So the trial has gone on...and on. All of last week, and early this week OP himself has been on the stand. Didn't really do himself any favours. He denies anything and everything other than what he has admitted to in his bail application.
The state's cross examination has been just...brutal. In the true sense if that overused word. Over 4 days the prosecutor (Nel) has shouted at OP, laughed derisively/incredulously at him and generally tore into him like a dog on a piece of meat. The start of the cross examination set the tone. Nel showed a Sky News video of OP shooting a Watermelon and making a comment about it being like shooting a person, only the watermelon is softer. Then right away Nel says something like "You know, that's what happened to Reeva's head. It exploded. Then followed by showing the crime scene photo of Steenkamp's head without warning. Networks broadcasting the trial live were unhappy. Won't post the pic here, but if you are interested in what someone's head would look like after being hit with hollow point ammunition you can see it here:
http://drum.co.za/uncategorized/warning-...-in-court/
And it went on like this for days. OP breaking down and crying and intentionally speaking in a high pitched voice (it's key to his defense). The prosecutor accusing him of breaking down when it suits him and when his case was going badly. The legal experts are saying the harsh cross-examination doesn't really factor into the outcome. It only helps or hinders if it reveals pertinent facts. Nel was trying to break down OP and make him stumble and reveal the "truth". That didn't really happen, but he did cast OP as an unreliable witness who changed his story a few times and was reluctant to accept responsibility for his actions.
OP has been unclear whether he is claiming self defense (I thought the intruder was coming for me) or, I don't know, temporary insanity (I didn't think. I just shot...four times) He started to say that he didn't think before firing since even if there had been an intruder behind the door he'd still be facing 15 years if he intended to kill them. Here is a picture of the bathroom cubicle (warning: graphic). It is tiny. No reasonable person would say that someone firing 4 shots into this space did not intend to kill whoever was in there:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/05/3...ne-leaked/
He is also facing 3 other firearms charges relating to two cases of negligent firing of a firearm, and one of possession of ammunition for which he doesn't have a permit. His problems there are that in pleading non-guilty to these lesser charges, when the evidence overwhelmingly shows he is guilty, makes him come across as someone who doesn't take responsibility. His defense in the case where he is charged with firing a weapon accidentally under the table at a restaurant in Joburg is that the shot just "went off", without him pulling the trigger or having his finger anywhere near the trigger. Gun experts have already testified that that type of gun (Glock) does not discharge rounds without the trigger being pulled. In the case where he is accused of firing a round out of the sunroof of his car after an altercation with a policeman the two witnesses in the car who have testified to this are lying. It ever happened. And the ammunition in his house belongs to his father. But he is estranged from his father and has been for years. Also the father has refused to even make a statement, let alone testify, about the ammunition in order to help his son.
IMO he is still headed for bankruptcy and 25 years in jail. All the money and energy spent at the trial is really the defense trying to cobble something together to get him convicted only of culpable homicide, rather than murder. 15 years in jail rather than 25. That really is what is being decided. As far as money is concerned I think he is already bankrupt, or close to it. Has sold the house and cars and moved in with an uncle (his cousins are amongst his "bodyguard" when entering/exiting court). The uncle seems rich (Lives in a huge house in a Pretoria suburb favoured by Ambassadors to South Africa), but there's only so much an uncle would be prepared to do.
Still coming are the defense's forensic experts. They will, hilarioulsy, be trying to prove that OP "screams like a girl" when agitated, and that multiple witnesses who have testified to hearing an argument couldn't have heard it. Good luck with that.
The state's cross examination has been just...brutal. In the true sense if that overused word. Over 4 days the prosecutor (Nel) has shouted at OP, laughed derisively/incredulously at him and generally tore into him like a dog on a piece of meat. The start of the cross examination set the tone. Nel showed a Sky News video of OP shooting a Watermelon and making a comment about it being like shooting a person, only the watermelon is softer. Then right away Nel says something like "You know, that's what happened to Reeva's head. It exploded. Then followed by showing the crime scene photo of Steenkamp's head without warning. Networks broadcasting the trial live were unhappy. Won't post the pic here, but if you are interested in what someone's head would look like after being hit with hollow point ammunition you can see it here:
http://drum.co.za/uncategorized/warning-...-in-court/
And it went on like this for days. OP breaking down and crying and intentionally speaking in a high pitched voice (it's key to his defense). The prosecutor accusing him of breaking down when it suits him and when his case was going badly. The legal experts are saying the harsh cross-examination doesn't really factor into the outcome. It only helps or hinders if it reveals pertinent facts. Nel was trying to break down OP and make him stumble and reveal the "truth". That didn't really happen, but he did cast OP as an unreliable witness who changed his story a few times and was reluctant to accept responsibility for his actions.
OP has been unclear whether he is claiming self defense (I thought the intruder was coming for me) or, I don't know, temporary insanity (I didn't think. I just shot...four times) He started to say that he didn't think before firing since even if there had been an intruder behind the door he'd still be facing 15 years if he intended to kill them. Here is a picture of the bathroom cubicle (warning: graphic). It is tiny. No reasonable person would say that someone firing 4 shots into this space did not intend to kill whoever was in there:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/05/3...ne-leaked/
He is also facing 3 other firearms charges relating to two cases of negligent firing of a firearm, and one of possession of ammunition for which he doesn't have a permit. His problems there are that in pleading non-guilty to these lesser charges, when the evidence overwhelmingly shows he is guilty, makes him come across as someone who doesn't take responsibility. His defense in the case where he is charged with firing a weapon accidentally under the table at a restaurant in Joburg is that the shot just "went off", without him pulling the trigger or having his finger anywhere near the trigger. Gun experts have already testified that that type of gun (Glock) does not discharge rounds without the trigger being pulled. In the case where he is accused of firing a round out of the sunroof of his car after an altercation with a policeman the two witnesses in the car who have testified to this are lying. It ever happened. And the ammunition in his house belongs to his father. But he is estranged from his father and has been for years. Also the father has refused to even make a statement, let alone testify, about the ammunition in order to help his son.
IMO he is still headed for bankruptcy and 25 years in jail. All the money and energy spent at the trial is really the defense trying to cobble something together to get him convicted only of culpable homicide, rather than murder. 15 years in jail rather than 25. That really is what is being decided. As far as money is concerned I think he is already bankrupt, or close to it. Has sold the house and cars and moved in with an uncle (his cousins are amongst his "bodyguard" when entering/exiting court). The uncle seems rich (Lives in a huge house in a Pretoria suburb favoured by Ambassadors to South Africa), but there's only so much an uncle would be prepared to do.
Still coming are the defense's forensic experts. They will, hilarioulsy, be trying to prove that OP "screams like a girl" when agitated, and that multiple witnesses who have testified to hearing an argument couldn't have heard it. Good luck with that.