I'm interested in it because of how relatively open it is, unlike when you just get the juiciest bits relayed through tabloids or something.
08:53:Mr Roux is suggesting Ms Burger could not possibly have heard emotion in a woman's voice at the distance between her home and Mr Pistorius', and with Ms Steenkamp inside a locked toilet with the window closed. Ms Burger insists she could.
08:56:Mr Roux suggests that the court should go to Ms Burger's home, to test whether she could hear emotion in a woman's voice from that distance. She replies that several homes have since been built in between Mr Pistorius's home and hers.
The defence lawyer is annoying me already. How long do you keep on at someone before concluding they believe one thing and you believe another?
I'm following it, for the sheer cheek of the defence case. How they're keeping a straight face when introducing evidence like 'well, he screams like a girl' is beyond me.
I'm not as wholly convinced of his guilt as many seem to be. If I lived in SA I'd probably shoot in terror anything that made a sound as well. We have family there who live a thrilling life behind armed guards and barbed wire.
I don't think he'll get a fair trial, though, and with someone that rich in a country that problematic, maybe such a thing doesn't exist.
I've swung wildly in my opinion on this since it happened. I mainly still feel sad that, even in a scenario where hes telling the truth and he was terrified of intruders (being a very famous person in what I understand can be a dangerous country), hes still completely thrown away his entire life. He was such a hero. But that's by the by really.
I'm not convinced by this woman's testimony really. having said that, when I think about it all, I'm not convinced by his story.
Last edited by smalex on Tue Mar 04, 2014 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Derek Nimmo wrote:I'm following it, for the sheer cheek of the defence case. How they're keeping a straight face when introducing evidence like 'well, he screams like a girl' is beyond me.
Did they say that?! :eek: :sman:
I am reading some updates about it. I couldn't be more convinced of his guilt, but I find trials in general quite interesting, and I'm intrigued to see what the impact of not having a jury will be on it.
I just can't get over the fact that if you were sharing a room with someone and you heard a noise in the en-suite your first thought wouldn't be that it was them, having got up to use the loo, and even if it wasn't surely if you're with someone you love and you start to fear for your life you also have some concerns about them and would at least feel about the bed to check they were there and ok before rampaging off with your gun and shooting blindly through a closed door which didn't even lead anywhere other than a loo?
I agree with smalex though, even if it was an accident he's fucked now.
Yes. On our news yesterday they said "alleged murder" - he definitely murdered someone; the only question is whether he thought he was murdering a burglar or his gf. I don't really see what difference it makes, particularly.
If he thought someone had broken in that's very different to murdering someone for no reason. I don't know what to make of this story at all. As Bean said on the original thread it sounds so ridiculous it might actually be true. I don't get why he'd shoot his girlfriend after a row. He must have known he'd get done for it.
"You first have to find out who you are. Then you have to be it like mad."
Mr Roux asks Ms Burger why a man would shout for help if he was trying to kill his girlfriend?
Well, to make it fit in with his story that it was an accident? Duh.
If the prosecution are making out that he killed her in a fit of rage/jealousy/pique/whatever, it would be odd if he contrived to make sure that he called for help before being taken over by rage and killing her.
Mr Roux asks Ms Burger why a man would shout for help if he was trying to kill his girlfriend?
Well, to make it fit in with his story that it was an accident? Duh.
If the prosecution are making out that he killed her in a fit of rage/jealousy/pique/whatever, it would be odd if he contrived to make sure that he called for help before being taken over by rage and killing her.
Yeah, I was thinking more in terms of it being premeditated I suppose. :columbo:
I'm not watching the live feed (you can stop it); just the text updates on the side.
I saw the beginning of this while trapped in a waiting room for an hour.
Not quite court as you see on tv is it? No charismatic lawyers arguing dramatically :))
I got annoyed by the "yeee-s" lawyer. Examining the neighbour witness, every time she finished what she was saying, there'd be a pause, then he'd say "yeee-s" as a prompt for her to say more. Just ask her another question or something!
Many people out there do feel threatened and vulnerable. My rellies ended up emigrating as they couldn't live with the constant worry of break -ins, often accompanied by shootings.
