I hope Roux and the team have a nice, color coded timeline chart... with circles and arrows and stuff.

Place all the State evidence points along it and the whole case will be clear. Especially the dopey notion that the shots were just after 3:17, yet OP was phoning at 3:19AM

Then I guess, the defense can get to the REAL case that should have been presented by the State ... which is explaining/justifying the fact that OP shot at what he genuinely thought was an intruder.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

My position is that I don't know if he is telling the truth or not.

The case presented by the State is mainly their contention that OP is lying. And (IMO) they failed to prove that beyond reasonable doubt.. in fact they failed well short of that standard.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Why did I think the Defense case started today I wonder? It is I believe starting on the 28th.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Hi wroughead... you probably thought that because it is NUTS to have these breaks when both sides have had a year to prepare a relatively uncomplicated case, The basic facts of the matter are known and admitted by both sides. It is ludicrous for the Sate to have wasted so much time doing little more than laying out the basics of what happened... in agreement with the defence. The death, the causes, who dunnit, etc etc are all given.

Having said all that I DO agree with this one delay. It seems the "game" the State plays in SA is to put 100's of potential witnesses on their list and so deny the Defence access. The State of course had no intention of calling 117 witnesses... they just wanted to stop the defence using them. A dirty trick to my mind. Roux should have a little time to consider using some of them 2 day seems very short time really. I presume he would need to depose any witness and so could not do much in two days. We all know that the State is shielding some witnesses on the "Keystone Kops" side of matters... Botha comes to mind... but I am sure there are other police witnesses who could testify to irregularities and so discredit some of the State's cop evidence.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Yes, it's pretty wide knowledge now, just about everyone is agreed. I get angry when I think after all this time, the case has not been properly prepared - I think it's a disgrace.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

I have seen some daft posts regarding Black Talon, ILLEGAL AMMUNITION!

One of the firearms charges does relate to OP having the Black Talon ammunition without a license... he has pleaded not guilty... but regardless, that does NOT make the ammunition itself "illegal"

Some people really do let themselves get carried away. All that has been said is that that type of LEGAL ammunition is no longer available. Made by the Winchester Company from good old USA it was never "illegal" and is not now. Technology moves on and there are improved types of ammunition available (more accurate) Hollow point ammunition is STILL legal... and in fact recommended since it lessens the chance of a bullet passing through a target individual and hitting some innocent bystander after exiting.

I wonder if these daft old dears confronted with their favourite brand of baked beans being superseded at the supermarket, would rush home to dispose of any "Illegal Baked Beans" that they have stored in their kitchen cupboards?

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

The maximum sentence for storing out of date baked beans in South African cupboards is 7 years, unless they are stored in a safe cupboard in the basement or in the garage, then it is only 5 years.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Like it Wroughead...

If I was in SA I wouldn't stand for that.... If I was raided by the cops looking for illegal beans, I'd hold them off log enough to eat all the beans.... the fart in their general direction

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

An observation based on what I see posted about this case... but applicable to most (all) cases now I come to think about it.

What it is that leads me to describe places as "True Gossip" rather than "True Crime" Forums is that the vast majority of posts come from the perspective of.....

PRESUMED GUILTY

That seems to work fine for defendants like Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias, Scott and Drew Peterson etc etc Not everybody joins the lynch mob, but nobody is very committed to defence. (Actually I do have reservations about of those cases... but I digress)

The cases that cause all the grief, handbag fights and bad feelings and banning are cases where a significant few actually remember what the Justice System has at its core:

Innocent Until Proved Guilty.

I see people denying what is plainly shown by evidence in order to advance and expand a hypothesis long after it is no longer possibly correct. The smallest of detail is regarded as highly significant, even though it is not brought up in court, and so not relevant. These are the people who will continue to bang on long after the trial has ended about all the good stuff that should have been presented in court. They are blind to the evidence that is presented that proves innocence. We will see how the Pistorius case works out, but I predict the usual outcries of disbelief from those who have remained wilfully ignorant of the facts... REALITY always comes as a shock

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I see some consensus that OP will testify himself first up?

I don't know if that is true, but if that is the case. I hope he does explain things fully. I am sure Nel will try and confuse the issue, but I do hope a clear outline of OP's version comes through. I hope the Judge asks questions too (not sure that is allowed) but much of this trial has been a sideshow. We need to get some clarity. The main point of the trial is that the JUDGE needs to understand exactly what OP is saying. Whether she believes him or not is key to the case. So an absolutely critical part of the trial. Once the frame work of the defence case is there, I have no doubts about Roux's ability to offer evidence and testimony and demonstration to PROVE the whole thing on a factual basis. There has already been enough speculation and "hints of things that may be show at a later date" etc from Nel... and near-hysteria from posters at Gossip Forums.
I have faith in Roux. I think he will lay out a clear (and undeniable) defence.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

One of my big concerns too. In the past, just as it was never a good idea for an accused to carry out their own defense - in almost every case they were found guilty - notions are that if a lawyer had acted for them, they may have been found not-guilty.

Same rule in my opinion applies to an accused giving evidence because if they don't give evidence, the jury (or judge) in this case will be none the wiser, and will have to assume what they've heard from other witnesses say from the prosecution side - or equally defense to be true.

I don't think it works that way in SA I think he will indeed be the first witness.

_________________
Since we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

I agree with Robert Shapiro... actually he agrees with ME! I said it first

This is in effect a Self Defence case, and as such the Defendant needs to put that case. I KNOW that GZ managed that without testifying, but as we all know he did give extensive "testimony" on Camera that the Prosecution kindly played, and in that case there were witnesses who saw GZ defending himself. I do think that OP has to testify and put his case that it was an act of self defence , albeit misguided in hindsight.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Pistorius trial: After the evidence, focus on character
Andrew Harding, Africa correspondent
26 March 2014

So what have we learned after almost a month of prosecution evidence in courtroom D?

There's been plenty of sound and fury. And yes, a cricket bat, a door, some retching, and plenty of text messages.

But I'm not convinced it all signifies as much as we might think. I'll explain more in a minute, but first of all, here's my take on the prosecution's palpable hits, and woeful misses so far.

... more at link
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-26746177

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I am not sure that the BBC are still the go-to place for unbiased and accurate reporting



I will go along with the "ferret" description

Nel could perhaps do well from here on, but I see no evidence of that... it is just a "guess", or more likely "wishful thinking" by MSM reporters, and certainly Gossip Forum posters, who view trials in the context of a "presumption of guilt"

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Opinion: Winners and losers in the Pistorius trial so far
By Kelly Phelps, legal analyst, Special to CNN
March 27, 2014 -- Updated 2127 GMT (0527 HKT)

(CNN) -- Four weeks into South Africa's trial of the century, and the state has rested its case. On Friday the defense will begin arguing its case, possibly beginning with Pistorius himself. The time is ripe to evaluate the evidence we have heard so far; so, how successful has the state been in establishing their claim that Pistorius intentionally murdered Reeva Steenkamp?

...more at link
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/27/opini ... index.html?

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

A thought occurs to me.

Dr Stipp is the best witness that there is in regards the two sets of bangs. IMO he already blows the State's case out of the water because he places the second set of bangs at just after 3:17 (from phone call times)... the State's case is that those bangs are the gunshots that killed Reeva... and THAT is simply not possible since that leaves only just over a minute for OP to do all the running around after, getting the bat, putting on his legs, going to balcony to shout, breaking the door down, dragging Reeva's body to bathroom... and THEN being on the phone at 3:19... It is simply impossible.

What occurs to me now is that as a witness with military experience, he is sure he knows gunshots... no doubt he DID hear the shots at around 3:10 and so was THEN predisposed to hear more bangs as gunshots too. Especially while distracted by creams and cries and what he perceives as a developing serious event. Phoning, getting dressed and getting ready to go assist. KNOWING that shots had been fired already he was predisposed to hear more loud bangs (bat on door) as shots too.

Fits perfectly with second set of bangs that were cricket bat, but sounded like gunshots.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Oscar Pistorius: the key questions he must answer from the witness box

The athlete's performance on the stand could spell the difference between life in jail or a chance to resurrect his sporting career

David Smith
Thursday 27 March 2014 19.04 GMT

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... itness-box

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Oscar Pistorius trial: How will the defense fight back?
By Richard Allen Greene, CNN
March 27, 2014

Pretoria, South Africa (CNN) -- Oscar Pistorius killed Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day last year. Of that, there is no doubt.

But was it murder?

One of South Africa's toughest prosecutors, Gerrie Nel, has been fighting for most of this month to prove it was.

Starting Friday, one of the country's shrewdest defense lawyers, Barry Roux, will try to convince a judge that it wasn't.

The verdict will hinge on two questions:

Did the Olympic sprinter know his girlfriend was behind the door in the bathroom of his house when he fired four hollow-point bullets through it in the middle of the night?

And if he did not -- if he thought she was a burglar, as he insists -- did he act as a reasonable person would have?

Critical testimony will come from the only living person who was in the house at the time, the "Blade Runner" himself.

...more at link
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/27/world ... l-defense/

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

"One of South Africa's toughest prosecutors, Gerrie Nel"

Really?

That does not say much for the standard of prosecutors in SA.

I see in MSM and certainly in posts at True Gossip Forums that Nel continues to be rated highly. Why?

Even while conceding that he has not performed well or presented all the "really convincing evidence" that people are sure he has, people claim that he is "playing possum"... "Rope-a-dope"... Nel's going to come off the ropes in the last round? Yeah...RIGHT!

This to me is Cognitive Dissonance on steroids... delusion in effect. Nel has done a piss-poor job so far and has not presented much startling evidence or testimony at all. It makes a lot more sense to apply Occam's Razor and conclude that Nel is crap, and that he does not have any more evidence other than what he has presented.

Whatever Nel does from here... he has left it a bit late since he has rested the State's case. I do concede that IF he manages to rip OP a new one with a brilliant cross-examination, he is at least back in the game, but then will come Roux's other witnesses and experts who will I think make mincemeat out of what Nel has presented in his half-arsed State's case.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light