Nel: As I said my lady "Did you put it on the floor? ", he answered "No, my lady".
Nel: My lady, I have been indicated about the tea adjournment before I get to number 6.
Nel: My lady, I think we will manage. Seeing that we exchanged heads. I don't see a problem.
Judge: Next week I am not available.
Nel: I think by Mr. Roux and by my side we will be finished by tomorrow.
Nel: By hook or by crook.
Nel: My lady 6. Is the inability to explain why the police moved the fans, then they threw the duvet onto the floor and then the denim onto the duvet. They then threw the blood spatter onto the wall.
Nel: my lady the police could not have not that The police on their version tampered with the small and big fan.
Nel: They moved all those things as per their version. The accused confirmed that the police did not know his version. He went further.
Nel: The accused indicated that they had no idea what his version was.
Nel: "I do not think they police or anyone knew what my version was at that time"
Nel: My lady only thing is that the accused stated a version, my lady with the utmost respect. The counsel cannot be blamed.
Nel: My lady, the failure to deal with the duvet on the floor, the accused had to do something with the duvet and that lead to him placing it on the bed.
Nel: We dealt with that and he then stated that he placed it somewhere but contradicted himself. "I did not look down"
Nel: This was in response to not seeing the deceased. It answered that it was pitch black.
Nel: Why would he give that answer. He did not know when she got up.
Nel: He walked around the bed to move the fans. When asked why did you not see her getting up? He tailored his version. With not even a blush, the accused taloired his version.
Nel: Later when he realized it, now he remembered that he had to move the duvet when he got out of the bed.
Nel: The court will have to find that the accused's version is incorrect.
Nel: My lady all these lies. If he had to move the duvet then he would have seen Reeva. He would have seen she was under the duvet.
Nel: The snowball effect came into effect, to tell one lie, he had to buil don the effect.
Nel: This will lead to the rejection of his version.
Nel: His version of a perceived intruder cannot be perceived as true.
Nel: His version of it being pitch dark cannot be true.
Nel: If the balcony light was on, in his version it could not have happened.
Nel: The court will have no option but to accept that there is no perceived threat.
Nel: The only thing is that Reeva was hiding behind the closed door.
Nel: His version of covering the blue LED light is so improbable. He had to work on a version to say that he did not see her get up.
Nel: The blue light never woke him up, he said it bothered him.
Nel: It is a tailoring to keep up his lie.
Nel: It must be impossible on his version for the denim to land on top of the duvet if the duvet was on the bed.
Nel: In this instance Van Rensburg testified that the denim was next to the duvet. It looked like it in this photograph.
Nel: If that was what the police wanted to do, why did the police not say so.
nel: When he was confronted my lady, his real attitude came to the front.
Nel: He then referred to the moveing of the cricket bat.
Nel: We say in the last paragraph, the court has not heard why.
Nel: 11. The deceased did not mention in his plea application that he had a conversation with the deceased.
Nel: He had to create sounds in the toilet, he had to ensure that he at least spoke to her. It was just a snow ball effect.
Nel: We say that in all the couples that testified in this case, woke their spouses up. Or they both woke up at the same time. But not this couple.
Nel: He heard a sound and was terrified by the sound and never discussed the sound with her. In fact, he acted concrete to his nature.
Nel: Earlier on he woke Samantha Taylor up when he heard a sound. But he never woke the deceased up.
Nel: He wanted to go there. He put himself in danger so that someone could act against him.