well? did he?
Oscar Pistorius killed his girlfriend Part 2
|by Anonymous||reply 263||09/11/2014|
He admits he killed her. The question is whether it was an accident or murder.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||02/21/2013|
The question is can he plead accidental death and get away with it?
|by Anonymous||reply 2||02/21/2013|
Thanks for starting. I was just searching for it.
Here's title I ran across from the CSM that is intriguing: "Can South Africa's justice system handle the Oscar Pistorius case?"
Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but the source is usually thoughtful.
Interesting aside: the detective formerly assigned to the case and removed is pictured. He appears mixed race.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||02/21/2013|
The question remains, is he the new O.J. Simpson?
|by Anonymous||reply 4||02/21/2013|
Link to old thread for reference.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||02/21/2013|
I strongly believe that it was an accident.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||02/21/2013|
Is there any evidence of drunkenness or drug abuse that evening?
What are they think it was 'roid rage?
|by Anonymous||reply 7||02/21/2013|
[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 8||02/21/2013|
I met a gal from SA who said their justice system has gone extreme to eradicate all the past injustices to people of color and the poor. Her sister ran over a black lady who walked out in front of her sister's car, and had to go through a murder trial. I t was established that the black lady was blind drunk when she stumbled onto the road, but because of the new rules, only a murder trial could be used to establish the facts because before, the DA would misuse the office's power to release white SA who killed black people, accidentally or not.
So now the assumption is always murder in the beginning.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||02/21/2013|
If at least one of the detectives contaminated the scene by not wearing protective gear, can't some of the evidence be called into question. Perhaps blood splatter which he might have stepped on. Won't the trajectory of the gun be the most damning evidence. He claimed he was on his stumps and not using his prosthetic limbs. He could be lying. The defense will probably refute the prosecution's claims about this, hire their own experts to say the exact opposite.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||02/21/2013|
[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 11||02/21/2013|
It is a mix of civil law (inherited via the Boers from Dutch law) and common law from the British period. The substantive law on serious crimes is more akin to English law, at least in theory.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||02/21/2013|
All I know is their accents are hideous and an affront to the English language.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||02/21/2013|
R6 should never be allowed to vote.
Neighbors heard them fighting. His story makes ZERO sense.A burglar got into a highly secure gated community, then climbed through a window and locked himself in the bathroom? Oh brother. OJ had a better lie. He heard someone in the BATHROOM and assumed it was a burglar without checking to see if his girlfriend was still in bed? Honestly, you'd have to be a complete moron to buy it. Only someone with borderline mental retardation would believe him. But SA has a huge problem with domestic abuse, and he's banking on sympathy.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||02/21/2013|
R14, I agree. Everyone knows his story is complete bs just another Scott Peterson/Drew Peterson.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||02/21/2013|
She was apparently dressed & had her cellphone with her in the bathroom. My guess is they were fighting through the night & she wanted to leave. Locked herself in the bathroom and he killed her in a fit of rage. If you look at the graphics from the National Post in the old thread his story makes no sense.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||02/21/2013|
I didn't read the other thread, but the casings were allegedly on the inside of the bathroom door.
If that is true and it was properly documented, he's done.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||02/22/2013|
I'm not sure why anyone is really debating this. He's trying to get bail.
If she was a burglar he would still be in loads of trouble. That's why the detective has the attempted murder charges, because NOT EVEN THE POLICE can shoot willy-nilly.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||02/22/2013|
Why are you people STILL blaming him for this death?!? Do you personally know Ossy? No, you don't, so shut up. If you did know him, you would know he wouldn't hurt a mouse. He's an animal lover and a gentle sole. So please, please, please just stop, for the love of humanity.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||02/22/2013|
He probably didn't mean to kill her. It's easy enough to shoot a modern gun off four times. South Africa has a bizarre law that says if you mean to kill someone who is physically in your house, and stealing and terrorizing you, you can't kill him.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||02/22/2013|
[quote]He's an animal lover and a gentle sole.
Actually, he has no sole(s).
|by Anonymous||reply 21||02/22/2013|
[quote]because of the new rules, only a murder trial could be used to establish the facts because before, the DA would misuse the office's power to release white SA who killed black people, accidentally or not.
I think that's why the police investigator is up for murder charges. One of the TV shows said it was related to him killing someone in the line of duty.
Imagine THAT happening in America, every time a policeman killed someone.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||02/22/2013|
If he didn't mean to kill her, than why did he?
|by Anonymous||reply 23||02/22/2013|
I'm an animal lover too - but I'd sure as shit would kill someone or attempt to kill someone if there was an intruder in my house.
If I wanted to break up with someone however - I'd just kick them out of my house.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||02/22/2013|
OOOH a live verdict
|by Anonymous||reply 25||02/22/2013|
It's a bail hearing at this point
And yes he did kill her, says so himself
|by Anonymous||reply 26||02/22/2013|
Why fire a gun at someone if you don't mean to kill them?
|by Anonymous||reply 27||02/22/2013|
This is such a long verdict.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||02/22/2013|
It's completely fucked up to shoot blindly through a door, EVEN if you *thought* it was an intruder on the other side.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||02/22/2013|
That's because you're an idiot, R6.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||02/22/2013|
[quote]Why are you people STILL blaming him for this death?!? Do you personally know Ossy? No, you don't, so shut up. If you did know him, you would know he wouldn't hurt a mouse. He's an animal lover and a gentle sole. So please, please, please just stop, for the love of humanity.
Let's guess how many prisoners you write to every week. You're kind of pathetic.
The reference to him being an animal lover is quite precious - because we haven't known any horrible people through history who loved animals, while treating people like complete shit. You want to take a walk with me on the Upper East Side of Manhattan because I can introduce you to a few?
People like you defend him solely because he's hot. It's so obvious.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||02/22/2013|
Pretoria Chief Magistrate Desmond Nair: I have difficulty understanding why he chose not to ascertain who was in toilet
I think that says it all
|by Anonymous||reply 32||02/22/2013|
Watching the Nair judgement now. He basically says he doesn't believe Oscar's description of events, in spite of cops cocking up the investigation. But that it will be up to a trial judge to sort it out.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||02/22/2013|
Granted bail. On to act two..
|by Anonymous||reply 34||02/22/2013|
He got bail.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||02/22/2013|
It took 90 MINUTES for the judge just to say bail granted?
|by Anonymous||reply 36||02/22/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 37||02/22/2013|
Long judgements are common; the magistrate's decision is reviewed - so some poor sap is going to have to read every word. He was thorough because it goes into the record.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||02/22/2013|
Magistrate even helped out the defence so that they know what they need to work on for the trial:
• Why did he not ascertain Steenkamp's wherabouts?
• Why did he not verify who was in the toilet?
• Why did Steenkamp not scream back from the toilet?
• Why did the deceased and the accused not escape through the bedroom door rather than venture into the toilet?
• Why would the accused venture into danger knowing the intruder was in the toilet, leaving himself open to attack? He returned to the dangerous area. What if the intruder was waiting for him?
And he said he had difficulty with the defence's version of why the accused slept on the other side of the bed from usual that night.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||02/22/2013|
It kind of reminds me of the Susan Powell killing, by her husband (Utah). The husband was never arrested even though he obviously killed his wife, in the end he also killed his two sons and himself.
This man should not have been released, he's nuts.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||02/22/2013|
R24, would you feel good about killing a 14 year old, who was in your house? Maybe just a kid who thought you were out and simply wanted to rob you? Is your crap worth the life of a young man?
|by Anonymous||reply 41||02/22/2013|
[FFS] Its the way the SA legal system works. Nair had to establish that first; there was a case to be answered, which he did. Its not his job to complete the investigation. Next, he declared Oscar would face a Schedule six hearing - premeditated murder. This was a huge decision. Last, he had to decided whether Oscar qualified for bail - again, a difficult decision because normally a Schedule Six offense precludes bail, unless there are unusual circumstances. In this case, the unusual circumstance appears to be the state's poorly framed case.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||02/22/2013|
His lawyer confirms he will not be returning to his house: "He does not want to go back there."
Like we care.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||02/22/2013|
[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 44||02/22/2013|
Why was he even charged with 1st Degree murder?
There was nothing I've heard that suggests it was premeditated.
That, the fact that the Crown didn't even check on the allegation that he had a foreign residence, and the charges against the detective make me think the fix is in.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||02/22/2013|
'Premeditated' does not imply he hatched plan to kill her. It means that when he took the decision to fire at the door, the state believes he did so with the intent to kill. Oh, and we are a republic. No crowns here.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||02/22/2013|
OJ never killed his ex-wife and never said he did. A known slasher killed Nicole but OJ was a much better story, so the sheep followed along.
This man admitted to killing his girlfriend...using some kind of bullshit, which is not even believable, unless he was seriously medicated.
He was like a 5 year old with a gun.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||02/22/2013|
He's guilty as hell. Maybe just because he went nuts, but still guilty. And don't give me that lesbian crap. I actually liked him last summer. Then again I didn't know about the guns, etc. Just thought this was a genius marketing operation, BT etc
|by Anonymous||reply 48||02/22/2013|
Oscar's defense is familiar to South Africans. There was a case years ago where a prominent sportsman - a rugby player - shot his daughter after she snuck out in the early hours in her dad's car. Her father awoke, saw the car rolling backwards down the drive without lights and assumed it was being stolen. He fired at it, killing his daughter. Story made big headlines in SA - and no doubt Oscar would have been aware of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||02/22/2013|
[quote] Magistrate even helped out the defence so that they know what they need to work on for the trial
He's already locked into the stupid story he told. If he changes it, it makes him look bad. Well, worse.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||02/22/2013|
r46, sorry about that I'm Canadian. I'm used to saying Crown instead of prosecutor.
By premeditated I didn't mean he had a forethought plan; I meant that I didn't think he had that intent. I thought he was just angry about her leaving (or whatever the fighting was about).
It seemed he just shot her in a 'fuck you bitch you're not leaving me' rage.
I don't understand how they could ever prove intent.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||02/22/2013|
And he was crying at the prospect of spending six months in jail for the duration of the trial, then life. Perhaps crying over his own madness as well. Once Botha the investigating officer was destroyed in court he suddenly seemed to be feeling much better.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||02/22/2013|
R51 you might prove intent because firing 4 (or 3) rounds into a closed door behind a tiny toilet can only imply one intent and that is to kill.
Gun Crazy is what it is
|by Anonymous||reply 53||02/22/2013|
[quote]Last, he had to decided whether Oscar qualified for bail - again, a difficult decision because normally a Schedule Six offense precludes bail, unless there are unusual circumstances. In this case, the unusual circumstance appears to be the state's poorly framed case.
Also the magistrate cited case law where the court shouldn't ignore the "personal circumstances" of a bail applicant.
Like not having legs, I guess.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||02/22/2013|
It's going to be a hard case to prosecute. Oscar's version sounds improbable, but that does not mean it may not be true. Unlikely, but SA law will err on the side of caution - benefit of doubt. Unless they can link forensic evidence to his state of mind - and so prove he wanted to kill her, he will likely be convicted of the lesser charge, culpable homicide. That leaves the judge a lot more room in sentencing. Ultimately, he could walk with a slap on the wrist.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||02/22/2013|
It will end up culpable homicide and it will be a slap on the wrist. Which is just a disgrace.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||02/22/2013|
Maybe her family will go all Dorner on Stubby...
|by Anonymous||reply 57||02/22/2013|
Clearly the face of a man who feels sorry for his actions
|by Anonymous||reply 58||02/22/2013|
I live in South Africa and I foresee a culpable homicide conviction at best. Even though a reasonable person of average intelligence can see he is guilty as hell of murdering her. Money talks when it comes to court cases and he is loaded. Unfortunately the SA police services are so poorly staffed and underpaid that idiots are the norm. I am not surprised this Investigating Officer made so many mistakes. My heart goes out to the victim, Reeva, and her family. What must they be thinking?
|by Anonymous||reply 59||02/22/2013|
Premeditated means he put his legs on before going to shoot which means that it is not credible he was responding to a threat but only intended to kill.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||02/22/2013|
Don't they have CSI in South Africa? Should be able to figure out exactly what happened and why in an hour.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||02/22/2013|
In the USA it is routine for convict people of premeditated murder based on the theory that the premeditation was just a split second before the crime.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||02/22/2013|
The statement from one of the witnesses that they heard a few shots, then 17 minutes later some more shots is crucial to this case in my opinion. But the defense will find some way to discredit this statement. If the statement is true, it shows clearly a case of premeditated murder.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||02/22/2013|
Money talks, as does power. What went with Botha was a warning. They have 15 weeks to work on their PR, which they undoubtedly will. It goes no further than this
|by Anonymous||reply 64||02/22/2013|
The "witnesses" are easily discredited because they live a half mile away.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||02/22/2013|
Nonsense R65, gunshot noise easily travels that far.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||02/22/2013|
Sound can travel very far, especially if there are few obstacles (just land and no buildings, for instance)
|by Anonymous||reply 67||02/22/2013|
That's fucked up, R49. Did he get put away?
|by Anonymous||reply 68||02/22/2013|
He got BAIL!!!
He's going to get away with it, isn't he?
|by Anonymous||reply 69||02/22/2013|
I think he meant to murder her and I think he's going o get away with it because we live in a fucked up world.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||02/22/2013|
Don't men often get away with killing women?
|by Anonymous||reply 71||02/22/2013|
Whats up with well known South Africans shooting family members
|by Anonymous||reply 72||02/22/2013|
[post by racist shit-stain # 2 removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 73||02/22/2013|
They said he's a flight risk. Why don't they just take away his legs?
|by Anonymous||reply 74||02/22/2013|
I think it was positively unseemly the way his family burst into cheers when their very own bank vault/murderer was granted bail.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||02/22/2013|
R22, the officer didn't actually kill anyone, he and other officers fired at a suspect minivan with seven people in it; they claim they fired at the wheels to try and stop the vehicle.
R42, if the magistrate thought the prosecution's case was so weak he wouldn't have declared this a schedule six offence, something the defence had argued against. The bail was granted because Pistorius isn't considered a flight risk. If the magistrate really thought the state's case was poorly framed then he wouldn't have declared it a schedule six offence. Bail has nothing to do with the final judgment.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||02/22/2013|
[quote]Interesting aside: the detective formerly assigned to the case and removed is pictured. He appears mixed race.
No, he appears tanned - something not unheard of in such a sunny clime.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||02/22/2013|
R74, I love you
|by Anonymous||reply 78||02/22/2013|
As a South African I find this ridiculous. Pistorius may not be a flight risk but he is definitely a danger to society. What reasonable person would fire off four shots, execution style, into a small confined toilet with the explicit intent of killing the person therein? This person, as demonstrated by his actions, should not be free. This Magistrate has made the wrong conclusion by granting him bail in my opinion.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||02/22/2013|
Does the S. African court system allow testimony about prior impulsive or violent behavior as a matter of establishing a pattern? Could an ex testify that he became volatile and had threatened her? The mother of a former girlfriend intimated as much. Of course, I expect his PR flacks to get to them before the authorities.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||02/22/2013|
[R79] As part of his bail condition Pistorius has to hand in his weapons, thus negating any "danger to society." I'm more fearful of the arresting officer who has been charged with attempted murder, and yet is still on the job, and in possession of his side arm.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||02/22/2013|
Is R81 a Pistorius-paid shill?
|by Anonymous||reply 82||02/22/2013|
[quote] As part of his bail condition Pistorius has to hand in his weapons, thus negating any "danger to society."
Because it would be impossible for him to obtain another or commit another act of violence without a gun.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||02/22/2013|
[R82] Time to update your tinfoil hat?
|by Anonymous||reply 84||02/22/2013|
Seeing him standing there every day, what a tragic turn of events. As someone who watched him live at the Olympic Stadium, and cheered him on, its surreal. No one will ever know what truly happened on that fateful early morning, apart from Oscar and Reeva. My heart goes out to Reeva's family. My head says one thing, the heart that watched him race says another. Whatever, its tragic its all come down to this.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||02/22/2013|
I saw a lot of red flags; he is a troubled person.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||02/22/2013|
"Don't men often get away with killing women?"
The last study I read on the subject said that men receieved much shorter sentences for killing female domestic partners, than women who killed male domestic partners. This in spite of the fact that the men were typically shooting in a posessive rage, and the women were typically shooting to protect themselves from violence.
It's a fucked-up world we live in.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||02/22/2013|
lol at r86, Thanks for weighing in Dean. I know you are particularly good at spotting shit a blind kid could see and then spouting your opinion 15 years later to anyone who will listen. You should get together with Drew Pinsky and analyze everyone on here.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||02/22/2013|
[quote] But the defense will find some way to discredit this statement. If the statement is true, it shows clearly a case of premeditated murder.
What does this mean? That's the defense job to test the evidence for memory and accuracy and truth. Do you think they shouldn't?
Even if the statment is true it does not necessarily show a case of premeditation at all. You need more than what you are suggesting.
Sound may carry but that doesn't mean you can tell where the sound came from. Or can tell what caused the sound. I certainly don't buy that someone at such distances could discern voices and whether an argument was going on. Or even if it was a real person as opposed to a TV or film. Sound is a funny thing - and subject to wildly differing perception by an individual's ears and brain.
The bail isn't surprising since there are certainly factors that will ensure the safety of the community and he isn't deemed a flight risk. People need to remember that he is not convicted of anything yet and so to imprison him should and does require a huge burden on the prosecution.
Not sure about S Africa but in the US you would have to lay a foundation of a pattern of behavior that is very similar to the one charges before a judge would even consider allowing it in. I cannot even imagine something like "prior impulsive behavior" (whatever THAT vague term means) even being considered.
The court has to be vigilant that the defendant is not being tried because he is s "bad person" or because he committed a crime earlier - he is being tried for THIS crime.
These principles, however, are more geared to avoiding prejudice by a jury or confusing the jury. I consider judges often just as susceptible to the biases and distractions juries are subject to but in their rarified world they have created a fiction that judges aren't like other people (LOL!) and are more capable of discrete analysis and immune from prejudice towards the defendant - this isn't personal prejudice but rather harmful information about the defendant that could taint their resolution of the case.
Eg, if they knew he strangled cats in his youth would they be more likely to convict him based on that rather than on the evidence in the case. Would they be inlfuenced in any way by knowing that? Or if they knew a defendant was gay would they be more likely to convict in child abuse case based on that knowldege rather than strictly on the facts of the crime before them.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||02/22/2013|
Let me be more precise, your honor.
I shot her but didn't mean to shoot her the first time.
I shot her but didn't mean to shoot her the second time.
I shot her but didn't mean to shoot her the third time.
I shot her but didn't mean to shoot her the fourth time, or however many times I shot her.
Does that help? Obviously, it was an accident. I thought she was in the bed next to me sleeping through my hysteria about an intruder and that the person in the bathroom with the door closed was just doing an amazing imitation of her screaming, "No!!! Please!!!! Oscar!!!! DON'T!!!!!!"
I was a victim of circumstances. I mean, the love of my life was brutally killed here. I ought to be getting sympathy, not accusations.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||02/22/2013|
[quote] I cannot even imagine something like "prior impulsive behavior" (whatever THAT vague term means) even being considered.
The magistrate very clearly said he'd showed evidence of aggression in the past, but not violence, and weighing all that--plus other factors--he qualified to get out on bail.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||02/22/2013|
R91, evidence allowed in for purposes of a bail hearing are not automatically allowed in for purposes of trial. Different evidentiary rules. Same with a probation revocation or other show cause hearings - hearsay is allowed for the most part. Sentencing allow in more than a trial would allow in also.
In a bail hearing you can consider almost anything.
"Past aggression" is so vague - what does it even mean. Not all aggression is bad.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||02/22/2013|
Do we know if he like hobbles around on the stumps like Dorf on Golf or if it is more dragging his body like this drawing?
|by Anonymous||reply 93||02/22/2013|
"No one will ever know what truly happened on that fateful early morning, apart from Oscar and Reeva. My heart goes out to Reeva's family. My head says one thing, the heart that watched him race says another"
|by Anonymous||reply 94||02/22/2013|
Please, R81 - only freaks think the sociopathic Pistorius is currently less dangerous than the officer.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||02/22/2013|
The drawing at r93 makes it extremely clear he murdered the living shit out of her iand didn't think it was an intruder.
How the hell do you stump walk awkwardly into a dangerous situation like that?
|by Anonymous||reply 96||02/22/2013|
I agree r96 and then when did he put on his legs? When he was supposed to be fervently doing CPR, he stopped to put his legs on? Because he had to be wearing them when he carried her downstairs.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||02/22/2013|
Countdown to his suicide. I give him three months. He's a narcissist, yes, but a cowardly one. Once he realizes he won't get off, he will kill himself.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||02/22/2013|
I agree r98, hell I would think about it myself if I did something that reckless and stupid. I think he will snap too. I mean, more than he snapped last week.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||02/22/2013|
Cop) You murdered her
Oscar) I did not, I thought she was an intruder
Cop) Oh please that theory has no legs
|by Anonymous||reply 100||02/23/2013|
I still want to hear about the panic button.
Because if I, legless, heard a noise in the dark night, I would have slammed the shit out of that thing.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||02/23/2013|
Surely he can crawl around if he's got knees? He's not a paraplegic; he doesn't have to drag himself around backwards like it shows in that graphic. He might actually be quite fast and nimble, which would somewhat contradict his tale of feeling vulnerable.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||02/23/2013|
r102 I bet he is fast and nimble, just like Lobster Boy was.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||02/23/2013|
Well that's the difference between a sissy and a man.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||02/23/2013|
Oscar got bail, because he's a celebrity. No surprise there.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||02/23/2013|
This bail hearing was too much like a mini-trial than an actual bail hearing. I'm surprised Magistrate Nair did not shut the whole side-show down and focus on what bail actually means - 1)Is the person a flight risk? 2)Are they a danger to society? The crime scene evidence should have been submitted in a report, not by a person. There should not have been a cross examination of one of the investigators at the bail hearing. Especially someone unfit to handle the likes of defense Advocate Roux. I sincerely hope that the prosecution has learnt from this, gone back to the drawing board and realised that they need to up their ante. I suspect they might have because Investigating officer Botha was pulled from the case the day after his disasterous testimony. I think that the prosecuting Advocate Nel is up to the task. What they need now is water tight forensic evidence and witness statements to close the deal.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||02/23/2013|
R107 the Aids infested 'mo troll
|by Anonymous||reply 108||02/23/2013|
I felt kind of bad for him having to stand there in front of that gaggle of photographers day after day. I wonder if they were given a set time to snap away and were then cleared out?
I have a feeling we are going to be reading about a suicide/suicide attempt before long.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||02/23/2013|
R109 the photogs were allowed about a minute in the morning before the Magistrate came in. They were not inside taking pictures during the bail application.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||02/23/2013|
He doesn't have a leg to stand on.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||02/23/2013|
R109 do you not think he deserves to be in the dock to answer for the unlawful negligent killing of someone?
|by Anonymous||reply 112||02/23/2013|
For me the key factor is the bathroom door was locked. What person goes to the bathroom in the middle of the night and locks the door? It just doesn't make sense. I really wanted him to be innocent, but there is just too many inconsistencies in his story.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||02/23/2013|
Is it possible that she heard him shout so locked the door in a panic and not knowing what was happening exactly?
|by Anonymous||reply 114||02/23/2013|
No, R114. Pistorius killed her in cold blood.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||02/23/2013|
R114 that is the story being put forward by the defense at this stage. But why didn't she call out to him? Why didn't he check whether she was in the bed? Why didn't he fire a warning shot to scare off the apparent intruder - remember that there was no-body standing in front of him with a gun or knife. Why didn't she scream after the first shot was fired? Why did one of the shots go through her shorts proving she clothed and was not "on the toilet" when she was murdered?
Too many improbabilities IMHO.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||02/23/2013|
r116 Is that what that bastard is saying? That I was "on the toilet" when he shot me? Fry the prick. Models don't take dumps.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||02/23/2013|
True, R104. Only a "man" would kill his girlfriend.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||02/23/2013|
He's a celebrity and a paraplegic. Of course he got bail.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||02/23/2013|
[quote]I felt kind of bad for him having to stand there in front of that gaggle of photographers day after day. I wonder if they were given a set time to snap away and were then cleared out?
I felt bad for the girl who's life he took.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||02/23/2013|
He's being railroaded because he's male. It's insane what they are doing to this guy.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||02/23/2013|
He's being "railroaded" because he shot and killed somone in dubious circumstances, r121.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||02/23/2013|
If he's being railroaded then the train already got his legs.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||02/23/2013|
I wanna be his last meal if he is sentenced to death!!!! He hot as hell!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 124||02/23/2013|
A killer is never hot, r124.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||02/23/2013|
Ossy is not a killer so yes, he can be hot.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||02/23/2013|
125, are you new here?
|by Anonymous||reply 127||02/23/2013|
[quote]All I know is their accents are hideous and an affront to the English language.
Probably the ugliest accents I've ever heard. Good thing Charlize Theron lost hers.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||02/23/2013|
R126 has waxy breasts.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||02/23/2013|
He based her head in with the cricket bat.
"Olympic sprinter Oscar Pistorius crushed his girlfriend’s skull with a cricket bat before shooting her dead, police have told her family.
Details of the post-mortem examination of South African model Reeva Steenkamp were withheld from last week’s bail application hearing.
But grieving relatives who saw her body before Tuesday’s cremation in Port Elizabeth described horrific injuries from the cricket bat, and entry wounds from 9mm bullets fired by Pistorius."
|by Anonymous||reply 130||02/23/2013|
[r121]: he wouldn't be "railroaded" if he didn't have anger management and violence issues (like so many men) which resulted in the death of one person.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||02/23/2013|
Of course he did it but he's worth enough money to put up a good fight. I really hope he doesn't get away with it a la OJ...
|by Anonymous||reply 132||02/23/2013|
As I posted in the first thread, and am supported by this latest news:
Oscar bashed in her head in the bathroom, positioned her, THEN closed the bathroom door and accurately shot through it, but he shot four times to make sure.
If the ear-witness is correct, Oscar might even have coldly re-positioned Reeva to line up later shots.
Then he waited until he was absolutely sure Reeva was dead before he called his friend.
Obviously Oscar carried Reeva downstairs, but we don't know how long he took in order not to fall.
Tne police did not have Jeffrey MacDonald tested for methamphetamines, and it was too late to test OJ. I hope OP was checked.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||02/23/2013|
r133 But was Mark Fuhrman questioned about leg tampering?
|by Anonymous||reply 134||02/23/2013|
Why, R133? You think only a meth head would start a thread like this?
|by Anonymous||reply 135||02/23/2013|
no r135 because McDonald WAS a speed freak who was probably tweaking when "intruders" killed his wife, yet he was never tested for drugs.
|by Anonymous||reply 136||02/23/2013|
R135 he meant oscar p not original poster.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||02/23/2013|
Picture: AFP Oscar Pistorius brother Carl also facing homicide trial
24 February 2013 | 09:46 | FOCUS News Agency
Home / World
Johannesburg. The brother of South African athlete Oscar Pistorius - accused of murdering his girlfriend - is also facing trial over the death of a woman, BBC reported.
Carl Pistorius is charged with culpable homicide over the death of a woman motorcyclist in a traffic accident, his lawyer said. The case has no relation to the charges against Oscar Pistorius over the shooting of Reeva Steenkamp. The Paralympic star - who was released on bail on Friday - denies murder. The charges against Carl Pistorius over an accident involving his car in which a woman on a motorcycle died date back to 2010 but have only just emerged, local media reports say. They were confirmed to the BBC by Pistorius family lawyer Kenneth Oldwage. The accident took place in the town of Vanderbijlpark, an hour's drive south of Johannesburg. © 2013 All rights reserved. Reproducing this website’s contents requires obligatory reference to FOCUS Information Agency!
|by Anonymous||reply 138||02/23/2013|
That is confusing, he begs for a different nickname than Bladerunner..How about 'Pistol" Pistorius? that should be easy to remember.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||02/23/2013|
Has it been established as fact that he did, indeed, shoot his girlfriend THROUGH the bathroom door? Or is that still to be determined? I seem to recall someone saying that Pistorius deliberately contaminated the crime scene by carrying Reeva's body all over the house. Was this to cover up the fact that he actually shot her at point blank range and used the bathroom story to make up a defense?
I just find it so odd that he was able to strike her at least twice in the head, through the door. Yes, it could happen. But he shot four times and hit her three times. That's incredible, considering he couldn't see who he was aiming at. Think about how hard it would be to make contact with a person's head, twice, through a closed door and without knowing their exact positioning.
I believe he killed her, then carried her body around the house to try to mask the evidence of his crime.
|by Anonymous||reply 140||02/23/2013|
R140 they think he put her in the toilet room himself after he hit her with the bat. And lined it up and shot thru door.
|by Anonymous||reply 141||02/23/2013|
According to an explosive new report from the National Enquirer, Oscar Pistorius was concerned that his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, was cheating on him with one of his close friends. This is what supposed sparked the argument between the couple. Reeva then reportedly used this opportunity to inform Oscar that she was pregnant with his child, news that she thought would placate him, but instead it only added fuel to the fire. The Enquirer claims that the pregnancy news sent him over the edge.
A source revealed to the Enquirer that police were called out to Pistorius' home on the evening of February 13 after receiving complaints from neighbors about shouting and fighting coming from the house. The source noted:
"Police were called to investigate, but it appeared to be just another lover's spat, so nothing was done except ask them to quiet down."
It was around 3am, say police, that things too a deadly turn.
The source revealed to the magazine:
"Police theorize that Pistorius was in a rage...and bludgeoned Reeva with a cricket bat during a fierce argument. When police found the bat, there was lots of blood on it."
The source adds:
"Investigators believe Pistorius shot the young woman once while they were fighting."
It is then thought that bleeding heavily, Reeva managed to escape and lock herself in the bathroom before Pistorius fired three more shots from his Taurus 9mm pistol through the door.
Leading up to the shooting, Pistorius was said to be seething with jealous, with a source revealing:
"Police believe the arguement started over Reeva's relationship with Oscar's close friend, handsome rugby player Francois Hougaard. Oscar discovered that Reeva and Francois had been texting eachother, and police later found evidence of their communications on Reeva's iPad. Those e-mails were the opening salvo in the figh that got out of hand and led to murder.
Police believe as the arguing continued, hot-headed Pistorius became manical. Reeva tried to calm him down, saying there was nothing betwee Hougaard and herself. Although she had dated him in the past, it was long over."
This, however, did not help to calm Pistorius down, and a supposedly desperate Reeva is said to have blurted out that she was pregnant with his child, said the source, who added that cops believe that the baby news incensed Oscar even more and that he screamed that the baby wasn't his before launching his attack.
Neighbors who heard sounds coming from Pistorius' home alerted security at the gated community.
At some point the source says that Oscar realized what he had done and carried Reeva's limp, bleeding body from the bathroom and tried to revive her. He tried to give her mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, but she died soon after.
Oscar later claimed that he had thought there was a burglar in the house, and that the shooting was a mistake. But the source says:
"But that doesn't make sense. Reeva had been in the house since 6pm the day before - and he knew she was there. Police aren't buying that story either and have charged him with premeditated murder."
|by Anonymous||reply 142||02/23/2013|
The body carrying thing is yet another piece of bullshit from Oscar.
Come on. No one hoists and hauls their injured loved one around the house like that. They grab towels and hold it to the victims head and immediately call 911 and ask what to do to aid. screaming for ambulance.
Her brains would be falling out of her head. Blood pouring. It would just not feel conducive to saving her.
He was using her to contaminate the scene.
|by Anonymous||reply 143||02/24/2013|
R113, it's not possible for him to be "innocent". He fired 4 shots at a captive into a tiny toilet room. Whether he thought it was an intruder, or knew it was Reeva, is secondary.
|by Anonymous||reply 144||02/24/2013|
[quote]I just find it so odd that he was able to strike her at least twice in the head, through the door. Yes, it could happen. But he shot four times and hit her three times.
[quote]That's incredible, considering he couldn't see who he was aiming at. Think about how hard it would be to make contact with a person's head, twice, through a closed door and without knowing their exact positioning.
and on stumps, r140, in the pitch-black dark (with the curtains closed)
|by Anonymous||reply 145||02/24/2013|
Alan Dershowitz wrote an article saying Oscar screwed himself with the short sighted move of presenting a detailed defense stmt just to make bail, which the facts are already dispute (her head being bashed in). This will really hurt him in a trial where the test of his life is on question. D said celebs are often short sighted and impulsive and are surrounded by people who give in to their demands do perhaps Oscars legal team got him off now but is already fucking up his chance to beat this like OJ did.
|by Anonymous||reply 146||02/24/2013|
Hey, r135: "OP" = Oscar Pistorius.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||02/24/2013|
You are very wrong, r144. An intruder could mean Justifiable Homicide, Manslaughter, or even an acquittal/release based on self-defense.
Oscar's entire future rests on the FACT that the victim was Reeva.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||02/24/2013|
I think Oscar's "future" rests on the fact that he bludgeoned someone's head and then shot them through a bathroom door four times.
|by Anonymous||reply 149||02/24/2013|
[quote]When you wake up in the middle of the night, and crime is so endemic in South Africa, what do you do if somebody is in the house? Do you think it’s one of your family? No, of course you don’t.--a statement from the uncle
When you're already awake, sliding yourself around, and rearranging things on your balcony, the immediate thing anyone does on hearing an unexpected noise is to do an inventory of where your loved ones are.
You may do this simultaneously as you're reaching for your gun, whispering to those in your bed, and pushing your panic button.
|by Anonymous||reply 150||02/24/2013|
r149, Presumably the spontaneous "intent to kill" an intruder carries not the same level of penalty as the enraged "intent to kill" a supposed loved one.
Unless you think that Oscar's entire defense team comprises nitwits.
|by Anonymous||reply 151||02/24/2013|
R151, you don't seem to have understood that the evidence - even what Pistorius himself said in his own affidavit - seems to point very clearly to deliberately attacking and shooting at his victim with the intent to kill. So, the defence team can try whatever tactic it likes and we'll see if it convinces the judge, but from what we've seen of the evidence and the magistrate's response so far it it unlikely to.
|by Anonymous||reply 152||02/24/2013|
To find Pistorius's account credible, you would have to believe that an otherwise rational, sane person would suddenly lose an ability to account for two people in a home. If Reeva was the only other person there, the odds are 99 to 1 that she was the source of any noise in the bathroom. Any rational person would confirm Reeva's whereabouts before going into any kind of panic. Either he's insane to the point of being delusional and/or schizophrenic, or he is a evil, lying sociopath that killed Reeva in fit of rage (and tampered with the scene to throw off investigators).
|by Anonymous||reply 153||02/24/2013|
A killer is never hot? Huh? One thing got nothing to do with the other. He's hot as hell!!! Get it straight, boo!
|by Anonymous||reply 154||02/24/2013|
He is absolutly right. As impulsive as OJ was he kept his mouth shut. During the chase on the highway and his arrest live on tv, he said NOTHING. His attorneys said nothing with respect to his guilt or innocence during bail hearing. Oscars attorneys basically gave their whole theory of the case at the bail hearing. They do not even know what information the police have on hand. He is fucked. You are now basically stuck with that intruder story.
|by Anonymous||reply 155||02/24/2013|
R148, I realise that, but in civilised countries we don't get our guns from under the bed and start shooting willy-nilly at people. Evidently this is not the case in the US and SA.
|by Anonymous||reply 156||02/24/2013|
I find it hard to believe his lawyer would have allowed OP to state that he fired the shots before puting his legs on, if it's going to be contradicted by the bullet trajectories.
|by Anonymous||reply 157||02/24/2013|
I find it very amusing that Alan Dershowitz is writing for the Daily Mail.
That is all.
|by Anonymous||reply 158||02/24/2013|
I don't think with my cock all the time, that's why Oscar Pistorius is not hot.
|by Anonymous||reply 159||02/24/2013|
r152, I understand the crime; I've been posting scenarios. I understand perfectly that the defense will try whatever it can; that's why it's called "the defense."
As to WHY the defense is attempting to use the "intruder" claim: THEY are aware that WHO the victim was thought to be and WHY the victim was killed are crucial points of contention.
This would not BE the defense if THE PENALTY for killing an intruder were the same as from deliberately slaying REEVA. Oscar has admitted to the shooting. He hopes to reduce his PENALTY with his cockamamie "intruder" story.
But whatever; the cricket bat throws all of his statement into a cocked hat.
|by Anonymous||reply 160||02/24/2013|
I totally agree reply 150. If he supposedly thought an intruder was in the bathroom and the woman he supposedly loved still in bed, why when he got his gun from under the bed did he not reach out to Reeva's leg, body etc, to shake her awake whilst whispering for her to get under the bed or to get out the house. He killed her in a rage. Came down from his anger and thought he'd try to cover up as much evidence as he could.
|by Anonymous||reply 161||02/24/2013|
This bastard is gonna walk.
Seriously, I'll be super surprised if this even makes it to trial.
BTW, I loved Fox News version of Oscar's story, complete with a little figure of him with just his stumps!
|by Anonymous||reply 162||02/24/2013|
Am I reading this correctly? Carl was on the premises of Oscar's house the night of the killing? Or was he on the premises where the statement was being by the uncle? So he's a potential witness in the case?
[quote]On Saturday, the family took steps to lower its profile on social media after someone hacked into the Twitter account of Carl. They cancelled all the social media sites for both Oscar’s brother and his sister Aimee. Carl has always been close to Oscar but was notably absent when their uncle Arnold, flanked by Oscar’s sister Aimee, read out a first reaction to the shooting on Feb. 17, even though he was also on the premises.
|by Anonymous||reply 163||02/24/2013|
*being read by the uncle.
|by Anonymous||reply 164||02/24/2013|
[quote]This bastard is gonna walk.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||02/24/2013|
The bastard is gonna..crab walk, skitter?
|by Anonymous||reply 166||02/24/2013|
It will be real interesting to see how he'll fare in prison.
You know, with no legs and all. Putting prosthetic legs on and off amoung the other inmates.
Also, his facial expression during the bail hearings is that of a man who is scared shitless.
Sure seems like he knows there is a HUGE probability that he is going to jail for the rest of his life.
No wonder he forced his lawyers to issue a detailed statement to get bail. These may be his only and last days of freedom.
|by Anonymous||reply 167||02/24/2013|
r167 I'm sure he will be housed in the Special Needs Unit with other disabled people. He will be the hero of the gimps and not even have to deal with the real harshness of prison.
|by Anonymous||reply 168||02/24/2013|
162 is probably right.
|by Anonymous||reply 169||02/24/2013|
I was shocked the first time i saw the daytona track. the banking is so steep that from the road it looks like it is about 2 stories high.
As for the injured fans getting free tickets. I would think if you got a piece of engine through your thigh, you might not be so keen to sit and watch another race.
|by Anonymous||reply 170||02/24/2013|
re 170 here...wtf how the hell did I end up in this thread. Sorry. Sheesh.
|by Anonymous||reply 171||02/24/2013|
I think he'll either run or kill himself. Someone like him won't allow himself to be jailed.
|by Anonymous||reply 172||02/24/2013|
I don't think he should be allowed prostheses in prison.
Will his exgirlfriend and her family be allowed to testify about his previous acts of jealousy and violence?
Why did Oscar live with the uncle instead of his parents during high school or whatever it was?
|by Anonymous||reply 173||02/24/2013|
[quote]Why did Oscar live with the uncle instead of his parents during high school or whatever it was?
Maybe he was intolerable at home.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||02/24/2013|
A National Enquirer article claims that Reeva was pregnant. When she told Oscar that set him off because he thought she'd been cheating with her ex-boyfriend.
|by Anonymous||reply 175||02/24/2013|
[quote]A National Enquirer article claims that Reeva was pregnant. When she told Oscar that set him off because he thought she'd been cheating with her ex-boyfriend.
Omg, are you serious?
|by Anonymous||reply 176||02/24/2013|
Do you think that Oscar is so angry because he doesn't have legs?
Or, is he just a angry asshole who loves guns, and when you put them together.....BOOM
|by Anonymous||reply 177||02/24/2013|
Maybe because of his injury he is sterile. Would he know immediatly it wasn't his.
|by Anonymous||reply 178||02/24/2013|
Actually, they were already having a blazing row because he was jealous over the ex, then she blurted out that she was pregnant to calm him down and then he went even more apeshit. I'm not sure how they know exact details like that and I can't actually find whatever I read earlier but the link is to an article that quotes the NE story. If she was pregnant will be easy to ascertain. I'm not sure if I believe all the NE claims but there must be some pertinent details that we don't know about yet: if (as most of us believe) he killed her deliberately there must have been something that set him off, rightly or wrongly.
|by Anonymous||reply 179||02/24/2013|
r179 I read that too and want to know if she was pregnant. She was already cremated so they can't do further tests now. They've released everything else in this so what's the word on that? Damn.
|by Anonymous||reply 180||02/24/2013|
I doubt they've released everything, all we know is what has supposedly been leaked to certain papers, and that might not be correct. But, even though it's the NE, I'm not sure they'd make something like Reeva being pregnant up because it's bound to have been verified or not by the autopsy. Other trashy rags (Daily Mail) haven't picked up on it yet so perhaps it's dodgy info or they want to check it first. We'll see.
|by Anonymous||reply 181||02/24/2013|
[quote]Maybe because of his injury he is sterile. Would he know immediatly it wasn't his.
His legs were amputated as a young child because he had no calf bones (fibulae). Why would that have affected his plumbing?
|by Anonymous||reply 182||02/24/2013|
Because sometimes you have to reload.
|by Anonymous||reply 183||02/24/2013|
Now the brother's on trial for murder too. Murdering a woman. Such a nice family, real charmers.
I wince at the thought of that poor woman cowering in the bathroom as bullets flew through the door, knowing she was going to die.
|by Anonymous||reply 184||02/24/2013|
Why didn't she lie down in the tub?
Are you serious? The brother also killed a woman?
|by Anonymous||reply 185||02/24/2013|
I wonder if they will make him use a wheelchair in prison?
|by Anonymous||reply 186||02/24/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 187||02/24/2013|
What a trashy family!
|by Anonymous||reply 188||02/24/2013|
I have friends in SA and have visited a few times. You cannot believe what a violent culture they live in. When you go on vacation you can rent these incredible guard dogs who will tear people apart. I read an add for guard "snakes" poisonous that you can rent to roam your property. Anyone who has enough money lives in a gated community but that has limited protection. The electricity can go out any time as well as cable and telephone because people steal the copper wiring. The gun culture is as bad as here except here usually you can find a reason, there it is just drunk idiocy.
I don't think they will find him guilty unless he is stupid or his defense makes mistakes. They will bend over backwards to let him go with a slap on the wrist. His brother committed this culpable manslaughter 5 YEARS ago and it was let go until now. I doubt anything of any real import to come out of either trial. The press will have a field day and then the show will move somewhere else.
Bread and circuses people, bread and circuses.
|by Anonymous||reply 189||02/24/2013|
Take a look at this 3D diorama of the crime scene a newspaper did with figures showing the locations of Oscar and Reema according to his affidavit.
IT MAKES NO SENSE.
|by Anonymous||reply 190||02/24/2013|
Can there be any more weird twists about the Pistorius family? She sounds like a piece of work.
The aunt of alleged murderer Oscar Pistorius is one of South Africa's criminal profilers, it has been revealed.
Micki Pistorius, 52, is the author of 'Profiling Serial Killers and other crimes in South Africa' and spent six years in the country's police department as founder of an investigative psychology unit.
During her role, she was involved in more than 30 serial killer cases and helped train nearly 200 detectives in the investigation of serial homicides.
She regularly attended court with the rest of the Pistorius family during his bail hearing last week, but has not made any public comment about his case as yet.
A prosecution lawyer confirmed to The Independent yesterday that Dr Pistorius will not be consulted about her nephew's psychology due to her family ties - although the issue is likely to be discussed in court.
The athlete has been accused of having 'a propensity for violence' during his bail hearing but magistrate Desmond Nair said he was not satisfied this had been proven.
In her book 'Catch Me A Killer', Dr Pistorius claimed to have extra-sensory powers of perception which she called 'cryptesthesia'.
She has also made controversial comments about killers saying: 'Serial killers are not monsters; they are human beings with tortured souls. I will never condone what they do, but I can understand them.'
|by Anonymous||reply 191||02/25/2013|
So the S. African media are saying that he's seeking to have bail restrictions relaxed.
Scroll down to see the t-shirt his brother chose to wear today.
|by Anonymous||reply 192||02/25/2013|
Did anyone watch the Dateline and 20/20 about him last night? I am thinking things are not looking good for him. Despite the crooked cop involved in the beginning of this, the prosecution supposedly has a very good case. OP comes off like a hair trigger temper dick. An interesting thing was that when he would get in fights with men over his girlfriends he would threaten to break their legs. He sounds like an insecure prick. Oh and he would often speed around in his sports car and drive aggressively forcing people to let him pass, etc.
|by Anonymous||reply 193||03/02/2013|
My armchair explanation of this misadventure says that he went off on a 'roid rage.
Too bad for him.
Too bad for her, for sure.
|by Anonymous||reply 194||03/02/2013|
I hope Dateline and 20/20 have those shows online. Was anything else said about the "supplements" found at his home? The police had initially said they were steroids, but his lawyers said they weren't.
|by Anonymous||reply 195||03/02/2013|
r195 They weren't. They were some kind of vitamin supplement shots. I knew someone that took something like that, b12 or something. They were quick to analyze them because they were saying that if they were roids he could be screwed record wise but he was clean.
|by Anonymous||reply 196||03/02/2013|
The fact that he got bail is obscene. Money and fame buy justice. Sickening. 99 percent of defendants would not be granted bail with the exact set of facts.
|by Anonymous||reply 197||03/02/2013|
I thought I read early on in the investigation that there was injectable testosterone in the home. No?
|by Anonymous||reply 198||03/02/2013|
r198 It was injectable but I believe they said it was just vitamins or supplements, nothing that would cause a personality change. The Dateline covers both his and Jodi Arias' cases and the 20/20 is just about him. They are both pretty good. He comes off like a flaky creep.
|by Anonymous||reply 199||03/02/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 200||03/02/2013|
The butler did it!
|by Anonymous||reply 201||03/02/2013|
The black guy did it!
|by Anonymous||reply 202||03/02/2013|
arguement = Reeva ran to bathroom = O lose the plot, so Reeva locked herself in toilet = O fires. O calls best friend and father (brother?)= STORY OF INTRUDER ensues - perhaps moves phones/bat/opens window in bathroom to support intruder story =damage control. then calls paramedics/security and ensures 'intruder story' is put out to Media immediately. Quashed by SA Policewoman in Press Conference outside Silverwoods Complex to Press. HOLE IN HIS STORY - As Judge Nair said, why didn't he leave through front door if he thought intruder in house,and why walk towards and into danger to the bathroom? So true - why didn't he wake/get Reeva if he heard someone in bathroom and get straight downstairs and out of house/he could have taken his gun for protection/and used mobile to call his security/doesn't add up because it is all... a 'story'. He cries because realisation that his career is over. Hes only been going out with Reeva for 3 months, so the in love story hard to believe, more like a developing reltationship. He gets bail, but he has affidavit in prosecutions favour. If there had been intruder why didn't his dogs bark ? His PR team now doing damage limitation/website updated/stories being leaked to press coincidence?/Defence even said that they'd received an email from someone saying they know who the burglar was ???? Pft ! It's sad, but O lost the plot and went ape with a gun and a poor young woman has lost her future. Let's hope justice will be served for Reeva and for her family.
|by Anonymous||reply 203||03/02/2013|
Reevas family have totally denied the suggestion that she was pregnant btw.
|by Anonymous||reply 204||03/02/2013|
I think Oscar P may be quite an insecure guy emotionally, and sounds like he was prone to jealous and possessive behaviour - something had to have triggered him that night, and as for the sms texts from Reevas ex setting him off...that's speculation at moment - I hope prosecution are able to find and present the evidence. I read that it can take from 3 months up to a year for an analysis of the cellphones found at the scene of the crime, as they investigate : calls made/calls deleted/even calls traced to the exact room locations they were made from/and if texts have been changed and tampered with. And this is all dependent upon where the phone masts are situated in relation to the crime scene and the house.
|by Anonymous||reply 205||03/02/2013|
As it stands , the info from the bail hearing is that the two phones found in the bathroom on the floor had not been used, raised by the prosecution because Oscar said he's called the Paramedics and his security after the shooting, but due to Botha, the police investigator, failing to investigate, according to the defence, Oscar used another phone to call for help, not found by police at the crime scene.- so at the bail hearing the police investigator hadn't prepared Oscars mobile phone records so it couldn't be verified by the prosecution whether he did or did not make these calls. It will be interesting when the forensic investigations have all the phone records completed and they are presented in the trial - and see if any of this is true and what was on Reeva's ipad or her phone/or if anything was deleted from her phone. I haven't read anything about someone 'receiving' a text or call from Reeva that night in distress ? I only read that she texted her Jo'burg 'Dad' that she wasn't driving home as it had got too late.
|by Anonymous||reply 206||03/02/2013|
having read all the posts, post 19 - referring to O as abbreviation Ossy... "O is an 'animal lover" - (&*_*_()_ what the ??? going to ignore that nonsense. Another reason for the INTRUDER STORY being ridiculous is that ..security wasn't much of a prioriy as he was sleeping with the large windows open on the balcony and with a ladder positioned up to bathroom window left by builders and nothing reportedly had happened in relation to crime at his gated complex for over 5 years and he has two rather mean looking dogs outside on guard.So it's strange that his story is that he went outside to bring the fan in and close windows because then it looks like he has 'covered' the issue of sleeping with windows wide open doesn't it .hmmmmm people who believe his story don't want to believe he'd be capable of this crime, and the performance of the defence at the bail hearing and the continuing family statements (by the Uncle) and their PR machine is very persuasive, sure.....but let's face it ...he meant her serious harm/regardless of outcome or consequence ending in a fatality which is premeditated, if he put on his prostetics and went after her. The poor girl wanted to leave that night and couldn't,he wouldn't let her, and I wonder if she was found wearing the clothes she'd arrived in too. Convenient that the SA policeman first on scene knew O prior to that night as well and he contaminated scene. Just sayin.
|by Anonymous||reply 207||03/02/2013|
R207 You should ignore r19 and Ossy crap, we all do, he is trolling or joking or stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 208||03/03/2013|
R189, he lived in a super secure development called Silver Woods. It is a gated complex that has 10 foot stone walls surrounding the entire community with two or three rows of electrified wires on top of the stone fence. There is also a place called Farm Inn that borders Silver Woods where lions, leopards and cheetahs are kept in a sanctuary. They are just on the other side of Silver Woods stone fence
|by Anonymous||reply 209||03/03/2013|
This guy and the whole thing is creeping me out. The lies. Especially if he gets off if he did murder her.
|by Anonymous||reply 210||03/03/2013|
it is a possibility he'll get off - praps on some stupid technicality during the trial, and his incrediby-expensive Defence team go in all guns blazing on some mistake the prosecution make, and they go for contamination of crime scene etc, and Defence prove reasonable doubtat prosecutions story. - We all know what happened in OJ trial and now enough times lapsed and his lawyers are now free to speak and one recently said YES...OJ DID IT !(and there's nothing anyone can do!) If O. gets sentence downgraded from Section 6 to 'culpable murder' he could get between 5 and 15 I'm reading,because he's been out on bail, so has to have punishment of confinement. BUT, if he'd been in prison now until trial the sentence,...the outcome at the trial for culpable murder could have resulted in just 'TIME SERVED' ! so he's taking a real gamble being out on bail now until his trial, while he's still got premeditated murder charge against him !!!! I've also read that the prosecution knew he'd go for bail and probably get it... but in the process of doing so...they got what they wanted...the 'Affidavit' ! now all they've got to do is find the evidence to catch him. SIMPLES NO ??? (wish it started Monday)
|by Anonymous||reply 211||03/03/2013|
they all seem very scarey - can you imagine being an enemy of the Pistorioussss ! Yikes...straight to the airport ! (or a witness for the prosecution)
|by Anonymous||reply 212||03/03/2013|
Does anyone know what a likely time frame for the trial is? Is it anticipated that it happen relatively quickly or is there a chance that it could get dragged out and continued as many high profile trials in the U.S. are?
|by Anonymous||reply 213||03/03/2013|
Ugh r9, I am so sick of white South Africans fleeing back to white lands and telling that sob story about how everything has supposedly gone to the "other extreme" after hundreds of years in the course of a couple of decades. Of course they get a sympathetic hearing from idiots who think that Affirmative Action quotas have taken all "their" jobs and seats in medical school away and given them to black disabled lesbians.
They still have all the money and all the good jobs, and they will keep both for the foreseeable future. The fact that the are reaping about a 1/100th what they sowed should have been also have been foreseeable, but they refused to see which way the wind was blowing and thought things would never change. Mores the pity.
|by Anonymous||reply 214||03/03/2013|
209 - Lions Leopards and TIgers next door !!! crikey ..I am lucky if I see a squirrel !! That's state of the art security, along with the big fence ! It's all another world to me. He even left a stepladder outside for a burglar, perhaps he didnt show up, so he tookover - whatever happened,he's admitted he killed her, it was all a 'mistake' - I'm never going to have a pee at 3am again !
|by Anonymous||reply 215||03/03/2013|
Would someone start a new thread for the new info on the California serial killer and rapist active in the 70s and 80s with the new info just released the public?
He is known as Original Night Stalker, East Area Rapist and possibly the Visalia Ransacker.
|by Anonymous||reply 216||03/03/2013|
never been to SA but met many SA's who live there and they're lovely and it's a beautiful country - intense post tho', sorry can't respond. Everywhere changes when you've been away for yonks does it not, it's a talking point. The June 4th date is to set a date for the actual trial, and I read that it could take up to 5 years to come to trial, like the brothers case, BUT ...this is high profile case and so experts is SA Law/Justice system etc, are saying it won't be allowed to drag out and should move fairly quickly, within a year for trial. Shame I've got popcorn that may be out of date by then.
|by Anonymous||reply 217||03/03/2013|
For fucks sake, pay the $18.00 and do it yourself.
|by Anonymous||reply 218||03/03/2013|
The trial starts in June, apparently, r213.
|by Anonymous||reply 219||03/03/2013|
I'll start it. The East Area rapist in Sacramento? The city was terrorized for a while until he moved on to Santa Rosa and beyond. Police helicopters were an almost nightly drill. The man was so bold he'd break into homes with a male present, tie him up, and force him to watch the assault.
I had no idea he was linked to the Night Stalker! I moved out of state for many years and didn't keep up.
|by Anonymous||reply 220||03/03/2013|
r216 Go into one of the many Heath Ledger threads and ask the HL troll to do it, he's always around.
r217 The Jodi Arias trial has taken almost 5 years to start. I hope OP's is quicker than that but I have a feeling he won't live to trial. He will kill himself somehow.
|by Anonymous||reply 221||03/03/2013|
Yes, that's the same guy r220! Thanks!!
|by Anonymous||reply 222||03/03/2013|
[R213] they can't cancel other scheduled trials in high court (if that's the correct wording) for Oscar P.s, but with such a high profile case and the deluge of media attention etc., it's suggested that it won't drag on, postponements of trial dates i'd imagine will be avoided where possible. I read it starts on June 4th, but for could be postponed for several months.I guess all will be revealed on June 4th. Barry Batemans' twitter has been very useful source of info during sensory overload of repetitive information that's been all over media during bail hearing
|by Anonymous||reply 223||03/03/2013|
In the USA it would take at least a year and a half to get to court.
|by Anonymous||reply 224||03/04/2013|
I wish he would kill himself, r221. I think he is too cowardly...a man that needs that many weapons and shoots through a door? Now that's a fucking coward.
|by Anonymous||reply 225||03/04/2013|
SA guy...could he pay them off and get this whole thing settled that way? like admitting that he should've been more careful with an 7 million dollar cheque as the icing on the cake?
|by Anonymous||reply 226||03/05/2013|
there is a lot of alleged corruption goes on, it's a thought. I've read that the cellsphones have come back and no calls were maade from those found at scene, - not sure if the investigation has still to be completed of any deleted calls from those phones or not yet though. Anyone have any further news - or is this misinformation?
|by Anonymous||reply 227||03/07/2013|
They should take the money, cash the check and then have someone car bomb him.
|by Anonymous||reply 228||03/07/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 229||03/07/2013|
Her family(uncle and female cousin) said on CNN today that she didn't love Pistorius, so why the fuck was she with him?
|by Anonymous||reply 230||03/07/2013|
R230, they'd only been dating about three months, sensible people often wait a bit longer till they decide whether they're genuinely in love or if this is the "one".
|by Anonymous||reply 231||03/07/2013|
R231 agree with you. Saying you're in love after 3months is not very believable, but sceptical that it was love after such a short time. Especially as R had not split from her ex for very long before dating O. She hadn't set out to stay that fateful night either, she'd been expected to leave, so on Valentines night and not having been 'planning' to stay orignally you wonder if O found that insulting or not, you never know how any arguement may have started, and wonder if she texted her Jo'burg dad that she wasn't coming home as it had got too late (which we know she did send that very text)..under duress or not, perhaps
|by Anonymous||reply 232||03/07/2013|
R230 and I don't think its unusual to date someone and only seeing flaws in them after several weeks/few months, so she would have been with P like anyone meeting someone knew going through early stages of the relationship and getting to know him etc , that's why she was with him. And it seemed she was so lovely, giving him a valentines gift even tho she wasn't perhaps feeling 'in love' with P is the kind of thing that couples do who (you don't have to be in love to o that), give Vals day gifts I wonder if she was starting to go off him a bit, as she'd wanted to leave and go home that night and not stay.
|by Anonymous||reply 233||03/07/2013|
It sounds like he was far more into her. The father of the family she stayed with said that she had complained about his possessiveness. He told Pistorius to back off a bit and give her room. Pistorius agreed but didn't change his behavior. She was in the initial stages of a dating relationship and had misgivings so, of course, she wouldn't be declaring love for him. People can date without being in love, you know.
|by Anonymous||reply 234||03/07/2013|
R234 yes, you're right. And I read too about the 'backing off from R' from the Jo'berg Dad - and after that apparently he did a bit, but rather than go inside the house to pick her up, he'd wait outside in the car - rather rude I think. I will look for interview with R's relatives on CNN- anything new please let us know.
|by Anonymous||reply 235||03/07/2013|
South African guy here; its unlikely Oscar can bribe his way out of this - its too high profile for that to happen. There was a case a couple of years back where a drunk rugby player beat a cop to death, after the latter tried to extort a bribe from him. The rugby player got off with a R750 000 (less than $100 000 at the time) 'compensation' payment to the family of the victim. He served no time. Still, its hard to see how in this case Oscar will be allowed that option.
|by Anonymous||reply 236||03/11/2013|
maybe she was using him for fame and shtupping his friend. that's doesn't justify her death, of course, but it is possible. she wasy playing with fire if she acted that way with him. it's too bad that she didn't know who she was really dealing with.
|by Anonymous||reply 237||03/12/2013|
R214 Really have no idea what you are talkinf about, do you? Educate yourself a bit.
|by Anonymous||reply 238||03/12/2013|
R237 she stayed friends with her ex ? (if that's what you're implying ...that he got jealous over her friendship with her ex)- OP clearly had anger management issues and his gun, while for security ..he was very quick to use it wasn't he without consequence. R236 I agree...I don't think money will buy him out , as any bribery to anyone official would get leaked at some point and as you say..such a high profile case, but he wants to be able to go back home, and therefore he could intimidate any witnesses on his estate ? or money speaks perhaps - he apparently wants bail conditions altered to include going back to the house so he can sell it, as his legal costs are so high. But I thought he earned a million in just a couple of months, so he has enough money, or is it his PR putting that info out for sympathy vote ?
|by Anonymous||reply 239||03/14/2013|
I was wondering if the Steencamps could under SA Law take OP to a civil trial for death of Reeva - you know...like Mr Goldman did against OJ Simpson for death of Ronald Goldman
|by Anonymous||reply 240||03/14/2013|
Yes, it is possible to sue for wrongful death in a civil court. However South African courts generally don't make the kind of awards you would expect in a similar case in the US. So they are unlikely to make much money even if they do win.
|by Anonymous||reply 241||04/15/2013|
Everyone got their Too Disabled to be Guilty rubber support bracelets?
|by Anonymous||reply 242||02/14/2014|
I'm betting he gets off. It's disappointing to see some idiots still worshipping this guy.
|by Anonymous||reply 243||02/14/2014|
Any DLers following the trial?
I don't understand why the prosecution aren't arguing that the sounds-like-gunfire, then female screams, then more sounds-like-gunfire, which the neighbours testified to hearing, was in fact Pistorius breaking the door down to get at Reeva, her screams, then gunfire?
The defense are painting the witnesses as unreliable, because Reeva could not have screamed after shots, she died instantly.
The first sounds they heard must have been Pistorius smashing the cricket bat against the toilet door; he claims he only used the bat after he fired the gun, to assist Reeva.
The prosecution have dropped a ball here.
|by Anonymous||reply 244||03/07/2014|
I have a terrible feeling he's going to go free. Hope I'm wrong.
|by Anonymous||reply 245||03/07/2014|
What was a gorgeous model doing with a guy with two stumps?
|by Anonymous||reply 246||03/07/2014|
[quote]Any DLers following the trial?
Yes, there is a thread on that:
|by Anonymous||reply 247||03/07/2014|
|by Anonymous||reply 248||03/07/2014|
He doesn't have a LEG to STAND ON in court.
|by Anonymous||reply 249||03/07/2014|
247, thats not the trial thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 250||03/07/2014|
Hey losers mocking him for being an amputee -- what do you look like?
|by Anonymous||reply 251||03/07/2014|
She was a beard who knew too much.
|by Anonymous||reply 252||03/07/2014|
It's never been in dispute that he killed her. Geez!
|by Anonymous||reply 253||03/07/2014|
[quote]247, thats not the trial thread.
You are right. Wrong link:
|by Anonymous||reply 254||03/07/2014|
I hope this murderous little shit gets strung up. His little stunt of convulsing in the courtroom made me want to puke.
|by Anonymous||reply 255||03/07/2014|
Language has no words for this filthy lying narcissistic ungrateful worm. I admire her mother I hope she is able to send his bad energies back to where they belong. Today was a faked show with the worst actor the world has ever seen. That he is not in prison shows how corrupt SA is.
|by Anonymous||reply 256||04/07/2014|
He'll get away with it.
|by Anonymous||reply 257||04/07/2014|
He'll be found innocent. He didn't do it.
|by Anonymous||reply 258||04/08/2014|
From what I saw of his testimony yesterday, he's claiming that he has more anxiety & fear than the average person because of his legs...he is vulnerable when his legs are off, and that increases his fear. And that's why he popped off a gun without investigating what was really going on. He has some kind of emotional disorder that makes him paranoid & vigilant.
But couldn't that argument be flipped against him?
He has more fear & anxiety than the average man because he has no legs. Wouldn't that make him more likely to rage against his lover than the average man? And lose his temper and shoot a gun?
Isn't it kind of a fine line claiming a mental disorder drove him to "mistakenly" kill his girlfriend...?
The man should definitely not be allowed to have weapons. Not if he's prone to fighting and has a mental disorder.
|by Anonymous||reply 259||04/08/2014|
Now, he is a "devout Christian". Then, he surfed his ipad for porn the day he killed Reeva,enjoyed the company of Joburg gangsters and low lifes, was amassing an illegal arsenal of firearms ( he owned in excess of the legal limit and was awaiting delivery of three more guns he illegally purchased when he killed Steenkamp), threatened to break a man's legs for "dissing" him, and was facing a civil action brought against him by a woman he physically harmed when ejecting her in a rage from a party at his home.
He unlawfully took another person's life when he shot at that door. Maybe he shot at Reeva knowingly, or maybe he just shot. But when he made the decision to shoot he broke South African law. Ignorance of the law is not a defense if you break the law, but he did know the law on use of firearms - he had to correctly reference it when applying for his gun permit.
So, he deserves jail. Personally I think all the evidence points to an unstable, controlling, violent personality who regarded the law, and anyone who displeased him, with contempt. Reeva had her phone with her in that toilet. It was murder in my view.
|by Anonymous||reply 260||04/09/2014|
His overacting is not helping his case. The prosecutor has Pistorius already psychologically figured out. That is why Pistorius is being grilled with regard to issue of inability to "take responsibility. " Whatever the trial outcome, Pistorius is a dead man Walking. Looks good on him too.
|by Anonymous||reply 261||04/13/2014|
Oscar Pistorius found NOT GUILTY of murdering his girlfriend.
Wow... that's unbelieveable.
|by Anonymous||reply 262||09/11/2014|
So, will he get ANY time behind bars or will this murdering asshole just be able to hobble about, with absolutely no repercussions?
|by Anonymous||reply 263||09/11/2014|