Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Cinds:

I lost off with following the trial, so excuse me if it's been mentioned, but surely if as he claims he was shouting for Reeva to call the police before he started shooting, surely she would have answered him from inside the toilet? 

you would have thought so but he's trying to infer that due to him screaming like a girl he either didn't hear her or she didn't answer him because don't forget she was supposed to be back in the bedroom being whispered to/spoken to in a low tone to get the police 

FM
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Cinds:

I lost off with following the trial, so excuse me if it's been mentioned, but surely if as he claims he was shouting for Reeva to call the police before he started shooting, surely she would have answered him from inside the toilet? 

 

you would have thought...its a question that no one seems to be bale to answer 

If Reeva thought there was someone in the house when OP shouted, she may have taken refuge in the cubicle and remained silent for fear of revealing her position to the intruder

Saint
Originally Posted by Pengy:
 

you would have thought so but he's trying to infer that due to him screaming like a girl he either didn't hear her or she didn't answer him because don't forget she was supposed to be back in the bedroom being whispered to/spoken to in a low tone to get the police 

 

 

that's the excuse defence in a nutshell 

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Saint:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Cinds:

I lost off with following the trial, so excuse me if it's been mentioned, but surely if as he claims he was shouting for Reeva to call the police before he started shooting, surely she would have answered him from inside the toilet? 

 

you would have thought...its a question that no one seems to be bale to answer 

If Reeva thought there was someone in the house when OP shouted, she may have taken refuge in the cubicle and remained silent for fear of revealing her position to the intruder

 

 

but he spoke to her before he got the gun allegedly and she didn't answer...so why did he not think it was her in the loo  

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Saint:

He thought she 'was' in the bedroom eventhough she didn't answer

 

 

yes  

Well that''s his position.

And if we are to be totally impartial it can be argued as logical.

 

In a panicked state he thinks she is in the bedroom.

She is in the toilet and takes refuge from an assailant OP claims is in the house.

He goes looking and hears noises from the cubicle - and shoots.

 

I'm not saying i believe him however

Saint
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

 

 

I understand Renton Saint, I'm still not persuaded he thought Reeva was in the loo, I am 100% sure he committed murder with the intent of killing whoever was behind that door 

that's my stance 

So you are not convinced he intended to murder Reeva?

Which is how i feel - given the evidence

Saint
Originally Posted by Saint:
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

 

 

I understand Renton Saint, I'm still not persuaded he thought Reeva was in the loo, I am 100% sure he committed murder with the intent of killing whoever was behind that door 

that's my stance 

So you are not convinced he intended to murder Reeva?

Which is how i feel - given the evidence

 

 

we will never know, sadly 

Dame_Ann_Average
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Saint:
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:

 

 

I understand Renton Saint, I'm still not persuaded he thought Reeva was in the loo, I am 100% sure he committed murder with the intent of killing whoever was behind that door 

that's my stance 

So you are not convinced he intended to murder Reeva?

Which is how i feel - given the evidence

 

 

we will never know, sadly 

True - and this is why i say there is just too many things that cannot be 'proved beyond a reasonable doubt'.

And why he won't be convicted of her premeditated murder of Reeva

Saint
Last edited by Saint
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Saint:
 

True - and this is why i say there is just too many things that cannot be 'proved beyond a reasonable doubt'.

And why he won't be convicted of her premeditated murder of Reeva

 

 

I hope he gets the full term for CH...and then there are the gun charges 

I agree

From what i've heard he should be convicted of CH

Saint
Originally Posted by erinp:

So Reeva used her cell phone  for light to get to the toilet ,but he had his back to the bathroom. So does that mean he knew she went to the bathroom or is he assuming she would have used her cell phone as a source of light if she went to the bathroom .

OP is trying to infer that she used her cell phone as a source of light just because that's what he normally does 

FM
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Dame_Ann_Average:
Originally Posted by Pengy:

Is Nel saying because he won't come back to it tomorrow, Judgie has told him to wrap it up? 

 

 

I'm not sure what he meant by that  My daughter phoned and I missed some of it 

inconsiderate sod how very dare she 

 

I told her that too 

Dame_Ann_Average

I can just about get my head around having a gun but I will never understand is why he had those black talon bullets loaded if not to kill whoever he shot at 

 

they're not illegal in SA but.... only special forces and such carry them which begs the question where did he get them and why did he have them?

 

those bullets are designed to be lethal  

FM

Add Reply

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