Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

Nel addressing the timeline - there was no screaming before the first noises, but there was before shots of 3:17am. BB

 

Nel: we argue that the bangs of 3:16/3:17 were the gunshots that killed the deceased. BB

 

Nel: screams started after the first sounds, and ended at the second sounds. BB

 

Nel: even on the accused version, he screamed for intruder to get out, but nothing heard before first sounds. BB

 

remember - defence says the 3:17 sounds were the bat hitting door. The earlier sounds were the gunshots. BB

 

Nel moves on to gastric content… Van der Merwe heard a woman’s voice at 1:56am. BB

 

 

 

Moonie
Last edited by Moonie

Ripple of laughter thro the courtroom as Nel recites the love names used by the couple - Boo Boo, Bah Bah kiss kiss

 

 

Now what cd be the most damning blow: the state of their relationship. 'We had the view of the deceased' thro whatsap

 

Nel: whatever the accused told the psychologists is his view - the WhatsApp messages are her view of the relationship. BB

Dame_Ann_Average

Nel quotes clinical psychologist who sd it equates to arguing only 10% of body has cancer. Its the 10 % that counts

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

Masipa questions whether Nel can rely on these messages - draw inferences? Relationships have ups and downs. BB

 

there Reeva's own words judgie 

Thought you would jump on that Dameee

Moonie
Originally Posted by moonie:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

Masipa questions whether Nel can rely on these messages - draw inferences? Relationships have ups and downs. BB

 

there Reeva's own words judgie 

Thought you would jump on that Dameee

 

and it should have been they're not there 

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by moonie:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

Masipa questions whether Nel can rely on these messages - draw inferences? Relationships have ups and downs. BB

 

there Reeva's own words judgie 

Thought you would jump on that Dameee

 

and it should have been they're not there 

Moonie

Nel: OP explanation for illegal gun firing at Tasha's reminds you of his defense to the murder charge: that gun just went off

 

Nel argues OP explanation for illegal gun firing incidents show his refusal to take responsibility, dishonesty.

 

Nel on sunroof shooting: "there was no conspiracy between witnesses to incriminate the accused"

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by moonie:

Who's that bloke top right of the screen, with the red tie, Dameee?

 

 

think its one of the defence team Moonie 

Ahh! right fankoo

Moonie
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

 

Is Masipa a Judge, she seems to be somewhat confused on the law 

 

Masipa questions Nel on this, refers to a defence argument. Nel says the law is clear - no licence = no possession. BB

 

Moonie
Originally Posted by moonie:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by moonie:

Who's that bloke top right of the screen, with the red tie, Dameee?

 

 

think its one of the defence team Moonie 

Ahh! right fankoo

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by moonie:

The most word used in this trial, if today is anything to go by????

 

 

gawd half an hour of Roux...was hoping I was just going to catch up reading Pengy 

Foiled...drat

Moonie

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×