IS HE GUILTY?

I actually think he is "performing" quite well today

robgun Wrote:

---

> You must be doing well with the ponies if you can
> afford to give up 50K a day.
> Although there is only so much of Oscar making me
> look like a tw*t that i could take!

lol im not,, But who wants to be involved in this Circ de la Bullshit..
Rather go defend Tik Dealers and Cape Flats Gangsters who know how to lie properly

Interesting that Nel defending knowledge and integrity of Barry Roux...professional conduct towards peers / colleagues very important in any profession...

Five pages on this thread in half a day. Must be some sort of a record?

TNaicker Wrote:

---

> Interesting that Nel defending knowledge and
> integrity of Barry Roux...professional conduct
> towards peers / colleagues very important in any
> profession...


TN, there is a very good reason for saying all that stuff about his colleague: If Roux made the ballsup, the court HAS to believe OP!!!!!

Nel is trying to get OP to admit it was his mistake and not Roux's. Court won't ever blame an accused (who is presumed innocent till proven guuilty) for mistakes made by his lawyers.

Besides the swerving he's doing with regards to the smaller charges he seems to be holding up pretty solidly on the main charge.

I can't see how the state is going to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he intended to kill Reeva.

Haupie Wrote:

---

> TNaicker Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > Interesting that Nel defending knowledge and
> > integrity of Barry Roux...professional conduct
> > towards peers / colleagues very important in
> any
> > profession...
>
>
> TN, there is a very good reason for saying all
> that stuff about his colleague: If Roux made the
> ballsup, the court HAS to believe OP!!!!!
>
> Nel is trying to get OP to admit it was his
> mistake and not Roux's. Court won't ever blame an
> accused (who is presumed innocent till proven
> guuilty) for mistakes made by his lawyers.

@Haupie...understood...realise that he is trying to ensure that OP cannot deflect blame to attorneys...emphasising that they are competent so only did based on what OP had told them...

Party Line Wrote:

---

> Besides the swerving he's doing with regards to
> the smaller charges he seems to be holding up
> pretty solidly on the main charge.
>
> I can't see how the state is going to prove beyond
> reasonable doubt that he intended to kill Reeva.

Most probably by showing that he has a tempter and is incompetent with a firearm and is a gun crazy nut.. or they'll just prove that he the type of person that no matter the situation intended to fire the weapon without any regard to who was behind that door..

its a pity that he doesnt want to be shown on tv.. I really would of liekd to have seen his body language as he sits there telling Porkies

Party Line Wrote:

---

> Besides the swerving he's doing with regards to
> the smaller charges he seems to be holding up
> pretty solidly on the main charge.
>
> I can't see how the state is going to prove beyond
> reasonable doubt that he intended to kill Reeva.

The state only has to prove that he wanted to kill the person behind the door not Reeva specifically so let's see how Nel goes on

sorry H, premeditated

The GLADIATOR(Oscar)
1. first annihilates a watermelon, (compares it to brains of a human)
2. then Reeva,
3. then blames Dr. Stipp for not been able to save Reeva(in his own words...Dr. Stipp...the first Doctor on the crime scene did not seem to know what he was doing),
4. then blames Reeva for been too sensitive,
5. then blames Fresco for the discharge of the firearm in Tasha's restaurant,
6. then blames Samantha for lying about discharging the gun from the sunroof after the Vaal trip,
7. then blames Fresco for lying about discharging the gun from the sunroof after the Vaal trip,
8. then says Samantha cheated on him by sleeping with another guy
9. then blames Police for contaminating the crime scene,
10. then says it's his father ammunition in his safe(which his father refuses to sign a statement for),
11. then says he never pulled the trigger in Tasha's Restaurant(well somebody did...and he was the only one holding the gun,
12. then says shooting Reeva was an accident(in his own words his gun has a double safety mechanism),
13. then blames his own Counsel(the beloved and indomitable Roux) on three occasions for inconsistencies in his bail application affidavit,
14. then blames the police officer for handling his firearm and making it safe after the trip to the Vaal,
15. then has become a combatant against the Prosecution and fails to answer questions put to him.

And on and on it goes....

It is in serious doubt whether Oscar("the Devil") will tell the TRUTH about anything.