Oscar Pistorius: Defense closing argument UPDATED

Friday, August 8, 2014

Good morning:

Watch Barry Roux’s closing argument livestream here. The court is back in session after lunch.

The arguments of counsel have now concluded.

Judge Masipa announced that she will deliver her opinion in the case on 9/11 at 9:30 am Pretoria time (3:30 am EDT).

To see the morning session, go here:

29 Responses to Oscar Pistorius: Defense closing argument UPDATED

  1. ay2z says:

    Definitely GAD, definitely.

    • bettykath says:

      Interesting. Michael Sakoloff says he was driving 150mph. Is it possible that he was actually going 150 kmh? That would be “only” 96 mph. Plenty fast, especially considering the traffic, but still….

  2. ay2z says:

    Yesterday Nel accused OP for never taking responsibility for ‘anything’, and at that time, in reference to all the charges, including the gun going off in the restaurant.

    Today, Roux knocked the pins out from under that claim as he, on behalf of his client, changed the plea for the restaurant shooting, and pleaded with the judge to believe that it was OP, who was taking responsibility by pleading guilty on this charge.

    Seems better had the defendant take responsibility on his own, before the state got that claim in yesterday. Looks like OP was hogtied by his legal team to ‘give’ something in the way of taking responsiblity.

    He should have done it earlier, but guess better late than never.

    • Malisha says:

      It’s not better late than never when there’s a death between the “on time” and the “late.”

  3. colin black says:

    Erm if OP was acting on instinct as an athlete .
    Should he not have taken of like a bat out of hell upon the sound of the first shot?

  4. ay2z says:

    Jelly do-nuts anyone?? Have a baker’s dozen, fresh and guaranteed to make a sticky, gooey tasty treat. Roux gets the lucky 13th!

    • bettykath says:

      ay, I think I’m a donut addict. I have to use all my will power to say no to the first one. If I don’t, I’ll eat at least six.

  5. Nel is right. If OP fired into the toilet intending to kill an intruder and he killed RS by mistake, he is guilty of murder.

    I don’t believe he did not know she was in the toilet.

    I think he probably shot her because she locked herself in there with her phone to get away from him and threatened to call the cops.

  6. bettykath says:

    thanks for the update

  7. Arguments have concluded.

    Judge Masipa said she will deliver her judgment on 9/11 at 9:30 am South Africa time (3:30 am EDT)

  8. Roux says it is not strange that Reeva took her phone into the toilet with her – he says this is what young people do.

    I’ll give him points for saying that with a straight face.

    • ay2z says:

      LOL!! What did he say? Young people meld (not that word) really well with their phones— oh yes, they ‘gel’ well with their phones.

  9. Roux argues, for example, why would OP beg for help and cry if he had deliberately killed Reeva?

    The simple and obvious answer is he shot and killed in the heat of argument and suddenly realized what he did and the irreversible consequences that would follow.

    In less than a minute, he took the life of someone he cared about in the heat of anger and by doing so he destroyed his own.

    Of course he was upset.

    • ay2z says:

      By extension, the defense position of Pistorius’s special anxiety problems, if the situation were just as they claim, all about a bump in the night, a startle and irreversible panic, what would happen in the future, with such a person reacting in this way with their own small child in the home, recently potty trained and pattering through the house in the middle of the night, full of pride at their newly found skills. And the toilet door bangs…..

      What are the chances… really. He was not delusional, this version defy’s common sense of a reasonable person.

      Reeva’s father gave a hearty nodding, at one point in Roux’s arguments though, as he may have accepted Roux’s point and rejected murder by intent.

  10. Roux is basically playing a game of Twister in which he has to acknowledge and explain a multitude of circumstances (Nel identified 13 that Roux calls Nel’s “baker’s dozen”).

    Explaining away each one without regard to the others is not particularly difficult, but he’s dealing with an interlaced tapestry of circumstances that lead to only one conclusion.

    • ay2z says:

      Yes, the ‘mosaic’. Nice job by Nels to attach catchy words or phrases to emphasis his key concepts. (not sure how well mosaic pieces stick to fabric canvas, but that’s no matter, it illustrates well, the concept of what happens to the whole picture if pieces have failed to stay part of the whole).

  11. Roux dealing with prosecutor Gerrie Nel’s “baker’s dozen” of 13 inconsistencies in Pistorius’ evidence.

    He says Pistorius suffered from a “severe depression in the witness box” and “major stress”, but is still criticised for his poor recollection.

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

  12. As Roux begins bringing his closing argument to a close, he has argued Pistorius’ innocence based on three separate fronts – lack of motive, his exaggerated “fight” response, and police incompetence at the crime scene.

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

  13. Roux emphasizes that OP and RS were a loving couple and OP did not have a motive to kill RS.

    Of course, motive is not an element of the crime and Nel doesn’t have to prove motive.

    Nel did prove that the neighbors heard a loud argument and a woman’s blood curdling scream before the gunshots.

  14. Roux is now talking about the evidence of social worker Yvette Van Schalkwyk, who asked to be a defence witness.

    She said: “This man was genuine in his conduct, he was crying, he was retching, he was vomiting, he was concerned for the deceased’s family, he was crying out for the deceased.”

    “It was a man heartbroken about the loss. He cried 80% of the time. The emotions were never about him, it was all about the deceased and the family.”

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

    • ay2z says:

      Those were emotions after the event and not indicative of his state of mind during the event. So why the relevance to the act itself, as this witness has inserted herself into the case, to express?

      Nel has not addressed this in his final comments (that, btw, Roux addressed to prevent early on in his argument, and reasserted at the end of his argument today, to prevent Nel from having any word after he was finished. This request that the state have no further word, resulted in Judge Masipa asking Roux if this also applies to the court having questions for the prosecution and of course, he could not deny the court it’s questions)

  15. Roux reads a statement for Reeva’s best friend, saying the model really loved Pistorius and could see a future with him.

    If Oscar had asked her to marry him, she would probably have said yes.

    This was supported by the Valentine’s card she sent him, saying she loved him.

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

  16. Roux says there is not sufficient evidence to support the prosecution’s assertion that Pistorius and Reeva had a row.

    He says they had differences, but got through their differences. After February 7, the relationship improved.

    There was no evidence of abuse or coercion, according to psychological reports. He was genuine with his feelings.

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

  17. The afternoon session resumes.

    Pistorius’ defence barrister Barry Roux turns to husband and wife Burger and Johnson, who gave evidence for the prosecution.

    He says there are obvious similarities in their statements. He says it is “quite clear” Johnson altered his evidence to fit with his wife’s.

    Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: