around the globe, then they would still have lost a daughter etc but they will also have …

        The history of South Africa has been one of huge inequalities of state crimes and ordinary crimes. Often when crimes are committed by headstrong, somewhat sociopathic rich kids then there is a certain closing of ranks and formations of protective circles that come into play as influential families and elite networks move in to protect their own.

        I mean OP has been out on bail, has travelled abroad, is being coached etc etc.

  20. You are misunderstanding me I don’t think my opinion is of any significance. I think the evidence and the judges experience with eyewitnesses is what is significant. I think the contradictory and impossible ear witness testimony is significant and I think security not hearing anything when one earwitness had her pillow over her head because of an argument is significant.

    Saying I must be a fan of the accused and I am not basing my points in logic is simply a silly smoke and mirrors response.

    1. All ear witnesses have no motive to invent what they heard! the accused has every reason to tailor and fabricate evidence! Security patrol did hear the rifle shots and Van Merwe heard the arguing 1 hour before those shots!

      1. Correct, Rita and when security called OP to enquire as to what was going on, OP said, “I’m fine”. Who can be fine after you have just “accidentally” shot your beloved girlfriend?

  21. Great piece. You may strengthen it by adding the point about ‘intent’. OP had the opportunity (and ability) to get himself and Reeva out of the bedroom and downstairs to safety if he wanted to. The Defence has done a poor job of portraying OP as unable to manage physically without his prosthetic legs. You can see from my blog that I doubted this from the very start. We hear numerous references to him ‘running’ around the rooms that night that for Derman and many of OP’s fans to ‘buy’ the notion he was incapable of simply avoiding the confrontation, is beyond belief. Now we see a video emerge from Australia which now ‘nails’ the issue once and for all. The pathetic display of OP dithering and acting out instability on his stumps was a well rehearsed stunt to have the Court believe he was more vulnerable than he actually was.I believe this is a major issue for OP. You point out too, that he had to carefully ‘think’ out his actions in getting his gun. If he was able to plan this carefully in the face of apparent danger, then he would also have been able to lead Reeva and himself away from the danger, he didn’t have to confront whoever was behind the door. These points will gain him a significant prison sentence.

    1. Hi Phil, there are MANY other elements that are not in OP’s favor that no doubt could be added, my post could be 5 pages long. But I really just wanted to focus on the main questions of the case that the Judge needs to determine.

      People can debate all day long about whether or not OP and Reeva fought that night, or if Oscar’s response to a perceived intruder was reasonable. But none of that matters in the face of the evidence that has been revealed. Oscar’s story is not possibly true based on evidence at the scene and ear witnesses. If his story is not true, then he knew he was shooting Reeva.

  22. Juror 13 and Rita Castell – Fawn (or should it be Yawn) is more likely to be a family member or part of their huge PR machine. During the early days of the trial when Roux was cross-examining state witnesses he said, emphatically, on many occasions that he would PROVE (at a later time!) that OP can scream like a woman, that the bat came after the shots, that the neighbours could not possibly have heard what they said they heard etc., etc., etc….. Did he come back and PROVE any of those things? NO!! If there was any way he could prove those things, he would have presented to the court. Instead, we have had an almost continuous line of very poor so called ‘expert’ witnesses. OP and the defence team have introduced mounds of inconsistencies and irrelevant detail – in my opinion to try and confuse and ‘take the eye off the ball’ so to speak. Thank goodness for SA’s Judge/Assessor system, rather than the jury system we have here in the UK. Thank you Juror 13 for helping to clear the mind of all the irrelevant clutter.

  23. The behaviour of Reeva is also unfathomable in the OP story – acting like a complete one dimensional phantom. When OP wakes up she is awake and talks to him. He gets out of the bed …

    She goes to the toilet while not turning on the lights to see where she is going.

    She goes to the toilet in the utmost silence so OP doesn’t hear her.

    She goes to the toilet without ever crossing OPs path or appearing in his eye-line either directly or indirectly.

    OP doesn’t hear her breathing, he doesn’t hear any movement of the bedspread, he doesn’t hear any noise of the bed as she drags her body across it, he doesn’t hear any rustling of her getting out of the bed, he doesn’t hear any movement of her groping her way down the corridor.

    She makes no comment saying I’ll just nip to the toilet.

    As soon as she gets to the bathroom area she slams the window open.

    OP goes into combat mode, doesn’t check the bed to see if Reeva is in it, doesn’t engage in any two – way communication with her, doesn’t put his arm on her leg or any part of her body, he positively manoeuvres his head so he doesn’t look towards the bed where she might be.

    Then he shouts out down the corridor. Reeva who is in fact in the bathroom, doesn’t reply, doesn’t put the bathroom light on, all she does is slam the toilet door (and locks it) and continues to remain as silent as a mouse.

    OP goes down the corridor in combat mode shouts out more. Reeva in complete silence.

    OP is in the bathroom area sees the window – sees the door is closed. He shouts at the door. Complete silence.

    Then Reeva decides to “move wood”, OP hears “wood moving” and shoots at the door. Reeva inside is shot dead. She makes no scream during this process. OP is absolutely certain of this fact.

    OP goes back into the bedroom.

    Suddenly he thinks wait a minute – where is Reeva? In complete darkness he gropes around the bedroom Immediately he has a very strong conviction that he has just shot Reeva.

    He is “certain” that Reeva hasn’t left the bedroom. He is certain she hasn’t fled downstairs and is hiding there. He has an overwhelming certainty that she must have been inside the toilet and he must have shot her. …

    1. According to OP Reeva was sleeping on the right hand side – yet her slippers were found on the left hand side of the bed? Usually OP slept on the right hand side of the bed but seemed to make an exception for this night? … but not consistent with Reeva’s slippers?

    2. I seem to remember that OP said he had his prosthetics on the right hand side of the bed.

      So OP had his prosthetics on the right hand side of the bed. Reeva had her slippers on the left hand side of the bed. Hence the evidence is that OP slept on the right hand side of the bed & Reeva slept on the Left hand side of the bed. So another example of the EVIDENCE not corroborating OP testimony. ???

      1. I think you accidentally got that second parts mixed up.

        Left Side Evidence: Reeva slippers, bag, magazines.

        Right Side Evidence: Oscar’s t-shirt, iPad/cover, shaver, ammunition.

        Yet Oscar claims he slept on left and Reeva on right.

        To further confuse, he claims his legs were left on the right, which would have been amidst the clutter of items including cords.

      2. Basically the evidence is consistent with Reeva on the left and OP on the Right. The evidence does not support OP version of their sleeping positions.

        I said that as far as I was aware OPs normal sleeping position was on the right …

      3. I think it has been established by the evidence that OP testimony is untrue in the majority. The next question is to weigh the evidence for the truth.

        Now it seems that there is evidence that Reeva was planning to leave? The packed bag and the jeans on the floor. It seems that the jeans were inside out and on the floor. If Reeva had have been planning to leave she would need to be putting her trousers on. The evidence seems consistent with OP pulling off her trousers (hence inside out) and throwing them off the floor.

        She must have been frightened and ran to the bathroom with her phone – why would one take a phone to the toilet otherwise? Why would she have not put on her slippers unless she was in a hurry?

        OP must have been following her with his gun and quickly shot her death – otherwise she would have had time to call someone?

        Presumably OP would then need to batter the door down in order to get access to Reevas phone to check if she had made a call?

      4. The witness statements provide evidence that Reeva was screaming. So maybe she was more screaming at this time for help rather than manipulating her phone in order to make an emergency call?

  24. if 2 people are engaged in a conversation when a series of distant gunshots are heard then an error in the number by counting one less than the number of shots fired is explainable in that one of the peoples voices was louder and masked out the gunshot sound so it was not heard and counted by those 2 people
    There we go , one possible, credible and realistic example to explain away “a complained of” contradiction in evidence.

    Judges and others of intelligence will consider these things and not have taken a prejudiced viewpoint from the start about a false persona presented to the public.

  25. Another thing that doesn’t make sense.

    OP and Reeva went to bed and slept around 9 – 10 pm – this was February 13th, the eve of Valentines Day.

    OP wakes up around 3 am. This is Valentines Day. Reeva is awake and says “What’s wrong, baba? Can’t you sleep?” And he replied, “not tonight”, he then gets out of bed and Reeva disappears from that moment onward (see my comment above).

    Now let’s think about that. This is Valentines Day, the 14th February. This is their first Valentines Day together.. This is the first point at which OP has woken up on Valentines Day. Reeva is already awake and alert to OP at that time, on Valentines Day.

    Why didn’t Reeva say – Happy Valentines Day Baba. Why didn’t she lean over to OP and give him a kiss and say, Happy Valentines Day Baba. Why wasn’t there any acknowledgement from Reeva or OP, who had just woken up according to OP, that this was Valentines Day.

    Reeva had prepared him a Valentine’s Day card but she never gave it to him, neither on the 13th nor when OP had just woken up.

    The evidence suggests OP did not get Reeva a Valentines Day card.

  26. Cricket Bat Swings.
    Going by the evidence; the last swing of the cricket bat broke through the panel and got partially stuck and had to be waggled and pulled to release it from the hole created. Then it takes a little longer to push or pull free any debris and move ones eye to a hole to “peer” through the hole created to take a look.
    How long does it take to do such a set of actions from the smallish crunch noise of the bat breaking through to viewing through the hole to see what lies beyond?
    I would expect a minimum time of at least 6 seconds and likely more.
    So if OP carried on screaming until the moment of actually seeing Reeva’s body then the screams should last for at least 6 seconds after the last impact noise to be correct on OP’s versions.
    Those who heard the screams and second set of bangs reported this to not be the case.

    Isn’t evidence wonderful!

    1. Was it Cricket Bat sounds or gunshot sounds heard by the Stipps during the second set @ about 3:13 am? According to OP’s written and verbal statement under oath, he yelled” help, help, help” BEFORE getting the cricket bat and before he knew who was in the toilet. It is then impossible that the second set of sounds was the cricket bat hitting the door, since he had not gotten the bat to bang the door yet!! I am very concerned that Nel did not even question him about that ‘impossible’ evidence that indicates he is lying about the second sounds being the cricket bat!!…Hope he will in closing argument or that this intelligent judge will find that.

  27. Botha said the duvet was on half of the bed. Yet the duvet was on the floor and we are to believe that it was not moved there by a police officer? Nel used the impossibility of an extension cord being able to reach a certain plug to try and impeach Oscar’s testimony yet that extension cord has disappeared.

    There also seems to be an inability for people to grasp the concept of the severity of Oscar’s immobility on his stumps and in particular standing still on them. The video (Channel 7) showed that he is clearly unstable on his stumps while he is moving and Sam Taylor testified to this. More so he is very unstable and vulnerable when standing still, picture a unicycle, it is stable if it is moving and a rider who is adept at using it, but try to balance it without a kick stand and it will fall over, for Oscar to be still on his stumps he must keep shifting his weight or prop himself with something. Which is exactly what he claimed he did.

    Oscar hears a noise that he perceives as an intruder in his home. It is dark and he is on his stumps. Could Oscar have fled on his stumps? Should have Oscar fled on his stumps? First he would have to have removed the cricket bat unlocked the door and then traversed tile and stairs all on his unstable stumps. He would also be holding his gun, in fear and hyper sensitive to any sound. It was his instinctual reaction to grab his gun and fight, rather than flee on his stumps, rather than fumble around in the dark, in a panicked state looking for and then putting on his protheses which would also require he put down his gun and in his mind an intruder was in his home and in very close proximity to him and Reeva.

    The scream testimony has been rendered more than questionable, some of the problems with it are the distance from which it was heard, the tenuous nature of eyewitness testimony (something the judge and her assessors are well aware of) the contradictory nature of the scream witness testimony, that two witnesses who did not come forward until the media was already printing and broadcasting stories of the “screaming,” the hearing a woman scream after it would have been impossible for Reeva to scream, the pillow witness when security while much closer to Oscar’s house heard nothing.

    This case like most cases comes down to intent and state of mind. The evidence so far has not shown that it was Oscar’s intent to kill Reeva.

    Should Oscar have made certain of Reeva’s whereabouts. Absolutely. In this he failed and Reeva paid for it with her life. That isn’t fair, that isn’t right, it is a terrible tragedy but it is not premeditated murder.

    Bundling and tailoring the evidence and testimony presented can lead one to believe whatever one wants to believe. We all interpret things with our own bias, if you are not aware you have a bias then you are more likely to come to a more subjective conclusion.

    I see you deleted my post which was simply factual. Perhaps your refusal to let the truth stand should tell you something about your motivations. Deleting counter points is cowardly.

    Justice is blind.

    1. The cord going missing is a bunch of bullshit. It was NOT seized evidence. The police have no responsibility to “watch” every piece of unseized evidence.

      Roux claims a picture showed it was in a different position a day later, which yes- in order to investigate you have to move items.

      Oscar’s camp took possession of the house 3 days later. Why don’t you ask them where it is. Maybe Aimee & Carice took that too.

    2. The ability for people to believe that OP being on his stumps is what led to this situation is hard for me to comprehend. If this were the case, why did he not put on his legs, which takes 20-30 seconds prior to getting his gun? The disability/vulnerability card came too late in the court proceedings to take seriously. It will be up to the judge & assessor’s to determine whether or not OP is lying about the fact that a “bump” in the night sent him into such a panic that he ran around screaming & shouting prior to unloading four bullets into a closed door. Justice is blind & so are many of the people who seem to believe any of the drivel the defense put forth. I am also waiting for the proof that OP screams like a woman – which is something Roux said would be proven. And, one more issue, the fact that upon seeing Reeva’s shattered, bloodied brains all over the bathroom & toilet, the screaming, hysterical OP is suddenly silenced because he is “broken” is another ludicrous lie. If anything considering the histrionics he has displayed in court, if it were true, that at that point he realized he had shot Reeva he would have gone out of his mind w/ screams of agony; instead he becomes silent. That was one of the biggest fabrications he managed to utter.

    3. Apparently Hilton Botha had said in Afrikaans in his statement, “die duvet was op die kant van die bed”. This can either mean “on the side of the bed” or “next to the bed”. The latter would be the more accurate translation.

      When Gerrie Nel pointed this out, Kenny Oldwage (who is English speaking) scoffed, but did not raise an official objection, and was taken to task by the judge.

  28. I don’t have access to Aimee and Carice. According to Nel the extension cord is proof that Oscar was/is lying so no, the State is not responsible for every piece of evidence in Oscar’s home but they are responsible for an item that the State deems so critical to disproving Oscar’s statements. It would have been prudent for the State to to have seized the cord.

    1. Yes, it would have been ideal. But within those first few days, they did not know what Oscar’s story would be. They simply did not know the importance of an extension cord. They did however photograph all of it in its original state. The original photographs serve as evidence and those were presented to the court. Roux is just throwing up a smoke screen by claiming the State did something wrong.

    2. @Fawn – The state has proved its case far beyond a reasonable doubt (exceeding SA’s statute by light years) and the defense directly contradicts itself and the physical evidence. Premeditation, only needs to be seconds, and the intent to kill Reeva Steenkamp have been amply proven. Every aspect of the prosecution’s requirements have been sively executed by one of the best attorneys in the world.

      In case you are mistaken, this is not OP support page and please …..

  29. If one photograph is compromised due to police moving stuff about, all the photographs can be viewed as compromised, it has been established that the photos have been compromised.

    1. Album 1 depicts the scene as it was found. All other albums show the items in various stages of investigation. This is standard practice. You cannot investigate without touching items. All was documented. The Judge understands this.

      The official police photographer has authenticated meta data files to prove the work is authentic.

      The defense tried to use other photos taken by police that were not the “official” photos to confuse witnesses. They did this repeatedly and Nel busted them repeatedly.

      If the defense was genuine, they would not have had problems using the official photos.

    2. The first person who contaminated the crime scene was OP when he removed Reeva’s body, washed himself , removed Reeva’s bag and told security ” everything’s fine” after he knew he shot and killed Reeva.

      1. absolutely ! I wonder if he initially had a plan of taking her body out of his house ?The fact he told security ‘everything was fine’?…..Its a dark thought indeed but fortunately he was rumbled.
        There are some fantastic points on this site.I do hope Judge Masipa can think of all these points when perusing all the evidence.No stone must be left unturned!

  30. It is foolish to rule out good witness evidence due because a fool may not be thinking fully. Stuff claimed to be impossible may not be so and a minor misperception may be at play.
    An ear witness can only report what they hear and put an interpretation to it. Later on this ear witness evidence can be considered along with other evidence and any issues sorted out.
    People need to be careful (fools are not ) and not alter or change evidence and mislead themselves and others as some have done.

    ok here we go;
    JOHNSON’S EVIDENCE; (not Burger’s). He states he heard what he took to be the woman’s scream fade out shortly after the last shot.IIRC it lasted for a mere few seconds or less.
    This may appear to be a problem if its not understood, but as there are reasonable explanations for what he claimed to hear then his evidence is mainly safe and credible and reliable.

    looking at the Stipps evidence at a location closer than Johnson, they report no scream after the final shot (not from Reeva or Oscar).
    So it makes sense to EXCLUDE a direct scream from either Reeva or Oscar as being responsible for the “fading scream” part of JOHNSON’S evidence.

    So what was it that JOHNSON misperceives as a fading scream of a woman. While it could be an unconscious mental connection filling in gaps in perception of his experience it is better to consider if its possible he really heard something as an explanation.
    It could be sound distortion , a sound reflection or echo effects that are behind what JOHNSON claimed to hear.

    or there may be other explanations.

    My favoured explanation is that he head a dog that was howling or whining in response to the screams or gunshots. If a howl or whine was started during the screaming or gunshots and masked by those louder sounds the tail end of the whining/howling is only heard when the gunshot noise ends.

    Carise Stander in her evidence spoke of dogs barking etc.

    so there you go — a likely, rational and plausible explanation for JOHNSON’S evidence that leaves it basically intact and making perfect sense.

    1. And with the same caveat regarding sound recognition issues as you’ve clearly pointed out, we cannot be certain that the screams were from Reeva. The witnesses have nothing to compare the scream against. I’ve never once heard a man scream in terror or in anguish in my life. As a bloke I’ve never screamed myself, and haven’t a clue what I’d sound like. It worries me a bit when guys are so confident about how a bloke sounds when he screams, What on earth do guys get up to to test out their ‘scream recognition’ ability?

      We’re all trying to determine how a sound is perceived, but none of us know what we should expect to hear. Anybody that ‘thinks’ they know is off their head; Just ‘thinking’ you know is not good enough to pass legal standard I’m afraid.

      Estelle V D Merwe lived closer than the Burgers, and she testified to say she thought one of the voices heard was a woman’s voice, Her husband disputed this and said it was OP’s, Two people who were closer than the Burgers and lived in the same house had differing opinions to the owner of the voice. One though female, the other male. This simple fact proves that it cannot be said with ‘confidence’ that the screams heard were indeed Reeva’s.

      The mere fact that the incident cannot have possibly kicked off at 3:02, on either OP’s version or the States tells us to be very careful when using the term ‘reliable’ against a witness. Sure, witnesses may be reliable, but that certainly doesn’t absolve them from being mistaken.

      1. 4 people claimed they heard a woman screaming for a prolonged period of time (10-15 minutes). I guess they must have ALL “perceived” the screams incorrectly? They were all intelligent, professional people, i.e. reliable witnesses.

        Estelle vd Merwe ONLY heard a woman’s voice speaking loudly between 2am and 3am. After the shots her husband identified the crying voice as Oscar’s. No contradiction.

    2. David, Dr. Stipp did not hear the female screams during or fading after shots because he was preoccupied with trying to call security in his bedroom. He testified that he was not focused on the screams at that point in time. As he figures out who to try to call next (after failing 2 times before) he hears the 2nd set of shots.

  31. What the defense failed to do in this case was create the scenario of a “reasonable” man. I know at the end there was an attempt to paint OP’s disability/vulnerability as an excuse for his actions. However, this was another example of the changing strategies presented by Roux & Co during the trial. I do not believe the judge nor her assessors will consider OP’s actions that night as “reasonable” because millions of people around the planet get up in the night to take a pee. And, the person w/ whom they were sharing a bed only moments prior do not end up shooting them four times through the closed toilet door because they heard a “bump” in the night. OP’s story of hearing a noise coming from the bathroom & having intense fear overcome him, whilst never securing the whereabouts of Reeva is just not believable.

    1. Yes, and not only is it not believable, it’s not proven. He does not have an anxiety disorder therefore there was no “reasonable” excuse for how he behaved.

  32. Hi Juror13. I love the way you have detailed everything so clearly, providing an excellent analysis of what happened in those early hours of that fateful day. I have been following each and every moment of the trial. I completely agree with you – Oscar Pistorius is GUILTY of murder. Thank you for all your hard work. Looking forward to reading more of your fantastic work.

  33. My apologies it seems I have given the misperception that I do not understand the ear witness testimony.

    Estelle van der Merwe (100m away) heard arguing at the same time security was near Oscar’s house and heard nothing.

    Michelle Burger (177m away) testified to hearing a woman screaming after the shots were fired. Burger also testified that she heard a man screaming “help, help, help” followed by a woman screaming. It seems much more in keeping with reality that she mistook Oscar’s screams for that of a woman.

    Part of Johnson’s (177m away) testimony;

    “That’s when the first shots were fired. I remember hearing a succession of shots,” Johnson said. “I heard the lady scream again and the last scream faded moments after the last shot was fired.”

    Burger and Johnson also only came forward after the media was condemning Oscar.

    Johan Stipp (72m away) did not hear “blood curdling” screams, Mrs Stipp heard “three shots”. Johan Stipp said he heard 3 gunshots then he heard a woman screaming (could not have been Reeva) then “3” more bangs.

    And the court is supposed to condemn a man on these very contradictory accounts of ear witnesses?

    Does Oscar remember the sequence of his screams, what he screamed, when he screamed, specifically, most likely not given the gravity of the situation.

    1. “at the same time security was near Oscar’s house and heard nothing”

      What is the evidence that “security” heard nothing? Who was the witness from security that took to the stands to make the claim that they heard nothing? Clearly there was gunshots. Clearly there was a bat involved somewhere? Details are critical. Please elaborate on this point. Thanks.

      1. Baba, the security leader, testified at trial. According to the security reports from that night, no sounds/fighting was heard during their rounds which was some time around 2:20am or something close to that. Don’t have exact time handy right now.

        Mrs VDM specifically said that the fighting voice was intermittent, not consistent for the entire hour. In the few minutes that security walked past, they could have easily been quieter.

        Some time after 3am (not 3am exact as some like to falsely say), the guard on bike heard gunshots and came to the gate to report them. Per testimony from Baba, “moments later” he got the calls from Stipp & Mike N. We know those calls were at 3:15:51 and 3:16+. The shots were just before that.

      2. Thanks: So was there in fact only one set of loud noises that were definitely heard – the ones that would have to correspond to the discharge of the gun?

        Maybe there wasn’t much noise from the bat? Maybe that was more a leverage operation.

        I am also hearing that there was damage to the actual bedroom door – the door linking their bedroom to the rest of the house … and that this may have been caused during the same night … maybe the result of a struggle occurring earlier on in time.

    2. Burger and Johnson eventually came forward as witnesses because they strongly believed that what they had heard did not match Oscar’s story of an intruder. They struck me as being shy, private people who had nothing to gain by doing this and a lot to risk. Roux was ruthless in his cross examination in an attempt to try to discredit them and to try to get them to concede that the screams were Oscar’s. He failed.

      They had also related what they had heard to work colleagues (Johnson even named them so his evidence is backed up) the morning after the shooting, before the story broke in the press.

      Naturally there will be minor inconsistencies between different people’s perceptions and memory of what they heard, but the broad outlines are clear: arguing, bangs, a woman screaming, more bangs, silence.

      1. I’m sure Frank knows something, but Frank would presumably say, either out of loyalty or because it’s true, “I didn’t hear anything,” which helps neither side, so it’s a total wash.

    3. These accounts are not contradictory when location, particularly with regard to proximity to OP’s bedroom and bathroom windows. Wind speed and direction can also markedly alter the volume of noise experienced by a receptor. I live near a racetrack and on a given night I’ll hear virtually nothing or the thundering noise of crowds, music and cars depending solely on the direction of the wind.

      Also, if you look at a map showing the earwitness locations along with a timeline of their accounts, it is quite clear that OP and RS were moving around the house. Earwitnesses heard certain things more distinctly based on their position relative to activities within the house.

      1. I meant to say: “These accounts are not contradictory when location, particularly with regard to proximity to OP’s bedroom and bathroom windows, are taken into consideration.”

        My point is that it’s spurious to suggest, just because witness A, who lives across from the kitchen windows, heard something different from witness B, who lives across from the bathroom window, that the accounts are “contradictory.” They may, in fact, be completely compatible, and even strongly supportive of a particular version of events, once you match up what they heard with what was possibly going on in the house location-wise.

        I, myself, have mapped out locations of the the ear witness homes and their timeline of events and found remarkable consistency supporting a view that OP and RS were moving around in the house that night. In fact, at one point they were likely arguing in the kitchen or adjacent to the stairs. If anyone hasn’t bothered to do something similar, I highly recommend that you do. It will help you visualise clearly what may have happened in the house that night.

      2. Yes,I did wonder whether that was the case.The fact R had undigested food in her stomach proves it.Worryingly ,that means FRANK knows something….

    4. Yes, Jill, her stomach contents suggest that she was in the kitchen in the wee hours of the morning, as does that certain earwitnesses with the best acoustic access to the kitchen/stairway heard arguing that night.

      If I had the time i would diagram this all out based on the location of ear witnesses and their timelines. “Bat Gun Kick” goes so far, but doesn’t account for the initial arguing….

  34. PLEASE CONSIDER ; like the Judge will, OP’s evil fabricated version of events from Reeva’s standpoint and how crazy it was she did not respond verbally or otherwise.

    Consider the following with Reeva having her phone with her and not having her phone with her;

    nb; due to him being careful not to alert anyone in the bathroom/toilet , OP in a low tone/whispered etc in the bedroom things she does not hear.

    Reeva is in the bathroom/toilet area in the dark! when out of the blue OP shouts “REEVA CALL THE POLICE”

    (THINK …why should she do that…what would she say to the police, why does she not answer back as to why or whats up Oscar—no reason to slam the toilet door shut or lock i!)

    Reeva then hears OP shout “GET THE #### OUT OF MY HOUSE”

    THINK
    (it conflicts with the “Reeva call the police” instruction and also raises the issue of WHY or Whats happening but in no way does it give a reason to slam the toilet door and lock it. If she thought it was aimed at her then she would comply by going to the Bedroom as that would be the only way she could “get the #### out of his house”

    OP’s version is not credible from the standpoint of Reeva’s view and claimed actions. She hears nothing about intruders or have any reason to think intruders!

    1. All great points. And I have yet to see any of these pro-not guilty posters comment on the physical evidence other than to say, the police moved stuff.

      The scene, the ballistics & the medical examiner evidence do not support OP’s “story”. The evidence supports an intentional murder. If OP cannot support his “story” then he knew it was Reeva in the toilet room.

      1. I believe blood is ‘physical evidence’. Van Der Nest (the States own expert witness) indicated that OP’s version is the most probable explanation for all the blood found.

        We can’t have an open-minded debate if one only chooses to ask questions which favour prosecution, or one only chooses to accept expert witness evidence depending on which side of the guilt fence it falls.

      2. “If OP cannot support his “story” then he knew it was Reeva in the toilet room”.

        That is the bottom line! Oscar’s story is a complete fabrication as supported by the evidence. Actually it is mingled with elements of the REAL event, EG. “I wanted to know why Reeva was calling the police” ( slip up), ” Get the F out of my house!” ( who shouts this to an “intruder”??), “Call the police” ( probably in a mocking tone) etc etc.

        OP has clearly added to his version to try and make it convincing: which side of the bed she was sleeping on (to excuse why he did not see that she was not in bed while he was “bringing in the fans”), that she went to the toilet with her cellphone which was found on the bathroom floor (I think this MAY be true but I have my doubts as I think she would have definitely called the police. Anyway, this was to excuse her not switching on the bathroom light and her needing it since the light in the toilet was broken, that he spoke to her in a low tone that was originally a whisper (with a whisper he would have had to have been leaning closer to her thus excusing why he once again did not see her in the bed).

        I could go on and on and on and on….

        Someone posted that one witness claims to have heard a female scream after the first set of bangs and that ‘it couldn’t have been Reeva’, presumably based on the evidence that’s he would not have been able to scream after the last shot. Keep in mind the States’s version, that the door was hit with the cricket bat first, and it makes perfect sense that it was Reeva.

        It is my opinion that there is overwhelming evidence to support the case that OP INTENTIONALLY shot REEVA and I am certain the judge and her assessors will find him guilty. At the least he I’ll go down with eventualis.

        I love your posts btw. Great job.

  35. Hi all, I am trying to figure out what the evidence is pointing towards safe in the knowledge that OP actual testimony can to a large extent be disregarded as being inconsistent with the physical evidence.

    An important feature is there were two sets of “bangs” separated by about 15 minutes?? Does the evidence point to the first set of “bangs” being the bat and the second set of “bangs” being the actual gunshots or vice versa?

    thanks!

    1. We don’t know what the 3am (first) bangs were. But ALL evidence points towards the fatal gunshots being the 2nd bangs, closer to the 3:15 timeframe. Reeva only took a few breaths after the head shot, per the ME, then she died. She was not shot at 3am and lived another 20 minutes as OP’s story suggests.

    2. Thanks: So was there in fact only one set of loud noises that were definitely heard – the ones that would have to correspond to the discharge of the gun?

      Maybe there wasn’t much noise from the bat? Maybe that was more a leverage operation.

      I am also hearing that there was damage to the actual bedroom door – the door linking their bedroom to the rest of the house … and that this may have been caused during the same night … maybe the result of a struggle occurring earlier on in time.

      [I have moved this comment here – I posted it to the wrong place before – apologies]

      1. The only people who heard the first bangs were the Stipps. They were in direct earshot across an open lot to his bathroom window. Balcony doors open, no AC or fans. Could hear everything.

  36. During a home invasion when Reeva was visiting her Mum, Reeva hid with her mum in a bedroom and remained silent in the hope that help would arrive or the perpetrators would leave, it is no stretch of the imagination that she did not realize that it was she, that Oscar mistook for an intruder and she repeated the behavior that kept her safe with her mum.

    Objectively “Call the police” and “Get the Fu* out of my house” are not conflicting statements as in Oscar’s mind they were directed at different people.

    As to the forensic evidence, here is a statement from the South African Police Service Division of Forensic Science ;

    “The version of events as set out in paragraph 16.13 – 16.17 in the statement of Oscar Leonard Carl Pistorius are consistent with the blood stain patterns. It is the opinion that these events are the most plausible and probable explanation for the observed blood shed”

    PS You needn’t tell me to “THINK” it makes you appear ill tempered.

    1. The home invasion was a different circumstance. They KNEW there were intruders.

      Think about this… The bedroom door was supposedly locked & secured with a bat. Reeva had just been in the bedroom and knew there were no intruders in there. Now she is in the bathroom and knows there are no intruders in there either. If Oscar started screaming, she’d be like WTF. How are intruders supposed to get in, magically teleport themselves?? Reeva KNEW there was nobody in the bedroom suite because she was awake and had been in both rooms according to Oscar’s story. She would not have been silent.

      1. She would have known with 100% confidence that Oscar was confused and would have said something, even if just “WHAT??!” Enough that he would then know it was her. She KNEW there was no one but her in the toilet. Fawn, anyone who thinks Reeva would have heard Oscar carrying on like that and then said nothing is being deliberately obtuse or else working for the defendant in a paid or voluntary capacity.

    2. As for the version of events with regards to blood spatter – it’s one paragraph 16.13 – 16.17, NOT Oscar’s whole version, that they agree with. The analyst is acknowledging that the blood spatter from when Oscar carried Reeva’s body out of the bathroom is consistent with his story. THATS ALL. Nel said in court, the State does not dispute that. It has nothing to do with what happened prior to and during the killing.

  37. There seems to be a lot of unaccounted for evidence (at least according to OP testimony). One is the fact that a pair of Reevas jeans was found thrown out of the bathroom window. …

    Some are saying this can best be accounted for by some form of struggle occurring between Reeva and Oscar.

    1. It’s not strong evidence and it makes no difference to the trial. If it was of any value it would have certainly been pursued by Nel. The same can be said (in terms of evidential value) for the hole in the bedroom door bath panel and damage to tiles. None of them make any difference to the trial as it’s pure conjecture regarding the time these could have happened. Lawyers will let things go rather than chase ‘what if’ scenarios, unlike many of us.

      1. In a scientific investigation it’s an absolute fact that Reeva’s trousers were found outside and immediately below the bathroom window. It’s not conjecture to say that such a situation is unusual. It’s not conjecture to say that it doesn’t fit in with OP’s testimony. In fact there are so many oddities of facts that collectively they would all have to be ignored in order to begin to perceive any possibility that OP was being truthful.

        Also “we” are not restricted in discussing elements that trial lawyers would ignore simply because they would focus on the juiciest aspects of the case … and they are not undertaking a detailed scrutiny of everything … because there is not the time nor the scope within the court procedure. However we are free to discuss everything and certainly we are free to point out inexplicable oddities in the case. It is my experience that oddities begin to fall inro place when one approaches the truth. The further one is removed from the truth the more oddities and inexplicable facts appear.

        Hence given that OP testimony is inconsistent with the facts I think it is fair for some of us to explore what might be the truth – even if some may be angry that others may be discussing these things.

  38. The balcony doors were open when Reeva headed to the bathroom how on earth would Reeva assume that a hysterically screaming Oscar had mistaken her for an intruder. Looking at things from the comfort of an armchair is not the position Oscar or Reeva found themselves in.

    1. I don’t think you totally understand that point. Reeva KNOWS there is nobody else in the room but the two of them. If Oscar screams to her “call the police”, don’t you think a logical response would be “why???” He didn’t yell get the fuck out until he was closer. Of course she would ask him why she needs to call the police. That is FAR more logical then saying nothing.

  39. The State at first demanded part of the “proof” of Oscar’s story being impossible was that he was on his protheses when he fired the gun. Turned out not to be true.

    The medical examiner’s testimony certainly does not preclude Oscar’s version as being true. Did Reeva eat while Oscar was sleeping? Perhaps.

    I don’t agree that the ballistic evidence is in conflict with Oscar’s version of that morning.

    If I am as good as Roux perhaps I will change careers. Thanks for the compliment 🙂

    1. The ballistics evidence absolutely proves his story is not true. He did not shoot in rapid succession. The injuries could not have occurred the way they did, where they did, with rapid succession shots. She was not hit by 3 bullets before hitting the ground. Look at the toilet lid! But if Dixon is more reliable to you than Mangena, then I’m not sure what else to say 😳

      1. Did not shoot in rapid succession yet Reeva was struck with 3 bullets before she collapsed. That is rapid succession.

      2. Incorrect. The ballistics evidence does NOT support rapid succession… Unless you believe Dixon over Mangena.

        She fell, enough time passed for her to be down and shot #2 missed her. 3 & 4 hit her while leaning over, and slumped on top of the magazine rack. Her head was directly in front of the toilet lid when hit. The only way for that to happen and line up with the trajectories is for her to be on the rack.

      3. Fawn, if Reeva could have eaten while Oscar was asleep, then I suppose she also could have run around the house shouting while he slept, because the neighbours did hear a ruckus coming from the property for at least an hour before she was killed.

  40. The evidence of all 4 of OP’s phones being intact and unbroken is proof he was not in the habit of breaking phones by carelessly dropping them. ie , he put them down properly.

    Yet under pressure giving evidence, OP slips up by stating he dropped Reeva’s phone before figuring out he slipped up and he suddenly became unsure and states he could have put it down.
    If his habit and normal practice was to put phones down with care, then the word “drop” and notion of dropping it would not pop into his memory or mind unless it was from reality. The act of his dropping Reeva’s phone can thus be deemed intentional and from which it can be inferred that he broke it deliberately in order to sell the story of Reeva, having the phone in the toilet and dropping it as a result of being shot.
    If Reeva’s phone had been broken before he picked it up (as per his false story) he would have noticed it. His about turn and suddenly being unsure and that he may have put it down betrays his thinking.
    That supports the view that Reeva did not have her phone in the toilet and that is why she never called the police or others for help.

      1. Read my day 15 post for details. The phone he uses that night was taken from the scene and hidden from police for two weeks, but police eventually figured it out. Defense used it at the bail hearing to make police look dumb. It’s very easy to surmise that his sister took it for him that morning considering she also stole Reeva’s handbag from the scene. See my Carice Stander post for details.

        He had his peeps working for him pronto after the killing. His defense attorney was on the scene in less than an hour after the shooting as well.

      2. I think Gerrie Nel may use the evidence of the phone that went missing for 2w in his final argument.I remember he asked someone on the stand if she saw a phone charging in the garage.She said ‘yes’ and at that he had no further questions.I cant remember who it was,maybe clarice?

    1. “Yet under pressure giving evidence, OP slips up by stating he dropped Reeva’s phone before figuring out he slipped up and he suddenly became unsure and states he could have put it down.”

      I am hearing that a possible explanation of Reevas broken phone (?) in the bathroom is that OP was chasing her and knocked the phone from her hand because she was threatening to call someone. She then scrambled into the toilet and locked it.

      I am seeing a lot of evidence that can only be explained by some form of continuing struggle between her and OP, leading up to her locking herself into the toilet.

  41. Where are Oscar’s wounds or marks from a struggle? He would have toppled like an upside down bowling pin if they were in a physical struggle, unless we are to take the scenario to another level and say he had on his protheses fought with Reeva, leaving no physical evidence on his body, then he said hold up let me take off my legs, scream a bit, shoot Reeva, put his legs back on and so forth.

    1. OP let slip on one occasion that he “knelt down” before he fired. I believe that it is not impossible that he was wearing his prosthetics all the time.

      According to the Stipps the bathroom light was on during the shooting. If he had been wearing his prosthetics he would have been in full view of the neighbours (Dr Stipp did see him moving after the shooting) so it is possible that he may have knelt or crouched to shoot.

  42. And I guess I simply can’t fathom people not comprehending that an extreme situation causing unpredictable behavior, saying that Oscar always put his phones down with care, so therefore he would have put Reeva’s phone down with care, is just beyond the scope of rational thought.

  43. Hi Juror13 … maybe you could write a book on this. I have just looked through your day15 report. There is an extraordinarily amount of evidence and basically none of it is consistent with OPs version of events …. however OPs version of events and the way it has changed both in terms of big detail and in terms of very small detail is itself additional evidence.

    Also instructive is how OP and the defence have been evasive on some matters – withholding relevant information and only admitting to it and responding to it after it being obtained from other sources. I am thinking of OPs former girlfriend testifying that OP always slept on the right hand side of the bed. All the physical evidence points to OP was positioned on the right hand side and Reeva on the left hand side.

    OP has been on bail for all this time and there is evidence that there has been a lot of tailoring, rehearsing, building up studio sets, consulting, advising, working out the best tightrope of a testimony … but it all ultimately fails on the cold hard evidence.

    There was OP detailed testimony of being shot at on the motorway and then him pulling into a restaurant parking lot or something and calling a friend to drive him home. When he was asked who drove him home he said he couldn’t remember.

    I work in science and OPs defence isn’t science … its something else.

  44. I still wonder why Reeva was standing facing the toilet door when she was shot. if she had run there screaming and scared out of her mind, would she not run be crouching behind the toilet bowl or get on top of it and open the window to yell for help or call on her cell? any thoughts ?

    1. Maybe he shot her as soon as she shut the door. Annette Stipp testified the screams got closer before the 2nd bangs (the gunshots) and Burger & Johnson both testified about an escalation in the screams before the shots.

  45. Okay just found another salient point from elsewhere.

    Reeva in OP’s version must have gone to the toilet in order to either evacuate her bladder or her bowels. However the EVIDENCE doesn’t support this at all. The Evidence:
    a) OP hears the toilet door close. BUT he never hears the toilet flush.
    b) When he kills Reeva, he doesn’t find her with her pants down.
    c) There is no evidence of unflushed urine or other matter in the toilet pan.

    Conclusion. She didn’t go to the toilet to evacuate her bladder or her bowels. It must have been for another reason.

    1. Yea, that’s been discussed a lot on the forums. The fact that she was standing with her shorts up and facing the door is problematic.

      That’s why the defense had to add in that she must have intentionally remained silent and was hiding because Oscar started yelling, call the police. Totally unlikely when you consider, on his story, that it was 3am, they had just been sleeping, which means not alert, it’s dark, and the immediate second she hears “call the police” she snaps in to action with no explanation.

      Instinct would be to yell back “what’s wrong??”

      For god sake, if all people acted like OP & Reeva supposedly did that night, people would be dying left and right.

  46. One thing that still baffels me… After the shots were fired, his ears were “ringing” and he couldn’t hear anything. Couldn’t hear any screaming. But he could hear a something like a piece of wood moving.

  47. Pictures show that OPs bathroom windows had a low windowsill. According to OP one of the window panels was slid open and he believed an intruder had gained access to the bathroom through it.

    Yet he would immediately be able to see that there was no ladder resting against the open window. By going close to the window he would be able to see out the window and confirm very quickly there was no ladder below the window sill.

    OP had his two guard dogs guarding the house. Did OP mention anything about his guard dogs? How could he think there was intruders in his back yard if the dogs were not making any noise in the back yard?

    Of course the OP version of events is also inconsistent with a witness seeing the light on in the bathroom.

    There were early reports that some of OPs awards were maybe thrown on the floor – was that substantiated?

    1. PS Sherlock Holmes novel – Silver Blaze:

      Gregory (detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
      Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
      Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
      Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

  48. Some more things that seem strange.

    When OP woke up why did HE get out of bed to move the fan. According to OP Reeva was awake and alert.
    According to OP she was on the right hand side of the bed.
    According to OP, Reeva was right next to the fan and right next to the balcony.

    Why didn’t OP ask Reeva to bring the fan “in”?
    Why didn’t OP ask Reeva to close the curtain?
    Reeva was closer AND she had full functional use of her legs.

    So if OP was so disabled and on the other side of the bed – why on earth didn’t he ask Reeva to bring the fan in etc?

    In OP testimony did he actually tell Reeva that he was going to move the fan etc?

    And why was OP feeling so cold: it was the height of summer. Reeva was the one closest to the fan and the balcony according to OP yet she didn’t feel the cold?

    When the police came he was found to be bare chested and wearing just a pair of shorts.

    1. On the stand, OP testified that he woke up very warm. He was bringing the fans in to put them in front of the bed. But of course we all know the fans weren’t found in front of the bed, the duvet was, making it further impossible to move around that area freely. No matter how hard he tries, his stories (plural, because they have changed) do not fit the evidence in that room. None of it makes sense.

Leave a Reply to David Hartopp Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s