RIP Reeva. My heart goes out to her family. I know they are feeling pain beyond pain.

@shalonnaw9282

10 жыл бұрын

I saw Reeva's mom smiled on the other day trial and I believe she is a strong woman and she can bare the pain otherwise she would not be at trial.

@MJaypie23

10 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much. I believe she is.

NNNOOOO I can't wait until Monday to see my lady!! It's way too long to be without here!!! please hurry back my lady!!!

@12thando34

10 жыл бұрын

lol u funny :)

MR Roux, I put to you that your mic was still on

OP has his head completely obscured while speaking about the beating.

Did I hear Lardy Roux say "I cannot stop him" after my lady said court adjourned. I thought this case was going on until April after breaking for a week. Do you think the state have enough to convict OP?

The judge has a lovely smile

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

i never saw her smile.....but i think you are right outside the court she does have a nice smile

@shalonnaw9282

10 жыл бұрын

yes, I noticed that too. She smiles very often too.

@akon9819

3 жыл бұрын

She smiled at Mr Roux most of the time.......that was a clear indication of her judgment

wow! that was the shortest cross examination from Roux!

@Lholden17

10 жыл бұрын

Because Roux has no where to go with this shocking evidence!

I'm thinking the phone records and texts are what's gonna give us the motive for this case!

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

only one problem...the court wount except it cause,no one can proofs that it was not tampered with.....that was why barry asked just that to the analyticalist

@Caramello98

10 жыл бұрын

In Oscar's affidavit he says: after he sees that he had shot Reeva he rings Ambulance and security.Runs down stairs and opens door to allow Ambulance access. Goes back upstairs carries Reeva down to the Garage some one told Oscar not to wait for the ambulance to go straight to hospital. Who did he ring to get that advice? His sister? she did arrive soon after and went through the house and requested a pair of sunglasses from the side table in bedroom?

My Lady , my lady what the heck !

What was on the ipads???

Blunt force trauma to the body, bruised to the top of the eye, blood stained cricket bat, this was noted at the post modern. Explained at the beginning of the video!! Sorry but they are very good at their job

She may have been beaten! Well that would explain the bloody bat. OP, what could she have possibly done to make you lose it and beat her? Did she call you a gimp or crippled? Those would be kind words to call the likes of you. What a scumbag.

I can't wait for Bad Runner to take the stand and metaphorically hand himself. He may stay 20 years in prison, he will still know a better fate than the poor girl who died in pain -broken bones, her hip one, hurt like hell- and terror -what's worse than seeing your partner turn into a murderous gunman trying to kill you?-

Does anyone else know who else - besides OP (if that even happens) - the defense is planning to have testify...besides their ballistics and/or cricket bat experts?

Why is the defense team conspicuously absent during the IT expert's testimony?

Oscar has forgotten to put his head in his hands, cry or retch into a bucket during the description of the injuries he inflicted on Reeva. He killed her in cold blood IMO but if that was not the decision of the court, the sentence should still be significantly severe. He killed her without regard for her safety whether that was deliberate or by mistake. He was an 'accident' waiting to happen from evidence in the other charges and by 'accident' I mean he was a lethal weapon himself the way he went around brandishing firearms.

*Oscar's Story just DOES (NOT) make SENSE!* written 3/23/14 (1:32 pm) Oscar's story just does (NOT) make SENSE! Let's use YOU for example. You are LAYING in the bed with your significant other who you LOVE so VERY much. Then, you get up out of the bed and walk out of the balcony's door which is about 5 feet from the bed to get some blow fans. On your way back into the house, You all of a sudden, hear a NOISE and *REFUSE* to think that it's your significant other but a GUARANTEED BURGLAR. So, you (PURPOSELY) AVOID walking 5 feet to the bed to check to see IF your significant other is STILL in bed or is the RESULT of the NOISE that you heard. So, you walk BACK to the VERY BED where your significant other SHOULD be laying but do NOT at ANY point, check to see IF your significant other is in bed. You just use the bed for leverage as you kneel down on your knees to GET YOUR GUN from UNDER the bed. Then, you GET UP and RUSH TO THE RESTROOM and START BLASTING AWAY without 1st KNOCKING on the door or calling your significant other's NAME to see whether or (not) THEY are in the RESTROOM! (edited 5/24/14 7:44 pm) However, upon Cross Examination by prosecutor Gerrie Nel, you CHANGE your story MANY TIMES to try and get it to MAKE SENSE to the court. Back to the scenario. AFTER BLASTING AWAY at the (alleged) UNIDENTIFIED TARGET - I said ALLEGED because you know who was in there, THEN and (ONLY) THEN, (after) you shot 4 TIMES, do you ALLEGEDLY get a little LOVE in your heart which MAKES you call out your significant other's name and when you do, you NOTICE that your significant other does (NOT) ANSWER BACK because he or she is TRAPPED (DEAD) in the restroom. So, you RUN and go get a CRICKET BAT to beat the door in so you can get to your significant other to SAVE him or her! Yet, when you get to your significant other, you DON'T administer CPR but instead you REMOVE your significant other from the CRIME SCENE and tote your significant other DOWN the STAIRS and when SECURITY calls, You tell SECURITY that EVERYTHING is FINE as you SIT THERE knowing that your SIGNIFICANT OTHER who CLAIM to LOVE so VERY MUCH, is sitting in FRONT of You DYING, literally DYING! You sit and WAIT EAGERLY for your significant other to DIE, and ONLY after your significant other completely DIES, you call security back and PRETEND to be ALL......SHAKEN....UP! "Booo Hooo Hooo, I can't TALK to you Mr Security because I'm Allll shaken up see.... Booo Hooo Hoo!" OSCAR IS A (COLD) BLOODED and UNMERCIFUL KILLER! Oscar HAD to KILL Reeva to get rid of the PAIN that was in his heart but ONLY to find a GREATER PAIN after he committed such a HEINOUS CRIME! Anyway, Oscar's story just DOES (NOT) make sense! Well, we know that having BRAINS is NOT one of Oscar's STRONGEST points because IF it was, he would have came up with a BETTER story, INSTEAD OF thinking that His DISABILITY, FAME and FORTUNE would SAVE him.

Till Monday...still long way to go

There have been several references to Reeve wearing a 'vest". Surely she wasn't wearing a vest in bed and, in turn, in the toilet. Did anyone else catch this detail?

i think my lady could do with a long break as shes bloody bloated form all the tea!!

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

haha!!....have patience with her man

whoa! listen to Roux at 1:42:20 "I cannot stop him.... I cannot stop him"

Why did OP do it?

It's because it's a major step not only a national hero for SA on trail but also because it is a televised, a major step

I love Nel's no-nonsense approach to presenting/questioning the witnesses. No filler.

Regarding Nel's request to have an extended weekend before reconvening, I think he and his team really want to spend as much or more time preparing for OP's taking the stand as they do their own final witnesses.

Nel said he wants to play some record on Monday's testimony,..what record.maybe Reeva has recorded on her phone when it happened or maybe she was phoning somebody while in the toilet and whoever was on the other line heard everything because reeva did not hang up and so as the person on the other line andthey retrieve the call record that night from the mobile company and play it as witness.?! OP will be in a lot of trouble!!! No way out if that is the case.Cant wait for next week to listen to the prosecutor's remaining testimonies.

Now we all know what "Code Red" really means...drawing blood...and on Valentine's Day to boot. The stars must have been aligned.

what about ROUX witnesses when they com ing? anyone know?

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

Roux must first slam the state witnesses,he is doing a very good job of that,then he can pulled out his witnesses ,which will be his forensic team

@analove9453

10 жыл бұрын

there supposed to be from the US cant wait

@Iazzaboyce

10 жыл бұрын

JULIANA anddrade Yes they are from the US - the main man has already made a KZread video of himself banging and old door with a cricket bat.

@analove9453

10 жыл бұрын

its been a circus since NEl decided to.not.prepare his witnesses for the bull dog ROUX is ...im.not sure if thats how it is in SA but in the US prosecution always does specially when its a big case ....ive never seen such a circus but hopefully it will shed light onthe SA system and improvement can come from.this

@analove9453

10 жыл бұрын

***** theres something inside me thats telling me hes gona go free

This is how a trial goes in South Africa? If it was a middle east country, their is no escape for Pistorius, Without a doubt pistorius is a killer does nt matter if it was intentional or not,

@Jono98806

10 жыл бұрын

It does matter if it was intentional or not to the courts and that's what they're trying to decide. He's already admitted to shooting her, so they don't have to decide whether he is the one who did it. Culpable homicide carries a lighter sentence than murder and that's why they have to determine whether or not it was intentional.

the persons which also believe OP made a mistake and he thougt it was an intruder should give me a thumb up:-)

I looked up some of the statements that OP answered on his firearms competency test as described by Sean Rens last Friday, one can use deadly force if: 1) “Attack must be against you" Now we know why the defense on Wednesday was trying so hard to say that RS was leaning forward torwards the door when she was shot in the hip. Obviously planning to open the door and charge OP with the magazine rack, a roll of toilet paper...? 2) “Know your target, and what lies beyond" Again, he had this one covered also. So what are the issues here?

I'm curious to see if the defense even has a ballistics expert, or was that just another Roux ruse to try to put doubt in the witness' mind and get him to contradict himself. Good for Mangena that he didn't fall for it.

I know this hasn't been specifically asked...and it is purely circumstantial, but both the ballistics and blood spatter witnesses (and others) have mentioned the vest and shorts she was wearing. So, my question has always been that since it was a very warm night in Pretoria on the morning of February 14th, why would she get dressed to go relieve herself? Also, if he was really trying to save her from bleeding to death, he would have tended to her wounds on the bathroom floor with towels and pressure and not wasted precious time carrrying the love of his life down the hall and stairs before re-administering to her wounds (for show, of course). Unless, he wanted to taint the crime scene itself? Another issue that I don't think would have flown in a US court was Roux's cross-examination of the ballistics expert (Mangena?) when he brought up the fact that the defense's own expert tested this and that and will testify otherwise - regarding the splinters on Reeva's arm and her body position when she was shot in the hip. He then finished with "Well, what do you say to that?" or something similar. Shouldn't Nel have then objected with the simple argument that when the defense presents their case, their own ballistics expert(s) will have ample opportunity to document his own opinion on their behalf? Talk about arrogance.

Could anyone tell me why do SA people call this trial as "trial of century"? No crime like this before within a century or why?

@Jono98806

10 жыл бұрын

I think that's just sensationalism, there've been far worse crimes than this in SA, even in the past year. They're only calling it the "trial of the century" because Oscar Pistorius is a well-known Paralympic athlete and celebrity, so there's huge public interest in the case (in the same manner that there was huge public interest in the OJ Simpson trial). Also, this is the first time we've ever televised a trial live in SA.

@yaseengaffoor

10 жыл бұрын

Also, there were probably trials much worse than this, its just because of this trial is televised. The century is also not yet done so I assume that the name comes from the hidden expectation that no trial will be like this in the years to come

@shalonnaw9282

10 жыл бұрын

Thank you guys! :-)

So they don't know what web history is ?

Reading through the comments I see some people find it hard to believe how a witness could hear "anything" from 170 yards away, in the middle of the night. I have to say that, Sound travelling through the warmer/hotter air of an African evening, will always travel significantly easier and quicker than it would say, in the UK where the air is much cooler. Add this to the huge decrease in ambient sound anywhere in the early hours and one can see that it is in fact possible to hear much further in the early hours. Think about that first song bird you hear just before it comes light proper, often they can be heard for miles. Another thing was that in a healthy relationship, you would think that a sexy young thing like Reeva RIP would have been sleeping nude in such warm weather. I just can't see that she would of wore shorts of any description to bed. Just my opinion and I state it with the uppermost of respect for Reeva and her family. I think of how it must have been for her on that terrible night and then I have no problem about feeling guilty for wanting them to throw away the key on OP. What a waste of both their lives.

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

yeah maybe,but you must know,barry first had special sound analysts on the scene,which will come out on the scene,also like the first witness that claimed she knows what a gunshot sounds like,because when she was 9 or something she heard a gunshot at a race ....she is now 20 married....goodness,guns and sounds have changed since 19 what you call it,also everything can be proven by decibels in a scientific way,if you take everything into account

@kenford2234

10 жыл бұрын

Ester Veldman We'll have to wait and see, but I thought the lady who said the screams woke her and her husband up sounded honest enough. I got the impression from her she didn't want to make the statement in the first place and would have sooner stayed out of it. The fact remains that he shot 4 bullets through a closed toilet door with the intention of hurting or worse, the person who was on the other side of the door. I know SA is a violent place at times but even if it was an intruder on the other side of that toilet door, he still had no reason to shoot to kill, like they were just wild dogs or something.

@Iazzaboyce

10 жыл бұрын

Ken Ford Looking at the layout of the apartment, the obvious reaction to becoming suspicious of intruders in the bathroom would be to alert RS grab a gun and both leave the building to notify security. I think that if OP thought there was an armed intruder or intruders in the bathroom he would not walk up that corridor in the pitch dark shouting, as he would not have known what was around the corner. The idea that he fired into the toilet at a supposed armed intruder or intruders is equally implausible as he would have risked the intruder/s returning fire. Also the evidence is he has shot low in the door - if he feared an intruder or intruders was behind the door he would have aimed at chest height to minimise the chance of return fire. OP's account is made up of a series of implausible events, but even if you accept each one as being true he still should not have fired at an imagined threat, because an imagined threat is not a threat - it's a thought.

@kenford2234

10 жыл бұрын

Iazzaboyce Correct! Another thing is, I would have almost certainly tried to put my legs on before attempting anything to do with a suspicious noise. You'd want to give your self the best chance possible so the legs are a must as much as the gun. I'm thinking he was probably sat outside the toilet door talking or arguing with her, she was probably putting a few things in a bag in the bedroom at first as he was pecking at her head about some jealous sh.t or something. When she ran to the toilet for some peace and privacy. He followed and sat outside the toilet door but, she wouldn't come out or open the door, this may have been going on for hours before he finally lost it and started blasting the door. This scenario ran through my mind during the first part of the trial and I haven't heard anything to change that view.

@Caramello98

10 жыл бұрын

Ken Ford In Oscar's affidavit he says that when he was in the bathroom and it was pitch black he was terrified of the possible intruder but was too scared to go back to the bedroom because the bedroom door was shut. He may have confused that incident with another. Because after finding that he had shot Reeva he had run back into the bedroom to put on legs and go to balcony to yell for help. I believe that at some point Reeva may have shut herself in the bedroom, which would explain its damaged lock and marks on the door. He must have chased her around the house when she hid in the toilet. He may have locked her in and trapped her there explaining that the key may have been on the outside of the door. The man has anger issues and can not admit it that is why there is no help for him. With "it's not me it's you attitude" I have a very good excoose ma'lady!

I am amazed that a lot of these Police witnesses are considered experts with minimal qualifications. A tool marks expert with no formal training in those specific areas he is testifying in, amazing. There are also conflicts in relation to persons who entered the crime scene and making statements that contradict each other about what occurred. How can a Police Officer bring measuring utensils into an autopsy and this be accepted by the court as being above board.WoW

@Sparrowdean

10 жыл бұрын

And how are you qualified to determine whether or not their qualifications and on the job working experience is inadequate?

@hottbaje6868

10 жыл бұрын

Because I work in law enforcement and an expert is supposed to be such not making it up as u go along and when queried about their qualifications are unable to say what makes their minimal qualifications expert status.

@Sparrowdean

10 жыл бұрын

Hott Baje Your reply confirms my suspicion.

@hottbaje6868

10 жыл бұрын

Sparrow Dean And what is your suspicion O wise one?

@hottbaje6868

10 жыл бұрын

My qualifications to comment on the case are the same as yours to comment on me and I know u r no expert when it comes to me.

man they are something else down there so there is no court into the twenty-four and my lady herself ask them what day Monday was..and she's the main person in the court room and she don't know nothing. maybe if your are high up you don't have to worry about stuff like that..

@Sparrowdean

10 жыл бұрын

The judge has expert knowledge of the legislation of her country that what's of relevance, not the date a particular Monday falls on.

@nickylup9566

10 жыл бұрын

I don't understand they're coming back Monday in court right,,,

@Sparrowdean

10 жыл бұрын

nicky lup Yes, of course.

what about the ippad not following what the prosecutor is trying to say

@hmsglory

10 жыл бұрын

Prosecution presented the entire web browser history for that date & all the favourite marked websites (bookmarks same on both ipods), which included porn sites visited that evening to the judge & her assessors. Nell was perhaps being discrete for the sake of Reeva's mum & that is why Roux expressed it could not be determined who the viewer was, or how many viewers there were that evening. The press have reported on the matter..

@analove9453

10 жыл бұрын

hms glory

@analove9453

10 жыл бұрын

which is why i dont trust their evidence and testimony some.might be true but.there seems to be an agreement between them just the way the officers answer questions

You know what is strange....why would his sister go to a bloody murder scene and apart from other items also collect a watch??? Why would anyone be thinking of the watch in a time like this??? "Oh, I murdered my girlfriend, my house is a bloody mess....I'm so traumatised by not being able to help her, but can you get one of my expensive watches, I need to know the time"!!!

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Just joking,of course, but perhaps he was wearing that watch (his favorite?) when he shot her.

i dont think he deliberately killed her. this is wasting time and money. disrupting more lives.

Does anyone believe that most crime scenes are handled impeccably - not a single mistake in collecting evidence? I would bet very few, if any - especially in a high profile case like this. But, when you have a dream team of defense attorneys working on your side (as with O.J. Simpson), they are being paid a ransom to unearth every detail of the forensic investigation looking for inconsistencies and possible crime scene contamination. OP did a great job of creating more work/distractions for the criminologists by greatly expanding the crime scene area when he carried her down the hall and stairs.

And pants. So, she was fully-dressed??

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Sorry, yes she was fully dressed, but wearing shorts, not pants.

Bye u all

Pistorius first beat her with the cricket bat then he shot her...

@yaseengaffoor

10 жыл бұрын

There is no evidence to prove this as there was no blood on the bat, however, I assume that he might have tried to open the door with the bat in an attempt to get to her after having beat her prior to this. After he seen that it failed his anger made him shoot her

@Lholden17

10 жыл бұрын

Yaseen Gaffoor What are you talking about? Didn't you see the photos of the bat with the blood on it? Didn't you see the blood splatter in the bedroom? How and why did her blood get there? The investigator testified there were a few places on Reeva's body that sustained blunt force trauma...what are you talking about???

@allanjoshua5799

10 жыл бұрын

Alaa von Alsburg I think that he testified that none of the blood spatters would constitute a pattern caused by blunt force trauma and he would consider them arterial. where in the video does he say that he agrees that there was blunt force trauma? may be i missed it.. can you post the time please? or are you referring to another testimony of another witness not in this video?

@maggie19ful

10 жыл бұрын

Allan Joshua I agrre with you,this testimony confirmed there was no blunt force trauma on Reeva's body and the bloods in bed and duvet and in the sofa are from the arterial blood spurts contamination. I doubt he is good in his field,being a blood splatter analyst

@maggie19ful

10 жыл бұрын

maggs mum that is why Roux did not fire him with a lot of questions

so super cool,the brightest pea in the pot,confirms that according to the evidence of the blood spatters oscar is telling the truth,good heavens i am glad

@Sparrowdean

10 жыл бұрын

Which truth would that be then? According to Oscar he shot her through the loo door in the belief that she was an intruder and blood spatters cannot confirm whether or not it was premeditated murder, nor will it confirm why he was so determined to kill whoever was behind the door.

@gerharduslusse6598

10 жыл бұрын

Yes i am glad too, just shows if he was lying at all, his whole testimony would be inconsistent because as they say if you lie, you have to lie again to cover the previous lie.

@cherrainemcleod8883

10 жыл бұрын

I am at a lost why you think his testimony helps the defense. Actually his testimony corroborates Mangena's statements as to where Reeva was when she was shot. His testimony of the blood spatter along the staircase and on the ground floor was never in dispute as the security at the estate also saw him coming down the staircase holding Reeva. Who are you to determine that he is the brightest, there were many qualified professionals with loads of experience who testified.

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

Sparrow Dean Agree this cannot be the only witness to be taken into account,But most of the eye witnesses is already slammed,the forensic evidence is compromised its gonna be very easy to slam them more by further scientific evidence produced by Barry and team remember barry also had a forensic team looking at the scene ,they did not move in to give their statements.....so far the state case is slammed.,that is why Nel said today...the defense has shine a new light on the case

@esterveldman4983

10 жыл бұрын

Gerhardus Lusse how...good heavens at the end van der nest clearly said....oscar is talking the truth,that is why barry did not bother to cross question mangena....he simply asked him if he did the relevant forensic testing ,mangena said no....everytime

And the judge...arterial explained...come on.

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Either she needs a hearing aid or should have the volume turned up on the one she's wearing. I don't dislike her. She seems very charming. I'm am happy to see that she has attendants (not sure exactly what they are called) that are also taking notes and assisting her in documenting the exhibits presented to her. It can certainly seem overwhelming for sure. Here's a question: Assuming the trial goes another three weeks, does anyone have an educated guess as to the length of time after the trial's conclusion before the judge has made her decision?

I don't know why everyone thinks of just "breaking the door and then shooting" or "shooting and then breaking down the door". what about "Try to break the door" "Bang Bang Bang" cricket bat, did not succeed, goes back, gets the gun and shoots "Bang Bang Bang", goes back wears his prosthetics comes back and kicks the door once "Bang" and pulls out the panel from the doorframe and then carries her down..... I don't know what the motive was but it seems to me it is most likely that she was chased down through the bathroom into the toilet (she was screaming) and he was yelling in rage and then he tried to gain access to her.. could not... in a fit of rage, shot her once.... (on her hip first) realized what he had done but now if he does not kill her she will testify against him... so the pause... then shoots her dead.... this sequence of events is corroborated by the evidence thus far.... I am not sure if it is enough to convict yet (unless they get the motive) which i think might be covered next week......

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

The motive would have been that he confronted her about seeing another man and that sent him into a jealous rage. We all know his propensity for being hot-tempered. OP's story does not even sync to yours, nor does any of the ear/eyewitness testimony from neighbors. What does sound plausible with the gun firing (as noted by Nel after Mangena was cross-examined by Roux) was that a single shot (according to Michele Burger) woke her and others up, and then they all heard the follow-up rapid shots. Not being an expert, of course, I would tend to agree with Mangena that four rapid shots (two double taps) would have caused wounds to be much closer to the same area of the victim's body. But, I can't wait for the defense's experts' testimony. I'm betting that these experts will be called first and if Roux believes he's done enough to create serious reasonable doubt, OP will not take the stand.

@allanjoshua5799

10 жыл бұрын

erzug Johan stipp (not sure if i got the name right, the doctor at the scene) He lives closer than Michelle Burger... In his testimony he said, he heard a total of 6 bangs..... and thats when Roux contends that those were cricket bat sounds and gunshots but tries to prove that the second set of bangs were when OP was trying to break the door down(after having shot her by mistake).... thereby trying to paint a picture that that the first shot killed her.... the two afterwards hit the deceased but the first killed her..... so she would not have been able to scream..... 4,5,6 according to him is what is heard by everyone.... What I am saying is.... the first 3 bangs were cricket bat on the door (syncs with him being on stumps and hitting the door), this is not loud enough for Michelle Burger to hear..... however this was heard by Johan Stipp.... she runs through the bathroom (screams which is heard by Stipp) locks herself into the toilet.... now he shoots her..... (first shot) this is heard by Michelle Burger.... then the pause... then two more shots...... then goes back to wear his prostheses to kick the door down and starts screaming as well..... This is what I think happened.....

@susannemuller2094

10 жыл бұрын

erzug no! there was no "other man" ! since she was in love with HIM! and so she was also laughing in her car, when she was coming to HIM! she loved him very much...- so - there is no Motive!

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Susanne Müller You're right. There was no other man, but OP became jealous just at the sight of her talking to another man. That is being overly possessive and insecure, IMO. If he didn't feel he was man enough for her (without his guns, that is), then he should have told her so and ended it before that night.

Have a good rest this weekend all those at court, cos its getting hotter than hell for the defense. Interesting, how Roux is brief and not argumentative to blood expert. Didnt want to delve too deep then??

watch robert shapiro (OJ lawyer) speaking about this case - he says OP will have to take the stand, to plead his "innocence" and to come across as a frightened man who thought there was an intruder. Compelling viewing, also shows you how he went about defending OJ

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Not to change the subject, but I believe Shapiro actually believed O.J. was guilty, especially after he failed that polygraph so badly. I also thought that Shapiro wanted out, but the new lead council, Johnny Cochran, told him "no way" because it wouldn't look good for the defendant to have one of his attorneys back out at that point. Have you ever noticed Shapiro's expression (here on KZread) when O.J. is acquitted of the murders? I have the terms "guilty" and "not guilty", since guilt or innocence has not really been proven in many cases. Reasonable doubt does not make a person not guilty, IMO. When you have the money and can afford a dream team defense, anything can happen. I also believe if OP escapes the "premeditated murder" charge and is convicted of "culpable homicide", there will still be a majority who believe he knew she was in the bathroom when he pulled the trigger.

@chriscaine7689

10 жыл бұрын

it was very interesting to hear Shapiro speak of how he defends people. He says he is not interested in whether they are guilty or not and never asks them either? But just does his job to get them off. Yes, I noticed when OJ was found not guilty Shapiro even looked a little defeated, but Johnny Cochran hung onto OJ like a sheepdog....pityful watching. But the prosecution in the OJ trial were absolutely crap...even if he was caught with the knife they would never have won with Marsha Hunt

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Chris Caine I believe you mean Marsha Clark.

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

Chris Caine I agree, but the theatrics of that trial being televised can tend to make all parties believe they are Shakespearean actors. They milk the limelight for all its worth. At least with this trial, there hasn't been one interminable sidebar after another. Another plus is that there's no jury to be cleared from the courtroom when attorneys from one side or another decide to have a hissy fit.

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

On innocence or guilt, there are defenders who will not defend an accused if they believe they are guilty beforehand...however few and far between they are.

Where is her pj's, why would she be sleeping in a short and shirt?? really

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

She wasn't. If you have a fight with someone, you are usually planning on leaving the premises...and it was a vest and shorts. Let's have a show of hands now. What female on a very warm evening sleeps in a vest and shorts? Come on, don't be shy.

@erzug

10 жыл бұрын

I just saw the "really". Evidently, only women dating Oscar Pistorius.

1:38:00 lol!

I believe in his innocence!

@susannemuller2094

10 жыл бұрын

so - i'm not alone - i believe also in his innocence! thanks ...

I never believed it was premeditated murder. He invites her over with the intent to kill her if she admits to having been with other men? However, the "culpable homicide" charge is a joke in this case. In SA, it simply means "the unlawful negligent killing of a human being". There is too much of a gap between the two degrees. The way I see it, they got into a number of heated exchanges during the course of the evening and it built to a boiling point (warm evening might have contributed to the friction) with him taking her out. Again, she was dressed. Secondly, when he says he brought the fan in from the balcony, he had to go back to the bed to retrieve his firearm. It wasn't stored in a dresser drawer on the other side of the room/bed. How could he have missed her absence?

Ti aiuteranno loro con giudici cugini a tempio Olbia e chi c'era c'è ancora solo che le anno unite fra loro morto vargiu e unita a Lula e va a lode vedremo se uscirà quella donna che fa l'amica avvocata sì sì