Weitere Gründe die zum Ausschluss führen könnenaus den regeln, sollten wir wohl alle mal dran denken
Zusätzlich zu den bereits genannten Gründen, behalten wir uns das Recht vor Nutzer aufgrund der übermäßigen Verwendung von GROSSBUCHSTABEN und ????? !!!!! (wahrgenommen als Schreien) auszuschließen. Ein weiterer Grund kann eine miserable Rechtschreibung sein. Das Verfassen von Werbe-/Spambeiträgen ist auch nicht gestattet und führt zum Ausschluss.
Jep, alles ist möglich, also abwarten.. ;)Cassandra71 schrieb: Glaubst du ernsthaft, die haben sich alle geirrt?
Wenn sie "eingenordet" wurden, dann ja. Aber so wirkten sie nicht, zumal sie sich ja auch hie und da widersprachen - was eben für die Glaubwürdigkeit und auch Glaubhaftigkeit des Kerngehalts - hier: Zwei Stimmen schrieen - spricht.CosmicQueen schrieb:Jep, alles ist möglich, also abwarten..
Roux has a difficult job because the holes that he is poking cannot just be looked at on their own, they have to be viewed in the context of all the other witnesses as well. When you consider it globally, and if you try to reconcile all of the witnesss' testimony with each other, it really does line up with Oscar's own statement.
There is nothing that suggests premeditation. Let me see if I can give you an example of what I mean:
First of all, the most reliable statements from the witnesses are going to be the statements they gave shortly after the event, while it was fresh in their minds and all they were reporting were facts of what they witnessed. Many of the witnesses have now come to court and have embellished and added "emotional" information that was not in their original statements. I think you have to discount those additions.
Stipp
He is the closest of the witnesses and had a direct line to Oscar's house via his open balcony.
1. He heard 3 "shots" and got up and went to balcony to see where it was coming from
2. On balcony, he heard a woman "screaming or yelling" 2 or 3 times
3. At 3:17 (verified by phone records) he heard "2 or 3" additional "shots"
4. At 3:27, he called security again
5. After his 3:27 call to security, he THEN heard Oscar yell "help, help, help"
6. At 3:28 he phoned Stander from Oscar's house.
Although his testimony included the an additional claim to have heard a man's screams intermingled with a woman's screams between the first and second set of bangs, this is no in either of his statements to police given on 2-15-13 and 3-18-13
I consider Shipp's testimony to be the most reliable because he is close by and would have had the best opportunity to hear what happened. He also gave a written statement on 2-15-13, before the bail hearing and before an opportunity to be influenced by media or other witness accounts, etc
Burger and Johnson
1. Heard a woman screaming and were woken up by the sound
2. They heard "help help help" -before the sounds they interpreted as gunshots
3. Heard a number of "gunshots" at 3:17, coinciding perfectly with the second set of bangs heard by Shipp and his wife. At the time they gave their written statements, neither of them could identify the number of "shots" as 4, contrary to Burger's court testimony
4. They did not hear any other sets of bangs.
While they both claim at trial that the woman's screams were "blood-curdling" and the woman was "in fear for her life" that was not in either of their statements to police.
They did not come forward until after listening to the bail hearing. They did not give a statement to police until 6 weeks after the events. Their testimony is the most suspect because of the timing and the ability to be influenced by each other and by media accounts. There's also a problem with their testimony changing in important aspects compared to Johnson's written notes and statements.
Merwe
1. She heard a woman's voice that sounded like one side of an argument around 2 a.m. It has not been established that this was coming from Oscar's house.
2. She heard what sounded like gunshots, and then she heard loud crying and yelling from Oscar - she initially thought it was a woman screaming, but her husband identified the voice as Oscar Pistorius
I believe that she was being honest and factual in her testimony. She did not try to interpret what anything meant, she simply reported what she heard.
So you try to reconcile all of these accounts with each other and what you are left with is -
- Shipp was woken up by the actual gunshots some time before 3:17;
- the noises at 3:17 were the sounds of the cricket bat hitting the door (Shipp said they sounded the same, so it's no longer in dispute whether a cricket bat hitting the door can sound like a gunshot);
- the screaming and yelling between the initial gunshots and the banging at 3:17 was Oscar screaming and crying loudly. This was heard by all 4 witnesses, all of whom believed it to be a woman screaming
- Oscar yelled help, help, help after he broke the door with the cricket bat
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237225&page=7
Weitere Gründe die zum Ausschluss führen könnenWen genau meinst du mit alle? Wenn du jemanden bestimmten meinst sprich ihn an, aber zieh nicht alle über einen Kamm!
Zusätzlich zu den bereits genannten Gründen, behalten wir uns das Recht vor Nutzer aufgrund der übermäßigen Verwendung von GROSSBUCHSTABEN und ????? !!!!! (wahrgenommen als Schreien) auszuschließen. Ein weiterer Grund kann eine miserable Rechtschreibung sein. Das Verfassen von Werbe-/Spambeiträgen ist auch nicht gestattet und führt zum Ausschluss.
aus den regeln, sollten wir wohl alle mal dran denken
Doch, meiner Ansicht nach schon noch ausreichend. Und man könnte jetzt auch sagen, man wartet die Aussagen der weiteren Zeugen auch noch ab. Die werden ja nicht ohne Grund auf der Liste stehen.
Wobei die eine Zeugin eine Verwechslungsmöglichkeit einräumte, somit muss man diese Aussage schon mal subtrahieren und dann sind es nicht mehr alle Zeugen.
Das geht doch aber in beide Richtungen? Ich kann mir doch nicht die Schreie als "Kernaussage" raus picken und sagen: jau, das wird wohl so gewesen sein und z. B. die Widersprüche bei der Anzahl der Schüsse ignorieren, weil mir das nicht in den Kram passt?obskur schrieb:Ich weiß nicht, wie man Zeugenaussage anders werten kann. Die gibt es und zwar mehrfach, ich kann sie mir nicht einfach wegdenken, nur weil es mir nicht in den Kram passt. Das hat nichts mit einer neutralen Diskussion zu tun. Ich kann doch auch eingestehen, dass man eine Verwechslung des Weines durchaus in Betracht ziehen kann, andere übrigens auch
Ok, so let's go with Oscar's version.
He shoots her accidently (let's say at roughly 3:15am) and instantly starts wailing, so much so that all of the neighbors hear a woman screaming (although, he never states that he does this in his affidavit). THIS IS WHEN STIPP WAKES UP AND GOES OUT ON HIS BALCONY AND SEES THE BATHROOM LIGHT ON, AND HEARS THE SCREAMS. That light was on immediately after the FIRST SET of bangs so that would have to mean that it was either on during the gunfire (if she was shot at about 3:15am) or Oscar turned it on immediately after the gunfire. Remember, Oscar supposedly didn't know immediately that he shot her.
This is what Oscar said in his affidavit:
After he fired the shots, he yelled to Reva to call the police and she did not respond. He moved away from the bathroom, keeping his eyes on the entrance and everything was still pitch black in the bedroom. (The bedroom and the bathroom are not that far apart that light in the bathroom wouldn't provide some illumination down the hallway)
He specifically states "I was still too scared to switch on a light". Those are his words, not mine. Again, I have to remind you that at this point Stipp is seeing the light on and hearing intense high pitched screaming, yet Oscar still doesn't know that it's Reeva in the bathroom.
Oscar makes his way to the bed and realizes she's not there and omg it might be her in the toilet, not an intruder. He goes back to the bathroom and he realizes the toilet door is locked and goes back to the bedroom again. He then opens the balcony door, walks out and yells help, help, help. The problem here is that Stipp did not hear the "help, help, help" until AFTER the 2nd set of bangs. At this point in Oscar's story, he still hasn't knocked on the door.
When he comes in from the balcony, he puts his legs on, goes to the bathroom to kick it in and in his own words, again not mine - "I think I must then have turned on the lights"
He goes back to the bedroom to get the cricket bat to bash the door in.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=237225&page=8
