Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Oscar Pistorius Arrested For Killing Girlfriend  
User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 30
Posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7492 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

in Spanish. If anybody finds the info. in English please post.

http://deportes.elpais.com/deportes/.../actualidad/1360827352_254289.html

He says he mistook her for a thief. Shot her in the head and in the arm.


MGGS
172 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinestlgph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9304 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7491 times:

link to USA Today in english.

Jesus a.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...storius-shoots-girlfriend/1918689/



Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2077 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7469 times:

Quoting AR385 (Thread starter):
He says he mistook her for a thief.

Yeah, sure ...


... but well, who knows, it also could depend on the drugs he has used.

 



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26860 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7449 times:

Sky News reporting that it may have been a Valentines surprise gone wrong. Weird I guess until we know the facts but very tragic whatever happened.

User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2331 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7446 times:

Very sad.

The star of the 2012 paralympics in London.


It may heat up the usual a.net firearm debate a little bit.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5176 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 7365 times:

The police news conference stated they had not said anything about it being a burglar.

They also mentioned there was no sign of forced entry and that they had been to this residence before for domestic allegations.


User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2077 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7313 times:

Police charged him with murder.

Police speak about "previous incidents" in his house. Whatever that means.

[Edited 2013-02-14 03:45:06]


Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineSmittyone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7308 times:

Quoting OA260 (Reply 3):
Sky News reporting that it may have been a Valentines surprise gone wrong. Weird I guess until we know the facts but very tragic whatever happened.

Completely irresponsible journalism IMO. Who exactly is positing this scenario? What is it based on other than coincidence?

[Edited 2013-02-14 04:10:10]

User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7305 times:

News reports this morning in the USA note that Pistorius lives in a tightly controlled gated community with a low likelihood of an 'outside' intruder. It is sadly well known of the high rates of crime in South Africa, with many owning guns for self-protection. In Pistorius' case his limited mobility to be able to escape from an intruder probably, along with being seen as having some wealth an well known person there, led him to own a gun. Of course there are other factors that led to him having a gun that are part of the history of that country. Unfortunately in the USA as well, a number of persons who are friends and family members are shot and injured or killed every month as believe to be intruders. It is a shame that such possible circumstances may have led to his girlfiend's death.

User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 7189 times:

A beautiful woman. It's always a shame when the good looking ones get killed.



User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7112 times:

This is very sad. Both them were good looking fit people. One is dead and the other with a long jail sentence in front of him, if convicted.

The beautiful and the dammed.


User currently offlineWolbo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 485 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 7097 times:

Ouch...



User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6075 posts, RR: 29
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7048 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 4):
It may heat up the usual a.net firearm debate a little bit.

I doubt it. That only seems to apply when this sort of thing happens in the USA.

Quoting anstar (Reply 5):
The police news conference stated they had not said anything about it being a burglar.

That is what I heard on the CBS radio news at 6am.

Quoting anstar (Reply 5):
They also mentioned there was no sign of forced entry and that they had been to this residence before for domestic allegations.


I heard that at 6:30

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 6):
Police speak about "previous incidents" in his house. Whatever that means.

At 7am the story from police was there had been "domestic issues" on previous occasions.

Quoting babybus (Reply 10):
Both them were good looking fit people

Which is part of the reason that it's news (the other part being that they were famous) When this kind of thing happens to a couple of good looking people it's news, when it is two regular and ugly people it would be a local story on the 11pm news.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6847 times:

The media is bringing out another side of Pistorius, that has has some serious issues. He had several close calls with the police. He was seriously injured in a boating accident in 2009 where alcohol was a likely factor in the crash but no criminal charges pushed. He was into guns big time. This article bring out some of his dark side: http://espn.go.com/olympics/story/_/...-murder-girlfriend-reeva-steenkamp

By the way, the Nike/his web site picture 'like a bullet' posted above has been removed from their sites.

Pistorius, like too many athletes around the world including in the USA, are able to get away with felony crimes, abuse people, drink and use drugs to abusive levels, cops and Judaical authorities afraid to do anything, the media covering up especially early on, and too many women are willing to sell their souls and bodies to them for the thrill even it cruel to them. They use performance enhancing drugs a step further than the law can catch them. From other reports, he had the public and media figures believe a phony side, including a NBC Sports reporter who spent some time with Pistorius in the lead up to the London Olympics who saw only the good public side of him, never seeing or looking for any problems with the law or with others. Sadly by not looking into his real life, not just his public side, he now faces murder charges.


User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6763 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 9):
A beautiful woman. It's always a shame when the good looking ones get killed.

Are you completely serious? As if less attractive people are any less worthy of living?



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6751 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 19):
As if less attractive people are any less worthy of living?

People don't get as caught up or interested when an average person gets killed. Do you really think anyone would have been interested in the JonBennet Ramsay or Madelline Cane cases if the kids hadn't been cute, it would have been how sad a kid is dead and another missing next story please.


User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6748 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Please do not construe this as an approval of the most unfortunate event that occurred during the past day or so. But please keep in mind that under the South African Constitution, section 35(3)(h) of the Bill of Rights: Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.


Regards,


SA7700



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10655 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6729 times:

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 21):
presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Exactly. What seems likely from first evidence has often been proven wrong.
For someone from a safe country what he did, when he did what he claimed to have done, seems very odd, shooting four times on someone he didnt see and didnt know who he was. If it would have happened in Western Europe, I would say, this is 99% murder, but it happened in South Africa, where armed robbers often kill instantly when someone wakes up. Before jumping to conclusions, this is about a man with no legs, he has the right to be more afraid of armed robbers than a 100% man.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6723 times:

Without judging these recent events since facts are lacking, I always felt he lacked humility.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineAF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6704 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 19):
Are you completely serious? As if less attractive people are any less worthy of living?

This:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
People don't get as caught up or interested when an average person gets killed. Do you really think anyone would have been interested in the JonBennet Ramsay or Madelline Cane cases if the kids hadn't been cute, it would have been how sad a kid is dead and another missing next story please.

Totally agreed. Same goes for celebrities.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 23):
Without judging these recent events since facts are lacking, I always felt he lacked humility.

Indeed. And he also seemed just a bit odd, this guy. Maybe it was the SA accent, maybe the attitude, I don't know. He's always seemed a bit... off to me.



Cheers
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6678 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
People don't get as caught up or interested when an average person gets killed. Do you really think anyone would have been interested in the JonBennet Ramsay or Madelline Cane cases if the kids hadn't been cute, it would have been how sad a kid is dead and another missing next story please.

I do understand your point. I feel the same way. In fact, I am ashamed to say, but I do not feel the model was attractive all that much. I feel horrible saying that about a victim of violence. Anyway.

This is a two-pronged story. People fawned over Pistorius because of his 'triumph' over adversity. I certainly liked his story. That does not mean that I do not feel for other victims of violence. There are plenty of African and Asian victims of landmines who have their legs blown off.

I thought this news story was more shocking in it's irony than any "omg a beautiful model killed" aspects. Each to their own I suppose.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6516 times:

Quoting OA260 (Reply 3):
Sky News reporting that it may have been a Valentines surprise gone wrong.
Quoting anstar (Reply 5):
They also mentioned there was no sign of forced entry and that they had been to this residence before for domestic allegations.
Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 6):
Police speak about "previous incidents" in his house. Whatever that means.
Quoting SA7700 (Reply 21):
Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

I've frankly been puzzled by the way this case is 'working out.' But I begin to wonder if Pistorius - or his lawyers - are trying something that has never been tried before.

As SA7700 says, any accused person has to be 'proven guilty.' But on this occasion, whatever else, there were only two witnesses - and one of them is dead. So the only person who can provide eye-witness evidence about what actually happened is Pistorius himself.

But he is (I suspect carefully, 'on advice') saying absolutely nothing.

I further suspect that, if he goes on doing (or rather NOT doing) that, there is no way the prosecution can get a conviction. Circumstantial evidence, like fingerprints on the gun etc., would not be enough - the only thing that would do the trick is Pistorius himself confessing.

So if he goes on 'saying absolutely nothing' there's quite a good chance (if 'good' is the right word) that he'll get out from under any murder charge. Sure, they'll probably be able to lock him up for a good while on grounds of 'insanity' or whatever - but, on the face of it, if he goes on saying nothing at all, my guess is that they won't be able to make any sort of murder charge stick.

Mind you - I had to learn a fair bit of law in my time, but I'm no lawyer. Can anyone who IS one say whether it's possible to get a conviction for a capital crime just on the basis of 'probabilities' - with (assuming that Pistorius goes on saying nothing) no eye-witness evidence from anyone about what actually happened?

[Edited 2013-02-16 04:14:04]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6504 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 26):
Circumstantial evidence, like fingerprints on the gun etc.

There's bound to be power residue evidence on his hands and clothing.


User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10655 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6476 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 27):
There's bound to be power residue evidence on his hands and clothing.

Well, he doesnt deny that he shot, right? So gun powder on his hands doesnt count much wether he´s a murder, or just a panicked guy afraid of a robber.
More important will be the distance he shot, the time between the shots, how much light was there, finding out what were the noises in the house heard by neighbours some time before the shots, the question when did the girlfriend enter the gated community, and so on.


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 30
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6407 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would think that the fact the girlfriend has 3 shots in the head and one in the hand points to a deliberate killing. That shot in the hand comes from trying to cover her face, and if she had tme to cover it, she had time to scream her name.


MGGS
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26860 posts, RR: 58
Reply 25, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6484 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
I've frankly been puzzled by the way this case is 'working out.' But I begin to wonder if Pistorius - or his lawyers - are trying something that has never been tried before.

You know its weird I just cant understand it. Normally you hear this and you say '' tragic accident or evil Man'' etc.. but I cant get my head around it.

Theories running in my mind :

Was he on drugs ?

Was she about to leave him ?

Was he in a deep sleep and then woke up thinking it was an intruder and just fired multiple shots in the dark?

If it was pre planned why would such a guy with so much going for him do such a thing?

So many questions and so hard to understand why.


User currently onlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 30
Reply 26, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6480 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

According to this:

http://deportes.elpais.com/deportes/.../actualidad/1361034857_209549.html

She was sitting in the toilette bowl when he shot her. Kind of hard to mistake that for a home invader.



MGGS
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 27, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6518 times:

A bit more information here - which suggests that he was 'firing blind':-

"Reeva, 29, is believed to have been sitting on a toilet when she was hit four times – in the arm, head, hip and finger – by three bullets fired through the bathroom door.

"It is believed she was still alive as Oscar carried her downstairs and ­ tried to revive her.

"Blood stains were found on the walls, indicating her heart was pumping.

"It is claimed Oscar was still holding Reeva in his arms and performing mouth-to-mouth when paramedics arrived.

"Neighbours said they heard her last breaths before she was pronounced dead by the paramedics.

"Forensic officers have removed the bathroom door as evidence."


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...storius-called-best-friend-1714199



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 28, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6456 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 26):
Kind of hard to mistake that for a home invader

Particularly considering she had already arrived at his house at 7pm the previous night, according to above mirror article.

The City Press is also reporting:

» A bloodied cricket bat is the central piece of evidence in the unfolding murder investigation against Pistorius.
» It is alleged that the first shot was fired in the bedroom after which Steenkamp locked herself in the bathroom.

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/exclusive-the-case-against-oscar/


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 29, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6376 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flood (Reply 28):

Yep, it's looking increasingly like Oscar has run his last race.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently onlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2989 posts, RR: 3
Reply 30, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6327 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 28):
Particularly considering she had already arrived at his house at 7pm the previous night, according to above mirror article.

The City Press is also reporting:

» A bloodied cricket bat is the central piece of evidence in the unfolding murder investigation against Pistorius.
» It is alleged that the first shot was fired in the bedroom after which Steenkamp locked herself in the bathroom.


Clearly looking like Pistorius does not have a leg to stand on so to speak if we are to believe what has been in the media so far.
It will be interesting to see how this turns out and gets spun.

Okie


User currently offlineAF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6293 times:

So wait...

Pistorius gets angry at Reeva, grabs his cricket bat, hits her. She runs away and locks herself in the bathroom. He grabs a gun as she is running away, shoots once, misses. Walks towards the WC and shoots through a closed door (maybe not expecting the bullets to go through the door?).

Opens the door somehow, realises what he has done, tries to repair the unrepairable by reviving her.

If that's how things went - clearly the guy is f-ed up in the head.



Cheers
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 32, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6256 times:

If that's really the story then I'm not sure I would call that premeditated murder, that would be quite a crazy plan.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 33, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6244 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 32):
If that's really the story then I'm not sure I would call that premeditated murder

So he attacked her with a cricket bat, then picked up a loaded gun when she ran away and tried to hide from him? I don't see him escaping a murder charge in those circumstances. He wasn't interested in talking to her through the bathroom door, was he?



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 34, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6237 times:

Well it depends of your definition of premeditated, and murder. But to me that doesn't look like something thought much in advance. More like a crime of passion.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 35, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6202 times:

Quoting AF1624 (Reply 31):
Walks towards the WC and shoots through a closed door (maybe not expecting the bullets to go through the door?).

She'd locked the door - he could well have been shooting the lock out?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 36, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 6165 times:

Right now, all we have are unverified leaks of alleged acts and evidence as well as a woman dead of an act of violence in a certain internationally known person's home. The world's media has already tried him and convicted him. I don't know how SA's criminal justice systems works, by law and in reality, perhaps someone from SA could discuss it here or give references to understand the likely situation for Pistorius.

User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 37, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6088 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 34):
Well it depends of your definition of premeditated, and murder.

I suspect the majority of murders are not premeditated. It doesn't make them any less murders.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 34):
More like a crime of passion.

Isn't this a uniquely French thing?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 35):
She'd locked the door - he could well have been shooting the lock out?

In my experience, the average household bathroom lock wouldn't require being shot out. Certainly not four times.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 36):
I don't know how SA's criminal justice systems works, by law and in reality, perhaps someone from SA could discuss it here or give references to understand the likely situation for Pistorius.

As indicated earlier in the thread, pretty much the same way it works in the US or UK. He's been charged with murder, he'll be tried by jury. The assumption is that he's innocent until proven guilty.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 38, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6073 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting scbriml (Reply 37):
He's been charged with murder, he'll be tried by jury. The assumption is that he's innocent until proven guilty.

We don't have juries in South Africa. As pointed out before the accused has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 36):
The world's media has already tried him and convicted him.

Absolutely correct. The Sunday papers here have gone ahead and published privileged court information, which was barred by the Magistrate, so much for the credence of the media.



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 39, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6005 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 38):
We don't have juries in South Africa.

So who decides his guilt, a panel of judges?

Must admit I'm pretty surprised you don't have trial by jury.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 40, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5989 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Depending of the case a judge alone or a judge with the assistance with senior.advocates

[Edited 2013-02-18 12:12:47]


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 41, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5922 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 37):
In my experience, the average household bathroom lock wouldn't require being shot out. Certainly not four times.


On the other hand, an amateur using a semi-automatic pistol might very easily loose off more rounds than were necessary? Some mention of shooting at the lock here:-

"According to this theory, the athlete first shot Miss Steenkamp by accident, whereupon she fled to the bathroom. He then shot at the door lock to try to get in, accidentally killing her.

"Pistorius’s father appeared to suggest it is this version that he believes."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Reeva-Steenkamp.html#ixzz2LIoqOpW8
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The police, of course, have the door; so they'll know from the location of the bullet-holes whether shooting the lock out was the probable intention. If that's how it turns out, there might be a chance of the charge being 'argued down' to manslaughter?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineAF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5842 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
In my experience, the average household bathroom lock wouldn't require being shot out. Certainly not four times.

It would if you had no legs. I'm not even kidding. Blowing a door open by kicking it is relatively easy. A lot less so if you're not... well... agile on your legs.



Cheers
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26860 posts, RR: 58
Reply 43, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5836 times:

Oscar Pistorius 'Put On Legs To Kill Partner'

During the bail hearing, prosecutor Gerrie Nel argued he fired four shots at unarmed Reeva Steenkamp through a locked door, showing it was a premeditated murder. He added there was "a motive to kill".
Mr Nel said Ms Steenkamp had barricaded herself inside the small, cramped bathroom with an overnight bag because she was scared after they'd had a row.

news.sky.com


Seems stranger by the day . Will be interesting to hear his account of things.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 44, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5813 times:

Quoting AF1624 (Reply 42):
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
In my experience, the average household bathroom lock wouldn't require being shot out. Certainly not four times.

Not a big problem, AF1624, but you're quoting scrimbl, not me.  

[Edited 2013-02-19 02:55:21]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 45, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5776 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AF1624 (Reply 42):
A lot less so if you're not... well... agile on your legs.

Pistorius has shown himself to be more than adequately agile on his 'legs'.   



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 46, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5744 times:

LOL, scrimbl........  


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineqantas077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5850 posts, RR: 40
Reply 47, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5679 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 35):
She'd locked the door - he could well have been shooting the lock out?

and in saying that, who on earth locks the bathroom door these day? sounds more like she was hiding from him than trying to take a toilet stop..he says he was out on the balcony getting a fan and heard noises in the bathroom, grabs his guns and fires, then realises she is not in bed...smells fishy to me.



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 48, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 5617 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 39):
Quoting SA7700 (Reply 38):
We don't have juries in South Africa.

So who decides his guilt, a panel of judges?

Must admit I'm pretty surprised you don't have trial by jury.

In Canada, we do have, theoretically, trial by jury. But in fact, 90%+ of criminal cases are tried in front of a judge alone.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 49, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5592 times:

Here's Pistorius' affidavit, presented to the court yesterday:-

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...us-affidavit-idUSBRE91I0OL20130219

Food for thought.......

PS - photographs/plan of bathroom here. He doesn't appear to have shot at the lock:-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nded-Pistorius-fired-gun-door.html

[Edited 2013-02-19 17:15:51]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 50, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5527 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 49):
Here's Pistorius' affidavit, presented to the court yesterday

How on earth can an affidavit be presented to the court yesterday, when the bail hearing is today and a plea has not even submitted to the court?

Quoting qantas077 (Reply 47):
who on earth locks the bathroom door these day?

Call me crazy, but I do.


Rgds

SA7700



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 51, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5520 times:

In my view, even if he didn't kill his girlfriend on purpose he's still a gun-paranoid killer. His argument doesn't hold much water re. thinking it was an intruder when he had a guest over his house. In the US at least I think we would/should have been charged with something like manslaughter and not 1st degree murder.

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 50):
Call me crazy, but I do.

I do too, even if I'm home alone. I guess it's habit.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 52, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5541 times:

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 50):
How on earth can an affidavit be presented to the court yesterday, when the bail hearing is today and a plea has not even submitted to the court?

We're a day ahead of you down here, SA7700.   And the story clearly says:-

"(Reuters) - Following are the central extracts of the court affidavit of Paralympic star Oscar Pistorius, who is accused of murdering girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp last week.

"The affidavit was read out in Pretoria magistrates court by the head of Pistorius' defense team, Barry Roux."


The bail hearing is already 'in progress' ............

[Edited 2013-02-20 00:51:13]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 53, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5531 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 52):
The bail hearing is already 'in progress'

Indeed, and the Prosecution stated they have a witness who heard nonstop fighting between 2-3 AM that morning. Yikes. Investigator stated Pistorius fired four shots at around 1.5m distance from toilet door, through the door in direction of toilet.

Looks like he's also being charged with possession of unlicensed ammunition for a different gun, but I guess that's the least of his worries.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 54, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5526 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 53):
Indeed, and the Prosecution stated they have a witness who heard nonstop fighting between 2-3 AM that morning.

Going to be an 'interesting' case, I guess, flood. On the one hand the prosecution doesn't have any direct evidence that proves that he had the intention to kill; but, on the other, even if the toilet had been occupied by an 'intruder,' Pistorius would have had no way of knowing whether or not said intruder was 'armed and dangerous.'

So even if he'd just shot some sort of intruder/thief, that could very well also have been deemed to be murder?

[Edited 2013-02-20 01:15:21]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 55, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5504 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 54):
On the one hand the prosecution doesn't have any direct evidence that proves that he had the intention to kill

Intent to kill, yes... maybe no direct evidence he had the intent to kill her.

According to Pristorius, he had gone onto the balcony or to close the balcony door. The inspector said that to get from the balcony to the bathroom, you have to walk passed the bed. Yet he didn't notice she wasn't in it? They found his empty holster under the bed, on the same side as Reeva's overnight bag and slippers - indicating she may have been sleeping on the same side as where he kept his gun.

It's obviously very early into the investigation, but I can't say any of this is boding well for him. The inspector noted the shots went through the top part of the door and fired in a top-down trajectory - meaning he probably had to already have had his legs on at the time - contrary to his affidavit. Pistorius said he was too scared to turn on the lights, whereas a witness reported the lights had been on. Witness also claims he saw lights on, heard a shot, scream, more shooting. Sigh.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 56, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5485 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 55):
The inspector noted the shots went through the top part of the door and fired in a top-down trajectory - meaning he probably had to already have had his legs on at the time - contrary to his affidavit.

VERY significant point that I'd missed, flood, thanks!  



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5474 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 56):
VERY significant point that I'd missed, flood, thanks!

One would think so, but I'm starting to question the competence of the inspector and prosecution... apparently one of their witnesses who heard the arguing lives 600m away. She also had an empty bladder, in line with using the bathroom at the time - although that doesn't necessarily mean she couldn't have returned to hide there later. When court was adjourned around noon, the junior prosecutor left court saying "we're in terrible trouble", lol... sounds like an experienced fellow.


User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 58, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5434 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

The case is "sub judice" and has not even been heard before a judge. At this time it is being carried out by the media. Which is not a good starting point at all. Let the courts decide.


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 59, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5425 times:

http://twitter.com/alexeliseev/status/304185537256906752/photo/1

If you came in from that balcony, and thought you heard an intruder in the bathroom...I bet most people would flee through the 'Informal Lounge', down the stairs, and out of the house. Pistorius could have quickly discovered if Steenkamp were still in the bed or not, lights off or whatever. Coming in from the balcony off the 'Main Bedroom' it is far easier to escape than to confront an intruder in the bathroom.

Another issue is...if he were so paranoid about crime in South Africa... Why did he leave the sliding doors open to the balcony? None of the windows/glass doors on his house look to have "burglar bars" so why is the defense bringing up this issue in the bathroom?

[Edited 2013-02-20 05:38:49]


oh boy!!!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 60, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5421 times:

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 58):
The case is "sub judice" and has not even been heard before a judge. At this time it is being carried out by the media.

Sorry, mate, but what the issue boils down to is 'freedom of speech.' Meself, I'm not at all certain that that cherished tradition, cherished and valued all over the Commonwealth, is still being respected:-

"WITNESSES claimed hearing arguing, a woman screaming and gunfire at the house of "Blade Runner" Oscar Pistorius the night he shot dead his model girlfriend, police have told a South African court.
Pistorius's defence team undermined the reliability of the claims as the South African sporting hero sought bail for the Valentine's Day killing that he insists was a horrible accident and not intentional, as prosecutors aim to prove.

"Police also said on Wednesday that Pistorius had previously been arrested at his Pretoria home for assault, although he was not charged, and faced further charges of possessing an unlicenced gun.

"A woman who lives in the same highly-secured Pretoria complex as Pistorius "heard talking that sounded like non-stop fighting from two to three in the morning", hours before she was killed, Prosecutor Gerrie Nel said.

"Another witness reported hearing gunshots, screams and then more shots, police said.

"We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming two-three times, then more gunshots," Detective Hilton Botha said."


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news...frfkui-1226582321669#ixzz2LRkXXKAg

You tell me - you live in South Africa. Are you 100% certain that this business is being 100% thoroughly investigated?

[Edited 2013-02-20 05:56:10]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 61, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5398 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):

On the other hand, an amateur using a semi-automatic pistol might very easily loose off more rounds than were necessary? Some mention of shooting at the lock here:-

He was no amateur and had been using guns for many years.

It also appears that he was using his legs, the bullets were apparently shot from height and angled down towards the victim who was apparently sitting on the thunderbox. This case has all the hallmarks of another classic like OJ's murder trial, only hopefully this time they get it right.


User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 62, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5398 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 60):
You tell me - you live in South Africa. Are you 100% certain that this business is being 100% thoroughly investigated?

It is a high-profile case. In order it is investigated by both the police and judged by the local and international media which in MHO is unfair.

Please keep in mind that under the South African Constitution, section 35(3)(h) of the Bill of Rights: Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently offlineAF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5385 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 44):
Not a big problem, AF1624, but you're quoting scrimbl, not me.  

Oh sorry man, don't know how that happened!

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 50):
Call me crazy, but I do.

I would too if it had a lock.



Cheers
User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1221 posts, RR: 3
Reply 64, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5357 times:

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 62):
Please keep in mind that under the South African Constitution, section 35(3)(h) of the Bill of Rights: Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Yeah that's what the law says, however in my understanding South Africa isn't only full of violence but also full of corruption, I wouldn't really trust the juridical system of such a country.



"A rational army would run away"
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 65, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5253 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 61):
It also appears that he was using his legs, the bullets were apparently shot from height and angled down towards the victim who was apparently sitting on the thunderbox.

When the case eventually goes to trial I suspect that that could turn out to be an important issue. Not 'of itself,' just on the principle that one lie would tend to invalidate the rest of his evidence as well. However, I recall that he said at one stage that he could 'walk on his stumps'; and, from photographs, he appears still to have quite a lot of his lower legs left? So he might still have been shooting at a bit of a downward angle? The police will know the angle pretty precisely, of course, from the bullet-holes in the door.

In any case, I doubt very much that he will be granted bail. He has admitted to shooting 'with intent,' and he was firing blind. As I said earlier, even if he believed that there was an 'intruder' there, he'd have had no way of knowing if said intruder was armed; so, on the face of it, that could well have boiled down to murder too?

Indeed, after typing this I found some details of the prosecution's affidavit, and they appear to be working along those lines:-

"There is no possible explanation to support his report that he thought that it was a burglar. Even (in) his own version, he readied himself, walked to the bathroom with the clear intention and plan to kill the 'burglar' and did so whilst the burglar was harmless and contained in a toilet. This in itself also constitutes premeditated murder of a 'defenseless burglar.'

"It is our respectful argument that 'pre-planning' or premeditation do not require months of planning — if ... I ready myself and walk a distance with the intention to kill someone, it is premeditated."


http://www.startribune.com/sports/olympics/191822621.html



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinedc9northwest From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 2269 posts, RR: 7
Reply 66, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5232 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 65):
'defenseless burglar.'

Yeah, right... I'm not a big advocate of guns, but as far as I am concerned an intruder in your house is a 'fair target' and should have no protection under the law whatsoever. Of course, "how do you prove it was a burglar? (etc.)" raises moral and judicial questions, but still...

That said, it wasn't a burglar. So Mr. Oscar here really screwed the pooch on this one. He should've checked if his now ex was in bed. I don't think it's unusual for someone to use the bathroom... Well, his paranoia did him one... and now if found guilty, he might face to face some 'defenceless burglar' or 'defenceless murderer' in jail.

We shall see. Maybe it was a mistake and he'll be found not guilty of murder. I doubt it, but at the moment there is doubt.


User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 67, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5210 times:

It gets more bizarre by the day:

"The South African detective leading the Oscar Pistorius inquiry is himself facing seven charges of attempted murder, police have confirmed. Detective Hilton Botha, who has faced fierce questioning at Mr Pistorius's bail hearing, was allegedly involved in a drunken shooting some years ago.
[...]
It is alleged the three were drunk while driving a state-owned vehicle and they opened fire on a minibus taxi loaded with passengers."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21528631

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 65):
In any case, I doubt very much that he will be granted bail. He has admitted to shooting 'with intent,' and he was firing blind. As I said earlier, even if he believed that there was an 'intruder' there, he'd have had no way of knowing if said intruder was armed; so, on the face of it, that could well have boiled down to murder too?

I'm not so sure. Unless the prosecution presents a very strong case today, I can see bail being granted as Pistorius probably won't be deemed a flight risk due to his high profile.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 68, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5171 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 67):
I can see bail being granted as Pistorius probably won't be deemed a flight risk due to his high profile.

Of course you could be dead right, flood. But I tend to see it from the opposite angle; he's already made a 'de facto' confession of murder - as I said, given that no-one else was shooting, it doesn't really matter whether the 'murderee' was his girlfriend or some burglar.........

And I'd see his 'high profile' - plus his great wealth - as definitely increasing the chances of him 'bugging out.' As things stand, he'll already have been told by his lawyers that he's facing a very long term of imprisonment, just on the basis of what he's already 'confessed' to?

I could be wrong, of course - but I'd offer five bucks of mine to three of yours that the judge (who seems to be an OK guy) decides that he stays in jail?  

[Edited 2013-02-21 02:18:07]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 69, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5149 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 68):
I could be wrong, of course

I could be too and, quite frankly, I hope I am.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 70, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5143 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 16):
Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Quoted for emphasis.

Too often I've read threads here and elsewhere where complete strangers have tried and convicted the accused before the case even gets to court. Speculating on what happened is unfortunately unavoidable, but it does create a situation where people who have read or heard the media's portrayal of events will decide one way or another as to the guilt of the accused.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
I further suspect that, if he goes on doing (or rather NOT doing) that, there is no way the prosecution can get a conviction. Circumstantial evidence, like fingerprints on the gun etc., would not be enough - the only thing that would do the trick is Pistorius himself confessing.

Can anyone who IS one say whether it's possible to get a conviction for a capital crime just on the basis of 'probabilities'

I'm not (yet) a lawyer. However, an accused person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. The standard of proof is no different, and that is "beyond a reasonable doubt". By definition, it does not call for an "absolute" proof, as that is impossible, but the probative value of that circumstantial evidence must be sufficiently high that there is no other reasonable explanation. Solely relying on circumstantial evidence makes the prosecution's job all the more difficult, but not impossible.

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 38):
We don't have juries in South Africa.

I for one am glad for that. In Western Australia, we had a high profile murder case late last year in which there was substantial media coverage in the years leading to the trial. The defence successfully made a motion for the accused to be tried by judge alone as jurors influenced by the media coverage would unfairly prejudice the accused's right to a fair trial. The lay person's ability to separate admissible evidence heard in court from unsubstaniated media speculation is questionable, especially in high profile cases such as these.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 71, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5121 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 70):
However, an accused person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. The standard of proof is no different, and that is "beyond a reasonable doubt". By definition, it does not call for an "absolute" proof, as that is impossible, but the probative value of that circumstantial evidence must be sufficiently high that there is no other reasonable explanation.

That comment of mine was back in 'Reply 21' on Feb. 15th., CXB77L. Since then, Pistorius has made a number of additional admissions - including publishing a (frankly, crazy) 'confession' that he thought he was shooting some sort of burglar, not his girlfriend. Not apparently realising that, even if his contention was true, that would ALSO have amounted to murder.

If ever a guy needed a good lawyer, it's Pistorius. But he doesn't appear to have found one yet........



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 72, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5116 times:

Pistorius is currently in a part of the criminal justice procedure that is like a preliminary hearing used in some states in the USA. They are also only in front of the judge, with a presentation of basic physical evidence, witness testimony and police/prosecutor information to determine the level of indictment of criminal charges to be brought up on trial for or even dismiss any possible charges. This is not the level of presentation of evidence needed for a trial or for the defendant to plead guilty. Apparently these are a public procedure in SA, with access to the media and the Defense to play to the media.

Many of us want to know why and how this occurred involving someone who presented himself as a 'great' and inspiring athlete and person, but as more information comes out, he is not perfect, like all humans.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 73, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5080 times:

Getting late here, I'm turning in. But if anyone would like to follow current proceedings in court, they're on here (in English). Fascinating discussion, in my view.........

"14:55 - Nair: There is evidence Pistorius threatened to break legs; discharged weapon; swore at someone: charge laid against [him] by his ex.

"14:53 - Roux admits he didn't ask Pistorius about his alleged accidental discharge of gun in restaurant - and asking friend to take fall.

"14:52 - Roux: It would be a "terrible injustice" to use vague, hearsay allegation about the restaurant incident against Pistorius.

"14:51 - Nair: There is evidence in this bail application that Oscar Pistorius asked a friend to take the fall for accidental gunshot fired in restaurant.

"14:51 - Nair: If established [that Oscar Pistorius would interfere with witnesses] should he be released on bail? Refers to Tasha%u2019s [restaurant] incident."




http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Ne...torius-bail-hearing-day-3-20130221



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 74, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5033 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 71):
Since then, Pistorius has made a number of additional admissions - including publishing a (frankly, crazy) 'confession' that he thought he was shooting some sort of burglar, not his girlfriend. Not apparently realising that, even if his contention was true, that would ALSO have amounted to murder.

He admitted to firing the shots through the toilet door. However, if the prosecution wishes to charge Mr Pistorius of the premeditated murder of Ms Steenkamp, then the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr Pistorius did in fact intend, and indeed, planned to kill her. Otherwise, it is not premeditated murder. It is not even murder unless there is intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, and proving that intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to Ms Steenkamp is going to be the hurdle for the prosecution to get over.

One could argue that there was an intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm because he did admit to firing shots through the door, but at the same time, he also raised the issue of self defence in his pleadings. That, along with the "mistake of fact" defence (he thought he was shooting at a burglar in self defence) could, in my view and based only on what has been reported in the media so far, raise enough reasonable doubt to see him acquitted on the charge of premeditated murder.

He is innocent until he has been proven guilty of the charge(s).

[Edited 2013-02-21 08:21:06]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 75, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4964 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 74):
the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr Pistorius did in fact intend, and indeed, planned to kill her.

He got the gun out from under the bed, CXB77L, and presumably jacked a round into the breech, and walked about seven metres to the bathroom. That surely indicates an 'intention'?

Then he fired four rounds through the toilet door. One round might have been 'unintentional,' but four?

Further, it looks as if he fired at the angle required to hit someone seated on the toilet, too - one of the police witnesses said that, because the toilet-bowl is on one side of the cubicle, if he'd fired 'straight' (that is, squarely through the door) he would have missed the victim. And, from the diagrams that have been published, he fired at a downward angle too - which would have been necessary to hit someone sitting on the bowl (indeed, the police later found one of the bullets embedded in the bowl itself).

As to 'he thought he was shooting at a burglar in self defence,' we only have his word for that. But even if he DID think that, that would have been murder too? Unless he somehow knew that said burglar was 'armed and dangerous' - and was also sitting on the toilet-bowl?

Sorry, I don't think there's any 'reasonable doubt' that he intended to kill his girlfriend, and did.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20394 posts, RR: 62
Reply 76, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4903 times:

This case keeps getting more bizarre. Now the lead investigator, Hilton Botha, is being taken off the case after charges were reinstated against him for seven counts of attempted murder stemming from an incident in 2011.

Pistorius prosecution in disarray as lead detective is taken off case for attempted murder charges



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 77, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4909 times:

Bail hearing has closed now. To his credit, the judge says that he'll give his decision today - in about an hour and a half:-

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Ne...torius-bail-hearing-day-4-20130222



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 78, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4873 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 75):
He got the gun out from under the bed, CXB77L, and presumably jacked a round into the breech, and walked about seven metres to the bathroom. That surely indicates an 'intention'?

Then he fired four rounds through the toilet door. One round might have been 'unintentional,' but four?

The reasonable doubt isn't in his intention to shoot, but rather his intention to kill his girlfriend.

If they want to charge Mr Pistorius with the premeditated murder of Ms Steenkamp, they're going to have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended, and planned, to kill her. Based on his affidavit, he thought Ms Steenkamp was in bed. Also, from what I've read and heard in the media, there's evidence from friends of the couple that say they were deeply in love and would have got married sooner or later; contrasted with the evidence from neighbours who may have heard them arguing on that night. That's where the reasonable doubt exists, and where reasonable doubts exist, the accused must be acquitted.

[Edited 2013-02-22 05:29:41]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Reply 79, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4857 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 70):
Quoting SA7700 (Reply 38):
We don't have juries in South Africa.

I for one am glad for that

I am beginning to question the value of juries myself. I have talked to a few people who recently have done jury service, and was shocked to learn of the attitudes of some of their fellow jurors.

Also, see this from the trial of Vicky Pryce, former wife of MP Chris Huhne in the UK. The jury were discharged by the judge when it became apparent that they simply did not understand their role properly. My favourite question they asked of the judge: "Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it?”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...fter-failing-to-reach-verdict.html

Amazing.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 80, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4845 times:

Decision is (for better or worse) that he's allowed bail........


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 81, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4833 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 75):
Unless he somehow knew that said burglar was 'armed and dangerous' - and was also sitting on the toilet-bowl?

That's the bit that gets me, what burglar breaks into a house then goes for a crap? I believe stumpy knew his GF was on the toilet and let her have it, otherwise why would he have fired on an angle purposely towards the toilet, IMO he did this because he knew she was on the toilet, otherwise he would have fired straight through the door. IMO that makes this premeditated murder, he intended to kill her.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 82, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4805 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 81):
That's the bit that gets me, what burglar breaks into a house then goes for a crap? I believe stumpy knew his GF was on the toilet and let her have it, otherwise why would he have fired on an angle purposely towards the toilet,

I don't follow this logic. He fired through the door, that much is admitted. There may be forensic evidence to prove that he had aimed at the toilet, but there is no evidence to prove that he knew his girlfriend was there. In his mind, he was firing to defend himself against an intruder who may or may not be armed and may have intent to harm him and his girlfriend as he has received death threats before.

Even if they can prove that he deliberately aimed at the toilet, how do we know that he wasn't aiming to incapacitate a burglar? If we are to accept that he would have had to deliberately aim at the toilet to hit it, then it stands to reason that it's out of the way of the door and provides reasonable cover - a good place to "hide". It is not beyond the realm of possibility that someone with intent to do harm would take cover there, which makes it a logical target.

[Edited 2013-02-22 07:10:50]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3508 posts, RR: 2
Reply 83, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4783 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 82):
Even if they can prove that he deliberately aimed at the toilet, how do we know that he wasn't aiming to incapacitate a burglar?

Because it's illogical. A burglar who breaks in the house doesn't to the loo for no 2.


User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 84, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4772 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 80):
Decision is (for better or worse) that he's allowed bail........

He'll probably be sending Botha an Easter basket.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 81):
That's the bit that gets me, what burglar breaks into a house then goes for a crap?

Plenty of lingering questions. Pistorius was acutely aware of violence in the area and had received death threats, yet he slept with an open balcony door - despite even having ladders laying in the yard. He neither saw nor heard Reeva get up, didn't notice whether she was still in bed, and didn't bother checking on her before heading to the bathroom. She just happened to have been sleeping on the other side of the bed that night. Two people in the house, yet he immediately assumed the noise was from a burglar, not her. He closed the blinds/curtains, retrieved his gun, then headed down the hall to confront an unknown number of intruders in total darkness. He stated he was defending Reeva, yet believing there was at least one other person in the house - he simply left his girlfriend all alone, asleep in bed. Reeva apparently went to the bathroom without turning on a single light along the way, not even as she entered the main bathroom before heading to separate toilet cubicle. The height of the bullet holes through the "upper" portion of the door, despite Pistorius stating he wasn't wearing his legs. He didn't bother trying to identify who was behind the closed door, she never said anything. The witnesses who heard the fighting between 2-3 AM, heard the gunshots and saw the lights on - were they just lying or mistaken? That's quite the "swiss cheese" model.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 85, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4762 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Danny (Reply 83):
Because it's illogical. A burglar who breaks in the house doesn't to the loo for no 2.

No, but as I have already explained in the rest of that paragraph, it isn't too far fetched to imagine that a burglar could have gone in there to take cover.

Quoting flood (Reply 84):
Pistorius was acutely aware of violence in the area and had received death threats, yet he slept with an open balcony door - despite even having ladders laying in the yard.

Here are excerpts from his affidavit in which he made reference to the balcony:

Quote:
During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013 I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains.
Quote:
I returned to the bathroom calling her name. I tried to open the toilet door but it was locked. I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door exiting on to the balcony and screamed for help.
Quote:
With the benefit of hindsight, I believe that Reeva went to the toilet when I went out on the balcony to bring the fan in. I cannot bear to think of the suffering that I have caused her and her family, knowing how much she was loved.

Can you please point to where he said he slept with the balcony door open?

Quoting flood (Reply 84):
He neither saw nor heard Reeva get up, didn't notice whether she was still in bed, and didn't bother checking on her before heading to the bathroom. She just happened to have been sleeping on the other side of the bed that night. Two people in the house, yet he immediately assumed the noise was from a burglar, not her.

Again, quoting from his affidavit:

Quote:
On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed.

Why didn't Ms Steenkamp answer him when he yelled out for her to call the police?

[Edited 2013-02-22 09:30:37]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinestarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 86, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4723 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 85):
No, but as I have already explained in the rest of that paragraph, it isn't too far fetched to imagine that a burglar could have gone in there to take cover.


If I was a burglar and was being confronted by someone the last place I would go would be a confined space like a bathroom with only one way in and out, I would have headed for the open balcony door which was right there as well.

If I was going to shoot into the toilet at what I thought was a burglar, had I shot four shots they would have been chest high and at four locations that the burglar could have been standing, not all in one place. I do not buy his story one bit but that is for the judge to decide.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12401 posts, RR: 46
Reply 87, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 4694 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 85):
No, but as I have already explained in the rest of that paragraph, it isn't too far fetched to imagine that a burglar could have gone in there to take cover.

It is when you look at the floor plan - the toilet has no exit and is a tiny trap.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 88, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4657 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 85):
Again, quoting from his affidavit:

Quote:
On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed.

Why didn't Ms Steenkamp answer him when he yelled out for her to call the police?

With respect, CXB777L, it boils down to whether you think he genuinely thought that there was a burglar there? If he didn't, his whole affidavit is certainly lies to start to finish; so we can't place any reliance on what he claims he said or did?

Now that we have a more experienced detective on the case I expect that the police will assemble the available evidence more sensibly. One issue that could prove to be decisive, seems to me, is that one cartridge-case was apparently found in the passageway or bedroom, not the bathroom; but that fact was not mentioned by the first detective in court. If that is proved to be so, it's very possible that he first shot (or shot at) Ms. Steenkamp outside the bathroom; that she then fled and locked herself in the toilet; and he then 'followed up' and fired through the door to finish her off?

Anyway, we probably won't hear much more about the case until the trial. And that is months away; apparently, because the courts are over-burdened, his next 'court appearance' will not occur until June?

"Magistrate Desmond Nair set the bail at 1m rand (£73,000) and said Pistorius must hand over his passports and also turn in any other guns he owns. The Paralympian's next court appearance was scheduled for 4 June."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...2/oscar-pistorius-released-on-bail



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 89, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4632 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 86):
I do not buy his story one bit but that is for the judge to decide.

It is indeed for the judge to decide. Whether you buy his "story" or not is irrelevant. As long as it is presented via admissible evidence in court, it must be contemplated by the judge before making his/her ruling on whether the prosecution has indeed proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended and planned to kill his girlfriend.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 88):
With respect, CXB777L, it boils down to whether you think he genuinely thought that there was a burglar there? If he didn't, his whole affidavit is certainly lies to start to finish; so we can't place any reliance on what he claims he said or did?

I believe he is not guilty of the charge of premeditated murder (or even murder) for reasons I have already mentioned. However, it would seem as though he did in fact cause the death of his girlfriend, although unintentionally. I don't think he would deny that. Therefore, manslaughter would be a more appropriate charge, in my view. With his remorse over what happened, he may even want to go to jail, if only to punish himself. I know if I ever unintentionally cause the death of someone I care about, I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

Nevertheless, it isn't about what you or I believe, it's about what the prosecution can prove. The entire onus of proof is on them, and the accused remains innocent until the prosecution have proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused doesn't need to prove anything. You cannot simply discount his affidavit just because according to some, his story doesn't add up. Mr Pistorius doesn't need to prove his innocence. His evidence merely needs to test the prosecution's case against him by providing an alternate explanation to the sequence of events, thereby raising reasonable doubt. The onus of proof only switches over to the defendant if he raises a defence, and even then, the defendant only needs to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defence raised applies in this case.

I'm somewhat bemused that, especially in high profile cases, the accused can be tried and convicted through the media before the case even gets heard in court. This is partly what drives me to seek a career in legal practice. It's as though the very basis of many legal systems in the world - that the accused is innocent until proven guilty - gets thrown out the window every time a high profile case arises. Everybody, no matter who they are, has a right to a fair trial; the presumption of innocence; as well as the right to remain silent.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 90, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4601 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 89):
Nevertheless, it isn't about what you or I believe, it's about what the prosecution can prove. The entire onus of proof is on them, and the accused remains innocent until the prosecution have proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Cheers, CXB77L!

Have to disagree on the basic point, though. The prosecution doesn't have to mess about 'proving' that he fired four rounds into a fellow human being - and killed her. No 'reasonable doubt' about it! That point is not in dispute. It actually wouldn't have mattered, in my view, if he'd shot and killed an unarmed burglar - that would also have been murder on the face of it. In either case, he didn't HAVE to shoot; he had plenty of options; like (in the burglar scenario) just locking the bedroom door and calling the police etc.

I don't know the details of South African law, but I guess it largely follows US/UK/Commonwealth practice. When and if he faces trial, the prosecution will try for a conviction on what the Americans call 'First Degree' murder (fully pre-meditated) . If they miss out on that, they'll probably achieve the equivalent of 'Second Degree' - killing while under stress etc. 'Third prize' would be mere manslaughter - but even that carries a sentence of up to fifteen years in South Africa, and I'd expect that the court would 'go to the limit' on a vicious 'four round' killing like this.

So it really isn't a question of whether Pistorius gets found guilty. It's just a matter of 'when,' and 'for what,' and what sentence he gets. Unless, of course, with all his well-publicised weeping and eye-wiping, he tries the 'insanity' defence - on present evidence I wouldn't put THAT past him and his advisers either.  

Anyway, lots of friendly and entertaining discussions ahead. Look forward to them!  

[Edited 2013-02-23 04:57:28]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 91, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4537 times:

A former US State prosecutor I saw on TV this morning brought up that often women confronted in a violent argument will lock themselves into a bathroom for short term safety and it may not end up good. In this case, it ended up very bad.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 90):
So it really isn't a question of whether Pistorius gets found guilty. It's just a matter of 'when,' and 'for what,' and what sentence he gets. Unless, of course, with all his well-publicised weeping and eye-wiping, he tries the 'insanity' defence - on present evidence I wouldn't put THAT past him and his advisers either.

  


User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 92, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4519 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 85):
Can you please point to where he said he slept with the balcony door open?

He didn't say it was open, yet arguably implied such which left the prosecution to raise the issue - a point which I don't recall being denied by the defense. An open door would also be supported by witnesses who heard arguing in the hour before the shooting.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 85):
Why didn't Ms Steenkamp answer him when he yelled out for her to call the police?

Yes, why didn't she? He claims he thought she was in bed, yet there was no response from her in the bedroom and he continued down the hall - and shot through the door regardless.

So the defense now argues that she was relieving herself and had locked herself in the cubicle as she didn't want to reply and reveal her location to the burglar. In other words, we're told to believe that when her boyfriend yelled for her to call the police, she ignored his plea and did absolutely nothing.

Defense stated her bladder was empty. Why didn't they offer conclusive proof and take a water sample, or are we meant to believe the burglar flushed?

Maybe some extra signage is in order:
http://twitpic.com/c5mo9x/full

Meanwhile, from the Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/bur...mpaign=standard-post:other:default


User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16245 posts, RR: 56
Reply 93, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4512 times:

Whether he is guilty or not of pre-meditated murder, will be determined by the ballistic evidence. Everything else is speculation or circumstantial.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 89):
However, it would seem as though he did in fact cause the death of his girlfriend, although unintentionally.

I don't agree. it could go either way. At the moment, it equally "seems" that he did intentionally cause the death of his gfr. We just don't know. The ballistic tests will largely answer this.

Given his reported history of domestic violence and anger control issues, it seems he may have indeed killed her in a moment of passion, which counts as pre-meditated murder.

A South African law professor on CNN last night said that SA has a robust plea-bargain legal environment which could mean a guilty verdict for manslaughter and no trial.

My gut, for what it's worth, is that he's guilty of pre-meditated murder.

Also, perhaps this sorry event will caution other aspiring blond actresses and models not to get mixed up with unstable athletic sports stars in search of the high life.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 94, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4478 times:

If this press story is correct, it's difficult to believe how badly that detective stuffed up while giving his evidence. The story confirms that one cartridge-case was found in the bedroom - and also says that the poor girl had a fractured skull, possibly inflicted with that cricket bat:-

"Police in South Africa are reportedly investigating the discovery of a bloodied cricket bat at the home of Paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius.

"Local reports stated police believe he may have used the bat to attack girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp before shooting her dead on St Valentine's Day morning.

"Detectives are working on two other theories concerning the bat: that it was either used to break down the door of the bathroom where she hid, or that she used it to defend herself against Mr Pistorius, South Africa's City Press reported.

"One bullet cartridge was found in the champion sprinter's bedroom and police are looking at whether he "chased" his girlfriend and fired the first shot before she locked herself in the bathroom and he fired three more through the door, the paper said.

"A post-mortem examination on the body of the 29-year-old model revealed that as well as bullet wounds to the head, arm, hand and hip, she suffered a fractured skull, it reported.

"There was lots of blood on the bat. Forensic tests will show whose blood it was," one source was quoted as saying.

---------------------

"The holster of a 9mm pistol similar to the weapon recovered by police was found on one side of the bed, the paper said. A bullet cartridge was also reportedly found in the bedroom and police are investigating whether Mr Pistorius fired one shot then "chased" Miss Steenkamp to the bathroom.

"The suspicion is that the first shot, in the bedroom, hit her in the hip," one source was quoted as saying. "She then ran and locked herself in the toilet. She was doubled over because of the pain. He fired three more shots. She probably covered her head which is why the bullet also went through her hand."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...d-at-Paralympic-athletes-home.html

If the story is right, I'm absolutely astonished that none of this came out during the bail hearing. For a start, the spent cartridge in the bedroom would have completely 'demolished' Pistorius's 'affidavit.'



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 95, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4442 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 94):
If the story is right, I'm absolutely astonished that none of this came out during the bail hearing. For a start, the spent cartridge in the bedroom would have completely 'demolished' Pistorius's 'affidavit.'

The Telegraph article is from the 17th while leaks to media and speculation was rampant. The autopsy doesn't appear to support any claims of an assault or crushed skull.

Meanwhile, back in the Pistorius household... his brother Carl is also being charged with culpable homicide as he apparently hit and killed a woman on a motorcycle.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21563911


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 96, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4399 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 95):
The autopsy doesn't appear to support any claims of an assault or crushed skull.

I guess that all I have to do is post this link, flood?

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/20...-steenkamp-skull-with-cricket-bat/

PS - this gives further details:-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...shown-extensive-head-injuries.html

[Edited 2013-02-24 05:02:38]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 97, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4383 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting flood (Reply 92):
An open door would also be supported by witnesses who heard arguing in the hour before the shooting.

Not necessarily, assuming that the door isn't soudproof.

Quoting flood (Reply 92):
we're told to believe that when her boyfriend yelled for her to call the police, she ignored his plea and did absolutely nothing.

Well, yes. There's no evidence to the contrary.

Quoting flood (Reply 92):
Maybe some extra signage is in order:
http://twitpic.com/c5mo9x/full

Meanwhile, from the Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/bur...fault

  

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 93):
Whether he is guilty or not of pre-meditated murder, will be determined by the ballistic evidence.

The ballistic evidence will determine the positions from which the shots were fired. It still cannot determine whether Mr Pistorius knows that he was shooting at his girlfriend and not a burglar.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 93):
Given his reported history of domestic violence and anger control issues, it seems he may have indeed killed her in a moment of passion, which counts as pre-meditated murder.

Yes, it does. But there is also reportedly contradicting evidence from friends of the couple who say that they are madly in love and would have got married sooner or later.

If he had wanted to kill his girlfriend, why did he call for help?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 94):
If the story is right

... then it doesn't look good for Mr Pistorius.

However, we won't know for sure unless the autopsy report is made public - which will be at the discretion of the Steenkamp family, I presume.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 98, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4347 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 96):
this gives further details

It's hard to lend the article much credence as the defense had stated the autopsy showed no signs of assault or defensive wounds - an assertion not challenged by the State during the hearing. I can't imagine such key evidence would have been withheld, for whatever reason.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 97):
If he had wanted to kill his girlfriend, why did he call for help?

If you kill your girlfriend in a fit of jealous rage and realize there's no way of fleeing or covering it up, make up an intruder. Countless people have killed their spouses and dialed 911 afterwards claiming such.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 97):
The ballistic evidence will determine the positions from which the shots were fired. It still cannot determine whether Mr Pistorius knows that he was shooting at his girlfriend and not a burglar.

Yet if ballistics show he would have had to be wearing his prosthetics at the time, he would lose all credibility.

[Edited 2013-02-24 08:15:19]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 99, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 4293 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 98):
the defense had stated the autopsy showed no signs of assault or defensive wounds - an assertion not challenged by the State during the hearing.

We have to remember that the bail hearing commenced within a very few days of the murder itself, flood. And there were reports that the crime concerned (murder with a gun) was the most serious in the book - 'Schedule Six' or something - and that bail was almost never granted to people accused of it. I also recall that detective being specifically asked (I think by the magistrate) whether any of the evidence gathered so far conflicted with, or ruled out, the 'intruder scenario' put forward by Pistorius - and he answered 'no.'

It's also significant, seems to me, that the press got the 'fractured skull' news from the family, when the body was released for cremation, not from the police or the prosecution. Lots more stories appearing about it now:-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...shown-extensive-head-injuries.html

One can only conclude that the police (and presumably the prosecution counsel) thought that the case would be a walkover, and just plain 'didn't do their homework'? Arguably, if they had, the 'intruder scenario' would have been ruled out straight away, and Pistorius would still be in jail?

I believe that Pistorius will be back in court in early June? Just maybe the prosecution, by pointing out that he appears to have fabricated the 'intruder scenario,' can press for bail to be suspended?

[Edited 2013-02-24 17:30:41]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 100, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 4251 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 99):
We have to remember that the bail hearing commenced within a very few days of the murder itself

True, but the autopsy had already been completed and Ms. Steenkamp's body was cremated on the first day of the hearing.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 99):
Lots more stories appearing about it now

Well, it's the same story - merely updated. The dailymail has been running with the story for over a day now, yet nobody else has picked up on it, not even the local SA media.

From the Telegraph:

"Police on Sunday denied reports that Pistorius used a cricket bat found at his house to assault his girlfriend before shooting her. Mr Myers, who identified Miss Steenkamp's body, told the Daily Telegraph that he was "surprised" by reports that she had been assaulted with a cricket bat.

"When I identified Reeva, I saw no indication of that", he said. "The first I knew about it was when I read it in the papers. I do not know where that came from".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...back-off-from-Reeva-Steenkamp.html


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 101, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 4221 times:

Either of us could be right, flood. By pure chance, I've actually seen a wound caused by a 9mm. pistol bullet at close range - a training accident, not the real thing, and fired from a 'Sten machine carbine,' not a pistol. But it sure looked messy, maybe that's what the family saw - the results of her being shot in the head.........

We'd better just wait (probably for a year or so) to see what comes out in the trial. But there's still the question of the cartridge-case in the bedroom? Still reckon that the policemen could have done a lot better at the hearing.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 102, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 4227 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting flood (Reply 98):
If you kill your girlfriend in a fit of jealous rage and realize there's no way of fleeing or covering it up, make up an intruder. Countless people have killed their spouses and dialed 911 afterwards claiming such.

Doesn't mean Mr Pistorius did in fact invent the intruder story to throw off inspectors.

Quoting flood (Reply 98):
Yet if ballistics show he would have had to be wearing his prosthetics at the time, he would lose all credibility.

I don't agree. Even if that part of his affidavit was struck out for want of evidence, the rest of it still applies and is valid until proven otherwise.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 99):
It's also significant, seems to me, that the press got the 'fractured skull' news from the family, when the body was released for cremation, not from the police or the prosecution.

It's only "significant" because it came from the press. It did not come from any official police investigation or presented in court. As far as I'm concerned, the only evidence that is relevant is that which is presented in court and is deemed admissible according to the rules of evidence in South Africa. Unless this story has been proven to be true by some organisation officially involved with the case, I'll take it with a large pinch of salt.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 103, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4225 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 102):
Doesn't mean Mr Pistorius did in fact invent the intruder story to throw off inspectors.
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 102):
Unless this story has been proven to be true by some organisation officially involved with the case, I'll take it with a large pinch of salt.

Happy to (politely) go on 'kicking the issues around,' CXB77L.  

But do you seriously hold the view that Pistorius has any prospect of being determined innocent of any crime?

[Edited 2013-02-25 06:02:03]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineflood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 104, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 4207 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 101):
But there's still the question of the cartridge-case in the bedroom?

Not sure where it was found, exactly... most articles I've come across mention it being in the hallway leading to the bathroom. I believe the defense claimed he had fired from the entrance to the bathroom which they argued explained the bullet casing being found there. As he was in the bathroom at least twice, he could have kicked or moved a casing on his way out. The two cellphones found in the bathroom are curious too though... it'll be interesting to see what they find on them, if anything.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 102):
Doesn't mean Mr Pistorius did in fact invent the intruder story to throw off inspectors.

Agreed, it doesn't. You asked why he would call for help and I merely offered a common explanation  
Quoting CXB77L (Reply 102):
I don't agree. Even if that part of his affidavit was struck out for want of evidence, the rest of it still applies and is valid until proven otherwise.

I'm not familiar with the legal ramifications aside from possibly perjury, but no jury in a US court would buy the rest of his story and neither would the judge in Pretoria. Having mentioned it some five times in his affidavit, not wearing his prosthetics formed part of his core defense.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 101):
Still reckon that the policemen could have done a lot better at the hearing.

Indeed, thankfully he has been replaced!


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 105, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4177 times:

Quoting flood (Reply 104):
Not sure where it was found, exactly... most articles I've come across mention it being in the hallway leading to the bathroom. I believe the defense claimed he had fired from the entrance to the bathroom which they argued explained the bullet casing being found there.

Looking at this plan, that doesn't seem possible - he couldn't even have seen the door to the toilet cubicle until he was fully inside the bathroom?

http://www.breakingnews.com/item/ahZ...d-bathroom-as-released-by-the-cour

To his credit, Detective Botha does appear to have done his best to 'get over' what could turn out to be two key points - that witnesses had described two shooting episodes, not one; and that one of the cartridge-cases had been found in the 'hallway.'

"Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." Roux again contested the claim.

"Botha said Steenkamp was shot in the head over her right ear and in her right elbow and hip, with both joints broken by the impacts. The shots were fired from 1.5 metres, he added, and police found three spent cartridges in the bathroom and one in the hallway connecting the bathroom to the bedroom."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...car-pistorius-case-police-blunders

But then he appears to have undermined his own evidence by saying that none of it ruled out the 'intruder' claim........

PS - quite an interesting discussion here:-

http://video.foxnews.com/v/218489643...-investigation/?playlist_id=161697

[Edited 2013-02-25 18:10:35]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 106, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4130 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 103):
But do you seriously hold the view that Pistorius has any prospect of being determined innocent of any crime?

One is not "determined innocent", they're either found guilty or not guilty of the charges laid against them. Being found not guilty does not equate to being innocent, it merely means that the person has not been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I believe there is reasonable doubt based on what I have read from the media. Even the investigator in charge stated that his case theory does not rule out the possibility of Pistorius' burglar theory.

Everybody is entitled to a presumption of innocence, which also means that where reasonable doubt exists, a person must, by law, be acquitted of the charge. I believe that a charge of premeditated murder will likely not stick because of the lack of evidence to prove Pistorius did intend and planned to kill Ms Steenkamp. There is only circumstantial evidence and speculation, the former is admissible in court only under certain circumstances, the latter is not. The lesser charge of manslaughter does not carry an element of intent to kill and thus is more likely to 'stick'.

Quoting flood (Reply 104):
I'm not familiar with the legal ramifications aside from possibly perjury, but no jury in a US court would buy the rest of his story and neither would the judge in Pretoria. Having mentioned it some five times in his affidavit, not wearing his prosthetics formed part of his core defense.

Thankfully he isn't going to be tried by jury. The Judge knows the law, and thus he/she knows that affidavits constitutes evidence, and so long as it is admissible by the rules of evidence relating to affidavits, it must be considered and weighed up against other evidence rather than simply discounted on a belief that he might be lying. Unless and until that evidence has been tested by admissible evidence from the prosecution and found to be lacking, it cannot simply be discounted on a mere belief. Also, just because one part of his affidavit is found to be less than accurate does not automatically mean that the rest of it is also inaccurate. Each of his contentions must be tested separately and presumed to be true unless found otherwise.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 105):
But then he appears to have undermined his own evidence by saying that none of it ruled out the 'intruder' claim........

... which is what any prosecutor worth his salt should do. Prosecutors aren't there to secure a conviction at all costs, they are there primarily as officers of the court. Their first priority is arriving at the truth. That means if they come across evidence which harms their case and helps the defence, or raises reasonable doubt, they must present it. He had to say what he did about not ruling out the intruder claim, because it simply doesn't.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 107, posted (1 year 5 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4066 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 106):
The lesser charge of manslaughter does not carry an element of intent to kill and thus is more likely to 'stick'.

That's more or less what I meant, CXB77L. Even if he'd just been shooting at a burglar, as he claims, that would still be manslaughter at the least. I believe that they tend to call it 'culpable homicide' nowadays?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 108, posted (1 year 5 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4066 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 107):
That's more or less what I meant, CXB77L. Even if he'd just been shooting at a burglar, as he claims, that would still be manslaughter at the least.

But from what I've read, he hasn't been charged with manslaughter, but premeditated murder. I believe it is unlikely that the prosecution can secure a conviction of premeditated murder on Mr Pistorius, unless the prosecution uncovers and presents some more damning evidence that can't be explained away. Based on what has been reported, I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to prove the prosecution's case theory beyond a reasonable doubt.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 109, posted (1 year 5 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4053 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 108):
But from what I've read, he hasn't been charged with manslaughter, but premeditated murder.

That probably clears up the disagreement, CXB77L. It's customary for the prosecution to go for the 'top' charge, but they can down-grade that to a lesser charge at any time (for example, what the US courts call 'Second Degree' murder, a killing that was intentional but not pre-meditated, or manslaughter) before or during the trial.

Trouble is, we just haven't had any 'firm' details of the evidence yet. Those quotes I put in Post 105, if they can be proved in court, would demolish the 'intruder' argument. Firstly, two shooting episodes, some minutes apart, don't fit the 'intruder' scenario as described by Pistorius. Secondly, when you fire a 'semi-automatic' pistol, the breech and barrel immediately slide back ('recoil') and eject the spent cartridge-case. So, if the evidence (when we finally get to hear it) is that one case was found between the bedroom and the bathroom, that would prove that he didn't just fire in the bathroom, he'd earlier fired in the passageway?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 110, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

Don't usually make double posts - but it looks as if the whole case just 'blew wide open.'

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...nkamp-pregnant-family-deny-1733347

If you google 'Reeva Steenkamp pregnant,' you'll already find about five pages of entries on the subject. Mostly denials by her poor bereaved family; basically saying that the post-mortem people didn't say so. But, of course, the results of the post-mortem haven't been published (not fully, anyway). And there appear to be no 'denials' so far from any other agency.

What's more, assuming for the moment that the poor girl WAS pregnant, it's obvious that she might not have been pregnant by Pistorius? They hadn't been 'going out' for that long......?

[Edited 2013-02-28 05:50:04]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineThunderboltDrgn From Sweden, joined Jan 2012, 563 posts, RR: 0
Reply 111, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3645 times:

"Oscar Pistorius is to ask for his ban on foreign travel to be lifted, along with
the mandatory drug and alcohol tests he must undergo under his bail conditions."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...k-for-travel-ban-to-be-lifted.html

His lawyers also claim that there is "no flight risk" but then why does he need his passport?
And why does he need the testing to be lifted unless he uses some illegal substances?

[Edited 2013-03-08 17:19:24]


Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 112, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

Thanks, ThunderboltDrgn, interesting. He doesn't want much, does he?  

Due to some sort of quarrel years ago, the National Enquirer is not accessible on the net from Commonwealth countries - but there are some quotes from their article here. Most important parts, to my mind, are that quarrelling was reported by neighbours much earlier in the evening, leading to a police visit; and that, as reported by at least one neighbour/witness, there appear to have been two shooting incidents, not one. Which, of course, if substantiated, would completely undermine his 'burglar in the bathroom' claim?

"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."


http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/20287



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 113, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3576 times:

I can't understand how he can even ask to travel. Here in France his ass would be in jail, and even if I understand how that can be seen as wrong since it's before conviction, he should at least be required to stay in a 10 miles perimeter or something, with an ankle monitor. Well, a wrist monitor in his case !


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 114, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3492 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 83):
Because it's illogical. A burglar who breaks in the house doesn't to the loo for no 2.

Do you really believe that is the case, or do you think that might have been the only place to seek cover?

Quoting starbuk7 (Reply 86):
If I was a burglar and was being confronted by someone the last place I would go would be a confined space like a bathroom with only one way in and out, I would have headed for the open balcony door which was right there as well.

If you break in a house in the dark, and the resident wakes up, I would think someone would seek cover quickly, why do you assume that they knew the floor-plan of the apartment?

I refuse you make any judgement is this case as we learned with Casey Anthony and are seeing in the Trevon Martin case, nothing is a sure thing? Between the Media and Social Media, everyone is convicted prior to trial by all the experts these days, the days of having a fair trial are over.
Could you image the horror of being a paranoid, double amputee in South Africa, and waking half-asleep in the middle of the night, possible half-drugged by Ambien or some other sleep-aid and thinking a burglar was in your apartment and shooting them, only to find out you killed your girlfriend? Imagine the horror of that and the guilt? That is why I will wait and see what happens in the trial, before I assume he intended to kill her.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 115, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3212 times:

Mainly instinct - but also a certain amount of legal nouse.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the SA Government has a whole lot more evidence against Pistorius. And that he gets arrested again quite shortly:-

"In a further shock for murder-accused Paralympian Oscar Pistorius, police investigating the death of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp have reportedly revealed that they had found Pistorius’ prized trophies strewn across the floor of the Pretoria home on the night Steenkamp was shot dead.

"According to the investigators, the awards, of which some were broken, may point to a row between Pistorius and Steenkamp before he ‘accidentally’ shot her four times, the Daily Star reports.

"According to a police source, they are still trying to establish whether the awards might have ended up around his home during an alleged dispute, adding that in a normal situation, the trophies would have been in a good condition and showcased on shelves or in cabinets.


http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report...ight-of-steenkamp-s-murder_1812287



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 116, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 114):
Could you image the horror of being a paranoid, double amputee in South Africa, and waking half-asleep in the middle of the night, possible half-drugged by Ambien or some other sleep-aid and thinking a burglar was in your apartment and shooting them, only to find out you killed your girlfriend? Imagine the horror of that and the guilt? That is why I will wait and see what happens in the trial, before I assume he intended to kill her.

Pretty sure it didn't go down like that, he also lived in a gated community, in SA those communities are pretty secure. IMO it went something like this, they had a fight, she ran away and hid after the first shot, he then finished her off as she was cowering in the loo, its pretty black and white if you ask me.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 117, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3004 times:

Don't know how other people will feel, but I find this decision just about incredible:-

"A South African court has cleared Oscar Pistorius for international travel after the Paralympian sprint star, charged with murdering his girlfriend, challenged his stringent bail terms.

"Pistorius, 26, had appealed against a raft of conditions including the confiscation of his passport that he said were unfair and unwarranted.

"I find that the magistrate's decision not to grant the appellant his passport to travel abroad was wrong," Judge Bert Bam told the High Court in Pretoria.

"The double amputee - who faces trial later this year over the Valentine's Day killing of his model girlfriend Reena Steenkamp - was not in court for the appeal, which was opposed by the state.

"The judge also ruled that Pistorius could return to his upmarket Pretoria home where Steenkamp was shot dead in the early hours of February 14."


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/world-news/os...dir2ev-1226608732884#ixzz2Opwy0WyB

It's a capital charge, after all. In my view there's every possibility that Pistorius will eventually abscond, and that the South African courts will end up having to extradite him to get him back to stand trial.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 118, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2994 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 116):
its pretty black and white if you ask me.

Fairly poor choice of words given the location but considering I agree I will go with "cut & dried"

Pretty unbelievable that he should be able to travel etc... not sure any country with a credible justice system would allow that!



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 119, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2988 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 114):
Between the Media and Social Media, everyone is convicted prior to trial by all the experts these days, the days of having a fair trial are over.

  

I agree entirely. It's a shame that some people have already come to a conclusion about a person's guilt before the court have had a chance to hear the admissible evidence that proves a person's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He has not been proven guilty and is only alleged to have intentionally killed his girlfriend.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 116):
its pretty black and white if you ask me.

It's never black and white. What you have there is a theory yet to be tested by admissible evidence in court - evidence that can't be explained away by other admissible evidence raised by the defence. I believe there is sufficient reasonable doubt in this case, unless one was to simply discount Pistorius' evidence as balderdash. That is not how the court will look at the evidence.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 117):
I find this decision just about incredible

I don't, particularly when you look at this part of the article:

Quote:
But Roux said Pistorius wanted to be able to go abroad under controlled circumstances to earn money.

"It is not as if the appellant is travelling for holiday in Mauritius; it's only to gain an income, there's no other reason," Roux said.

I don't believe that the court would give free rein to travel anywhere he wants at any time. I'm positive that there will be restrictions on where he can go, when he can go and how long he can stay for, among other things.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 120, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2985 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 119):
I'm positive that there will be restrictions on where he can go, when he can go and how long he can stay for, among other things.

No mention of any such restrictions in the press article, CXB77L? All the judge appears to have said is:-

"I find that the magistrate's decision not to grant the appellant his passport to travel abroad was wrong," Judge Bert Bam told the High Court in Pretoria."

I read that as saying that he can travel wherever he likes, whenever he likes?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 121, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2979 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 117):
"A South African court has cleared Oscar Pistorius for international travel after the Paralympian sprint star, charged with murdering his girlfriend, challenged his stringent bail terms.

Simply unbelievable, I can't imagine this happening in many other countries for a murder suspect.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 120):
"I find that the magistrate's decision not to grant the appellant his passport to travel abroad was wrong," Judge Bert Bam told the High Court in Pretoria."

Makes you wonder how much the Judge was paid to overturn the original decision, also wondering how soon Pritorius will leave the country for parts unknown! This stinks!


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 122, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2961 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 120):
No mention of any such restrictions in the press article, CXB77L?

Just because it isn't mentioned doesn't mean there aren't any, neither does something mentioned in an article automatically make it true. I'll concede that I'm speculating with respect to the restrictions, if any, that may apply under Pistorius' revised bail conditions, but it makes no sense to me for a court to impose no conditions at all.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 121):
Makes you wonder how much the Judge was paid to overturn the original decision, also wondering how soon Pritorius will leave the country for parts unknown! This stinks!

I understand that corruption exists everywhere in every industry. The legal industry is not exempt from this. But unless there is hard evidence of such corruption, more than mere speculation, I find this accusation incredible.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 123, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2951 times:

First of all, even if his story is true, I still think he should be jailed for some time. Self-defense shouldn't allow you to shoot at unidentified people through doors.

As for earning money, are there still event organizers that want him ?



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 124, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2944 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 123):
Self-defense shouldn't allow you to shoot at unidentified people through doors.

Absolutely right, Aesma. If attacked, the law allows you to use 'reasonable force' to defend yourself. But even Pistorius (as far as we know) admits that no-one was shooting at him. And he also effectively 'admits' that, even if he truly believed that there was a 'burglar' in the toilet, he made no attempt to 'communicate' - to talk to the guy and try to get him to 'come out with his hands up.' Instead he 'blind-fired' at least three rounds through the door............

On the face of it, even if it HAD been a burglar, he'd have been found guilty of manslaughter at the least........

Pistorius MUST know that he has next to no chance of being acquitted. And that his only chance of escaping justice, for a while at least, is to make some more money from competing ASAP, and then get himself to a country that doesn't have much in the way of extradition treaties.......

[Edited 2013-03-28 07:40:32]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 125, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2908 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Pistorius MUST know that he has next to no chance of being acquitted. And that his only chance of escaping justice, for a while at least, is to make some more money from competing ASAP, and then get himself to a country that doesn't have much in the way of extradition treaties.......

I'll agree with that to the extent that he won't be acquitted. But I've believed for some time w.r.t. this case that some form of plea bargain will be arranged. After all, there is no jury system in SA, it's just the judge.

He would have to admit his guilt, be subject to a fairly strict probation for 3-5 years (including no alcohol, which seems to have been a problem for some time), and with a plea bargain there is no chance to appeal. So everyone would know he is guilty, and the SA justice system would be relieved of the burden of warehousing him for a long time at great expense. I am quite sure the Steenkamp family would be unhappy with this type of arrangement, but sometimes an expedient is never satisfactory to all parties.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7143 posts, RR: 3
Reply 126, posted (1 year 4 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2897 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 122):

I find this accusation incredible.

Why South Africa is very corrupt, it's engrained into society.


User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13040 posts, RR: 12
Reply 127, posted (1 year 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2891 times:

I bet if Pistorius were Black, he would be rotting away in jail for the rest of his life, no bail, never see the outside world again.
There is something disturbing about his ability on bail to leave the country. In the USA, a person who is accused of such a crime would have to turn in their Passport to authorities as a condition of bail. I wonder what the reaction will be in the other countries where he wants to appear in if they would grant him a visa or if one not needed, if they would even let him in, he certainly wouldn't be allowed in the USA.
Then there are the sponsors or paying him appearance monies who will get bashed on Twitter and Facebook for making any payments to him. At a time when the issue of violence against women is getting worldwide attention, his public appearances are all wrong.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 128, posted (1 year 4 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2854 times:

All the signs are that, as far as participating in athletic events is concerned, Pistorius faces the 'cold shoulder.'

"The sporting world seemed poised to give the cold shoulder to Oscar Pistorius after a court in South Africa allowed the Olympic and Paralympic star to return to international competition.

"Organisers of major athletics meetings now face a dilemma over whether to invite the 26-year-old to race. Many privately admit that they are reluctant to welcome Pistorius, who is awaiting trial for the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, at his home last month.

"British Athletics declined to comment on the issue, but sources close to the governing body say Pistorius is unlikely to receive an invitation to run at the London Anniversary Games, to be held in the Olympic Stadium on 27 July, or at the Birmingham Grand Prix on 30 June.

"Pistorius was a headline act at two prominent Diamond League meetings in the United States last year – New York and Eugene – but he is unlikely to be welcomed back to either this year. Organisers for the two events refused to comment publicly, but one source said: "My gut feeling is that it would be completely unrealistic."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...istorius-athletics-bail-conditions

In my view that's exactly the reaction most, if not all, of us would have hoped for, and expected.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 129, posted (1 year 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2837 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Aesma (Reply 123):
Self-defense shouldn't allow you to shoot at unidentified people through doors.

Self defence allows a person to use reasonable force to defend themselves. This 'reasonable force' is determined by both an objective and a subjective test. It is not correct to simply say that shooting someone through the door is not self defence. In some circumstances, it can be, if the force is deemed to be reasonable in the circumstances.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Pistorius MUST know that he has next to no chance of being acquitted.

He has every chance of being acquitted on the charge of premeditated murder. I do not believe there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he planned and intended to kill his girlfriend. That he caused the death of his girlfriend is not in dispute - he even admitted that himself, but causing the death of someone, absent any intention to (a) cause their death; (b) cause grievous bodily harm to that person (whether or not death was an intended consequence); or (c) perform an illegal act, is not murder. It's manslaughter.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 125):
But I've believed for some time w.r.t. this case that some form of plea bargain will be arranged.

Perhaps there will be a 'plea bargain' of sorts, but the reason, I believe, is that the prosecution would find it difficult to make the charge of premeditated murder stick, unless they can find some more compelling evidence that can't be explained away by evidence submitted (or to be submitted) by the defence.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 128):
In my view that's exactly the reaction most, if not all, of us would have hoped for, and expected.

If it were me organising such events, or if I were a sponsor, I would have no qualms about inviting him to participate. A person is innocent until proven guilty, and until such time as he has been proven guilty by a court of law, he should be treated as any other citizen and not as a criminal.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 130, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2803 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 129):
It is not correct to simply say that shooting someone through the door is not self defence. In some circumstances, it can be, if the force is deemed to be reasonable in the circumstances.

Do you think that is applicaple in that case?

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 129):
I do not believe there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he planned and intended to kill his girlfriend.

I don't understand how anyone can take the story that he expected an intruder to be in the bathroom seriously. If the trial was in front of a jury he just might be able to convince them but it is decided by a judge and I see no way he will buy that story.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 131, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2790 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 129):
but causing the death of someone, absent any intention to (a) cause their death; (b) cause grievous bodily harm to that person (whether or not death was an intended consequence); or (c) perform an illegal act, is not murder. It's manslaughter.

Surely firing up to four rounds through the door, apparently at an angle calculated to hit anyone sitting on the toilet-seat, provides ample evidence to prove all three intentions, CXB77L? Even if Pistorius really thought there was an 'intruder,' the most he could (legally) have done would have been to call out to the 'occupant' to come out with his hands up? Alternatively, of course, he could just have stayed at a safe distance and called the police?

Quoting cmf (Reply 130):
I don't understand how anyone can take the story that he expected an intruder to be in the bathroom seriously.

Couldn't agree more, cmf. I suspect, too, that the police are being 'cagey' with their evidence, keeping a lot of detailed stuff un-publicised until the trial. Especially the rumoured finding of one spent cartridge-case in the passageway, not the bathroom? That alone would tend completely ro invalidate Pistorius' version of events?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineTheSultanOfWing From El Salvador, joined Dec 2012, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 132, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2782 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 130):

I don't understand how anyone can take the story that he expected an intruder to be in the bathroom seriously.

I concur!

Really curious whether they can prove he had put on his prostheses before the shooting, contrary to what he declared.
Apparently the angle of the shot through the door suggests that he was way too high up for him to be without protheses; and why would he lie about a detail like that?

And come on now: you spend the night with your partner in your own bedroom, you hear a sound at night which seems suspicious. I have had that experience myself.
BUT:
You then speak / shout in distress while grabbing your firearm with the full intention of waking up your "better half", and though you don't get any reply from the person in question; you don't hesitate or double check.
No, you shoot through the toilet door anyway! (??)
Who on earth would that person be in your own bathroom, whilst nobody is replying to your calls from the bed!??
It boggles the mind! It boggles mine anyway......



I feel like the A318 at times: I am probably worth more parted out than as a whole.
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 133, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2749 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 130):
If the trial was in front of a jury he just might be able to convince them but it is decided by a judge and I see no way he will buy that story.

I believe it's the other way around. A judge is much more likely to assess only the admissible evidence presented in court rather than be influenced by any media reports, however bleak a picture they may paint of Mr Pistorius despite the fact that his case hasn't even been heard yet.

I'm thankful that this case is being tried by a judge alone and not a jury. A judge is far more likely to examine the available evidence dispassionately and impartially. A judge knows the law and knows what is admissible evidence and what is not, and knows that all evidence, so long as it is admissible by the rules of evidence, must, by law, be considered when making his/her determination. He/she cannot simply dismiss the evidence of the defence as frivolous lies unless it has been proven to be untrue. Even if one element of Mr Pistorius' evidence is proven to be false, it doesn't mean the rest of it is.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 131):
Surely firing up to four rounds through the door, apparently at an angle calculated to hit anyone sitting on the toilet-seat, provides ample evidence to prove all three intentions, CXB77L?

Not if he believed that there was an armed burglar in his house intending to do him and his girlfriend harm. In his affidavit, Mr Pistorius stated that he called out for his girlfriend to call the police, so why did she not respond, informing him that there is no danger, and that it's only her on the toilet?

Unless the prosecution can prove that Mr Pistorius did in fact know Ms Steenkamp was behind that door, yet fired anyway, I don't think they can convict Mr Pistorius of murder. The spent cartridge in the bedroom, if proven to be true, could point towards that theory, but that evidence has yet to be heard in court. He has not been tried nor convicted. Therefore, until such time as he is tried and convicted in court, he is deemed to be innocent.

I am open to the possiblity of his conviction, and in fact agree that he might be convicted based on the evidence that he himself presented - that he caused the death of his girlfriend. The prosecution may well have much more evidence that proves Mr Pistorius' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, I believe that there is reasonable doubt based only on the evidence that has been reported in the media so far, which is in no way a complete record of all the evidence that is going to be used in the trial, neither will Mr Pistorius' affidavit form the entirety of the defence's case.

What I dislike is the media and social media trying and convicting a man before the case has even been heard in court. I'm not saying he's not guilty - I wasn't there, I don't know and didn't hear or see what happened. But everybody has a right to a fair trial and a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 131):
Even if Pistorius really thought there was an 'intruder,' the most he could (legally) have done would have been to call out to the 'occupant' to come out with his hands up?

He did. From his affidavit:

Quote:
On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police.
Quoting TheSultanOfWing (Reply 132):
Really curious whether they can prove he had put on his prostheses before the shooting, contrary to what he declared.

I don't think that proves anything.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 134, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2741 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 133):
Not if he believed that there was an armed burglar in his house intending to do him and his girlfriend harm.

Even if he genuinely believed that there was a 'burglar' in the house, CXB77L, he has not produced any evidence (or indeed any testimony) to support the idea that he even thought any such intruder to be armed? Nor did he say anything to the 'intruder' - he just fired. If there really had been an (unarmed) intruder, that would have been manslaughter at the least.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 133):
The spent cartridge in the bedroom, if proven to be true, could point towards that theory, but that evidence has yet to be heard in court.

Actually, or at least arguably, one cartridge-case in the passageway. This video is by no means sworn evidence, it will have to be established in court. There's admittedly a 'loose end' - evidently five rounds fired, but only four cartridge-cases found. But if it is so proven - together with the forensic evidence, how many bullets hit Ms Steenkamp, at what time, and at what angle - my guess is that Pistorius will be 'toast':-

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...pistoriuss-bedroom/article9057953/

[Edited 2013-03-30 06:14:12]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 135, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2722 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 134):
he has not produced any evidence (or indeed any testimony) to support the idea that he even thought any such intruder to be armed

Quoting from his affidavit:

Quote:
I believed that when the intruder/s came out of the toilet, we would be in grave danger.

Whether the force used is "reasonable" enough to constitute "self defence" has, in part, a subjective element, in that if he thought he and his girlfriend would be in "grave danger", specifically that their lives would be threatened, it may indeed constitute reasonable force from his subjective point of view.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 134):
Nor did he say anything to the 'intruder'

Yes, he did. Again, quoting from his affidavit:

Quote:
On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 136, posted (1 year 4 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2716 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 133):
I'm thankful that this case is being tried by a judge alone and not a jury. A judge is far more likely to examine the available evidence dispassionately and impartially. A judge knows the law and knows what is admissible evidence and what is not, and knows that all evidence, so long as it is admissible by the rules of evidence, must, by law, be considered when making his/her determination. He/she cannot simply dismiss the evidence of the defence as frivolous lies unless it has been proven to be untrue. Even if one element of Mr Pistorius' evidence is proven to be false, it doesn't mean the rest of it is.

It is because a judge is much better at weighting the evidence I think Pistorius version is very unlikely to carry.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 133):
In his affidavit, Mr Pistorius stated that he called out for his girlfriend to call the police, so why did she not respond, informing him that there is no danger, and that it's only her on the toilet?

How do you know she didn't respond? How do you know he called out?

To me that story looks like just that, a story. Maybe my opinion will change as more evidence comes out but that is where I see it now and I expect the prosecutor will have an easy task convincing the judge about it.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 137, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2673 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 136):
It is because a judge is much better at weighting the evidence I think Pistorius version is very unlikely to carry.

Pistorius' affidavit is admissible evidence. Every piece of evidence has a certain probative value depending on what the evidence is and what it proves. If the prosecution can present evidence of a higher probative value that contradicts Pistorius' affidavits, then the judge will weigh that evidence accordingly. It is not an exact science, but the determination of the truth between two conflicting stories is done based on evidence. It's not a question of what the judge "buys" any more than it is a question of what the general public "buys". That's completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is proof. To paraphrase A Few Good Men, it doesn't matter what you believe, it only matters what you can prove.

From what has been reported by the media, I don't think the prosecution has enough to convict Pistorius of premeditated murder, but as has been mentioned, what has been reported in the media is most likely not the entirety of their evidence.

Quoting cmf (Reply 136):
How do you know she didn't respond?

I don't. That's probably going to be a question that remains unanswered. I don't recall seeing any reports of witnesses hearing Steenkamp answer Pistorius' call to call the police.

Quoting cmf (Reply 136):
How do you know he called out?

Because it was in his affidavit. Unless there is evidence to prove that it is false, then he has to have the benefit of the doubt.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 138, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 137):
then the judge will weigh that evidence accordingly

Exactly. Between the jealousy, screaming, etc. the suggestion that a burger locked himself in the bathroom will be thrown out and with it the rest of Pistorius' version of the events.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 139, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2653 times:

Found a press story that, if it's 'kosher,' completely destroys the 'intruder' case. Also more or less confirms the 'passageway shot':-

"Model Reeva was killed by 9mm pistol shots fired through the locked bathroom door at around 3am on Valentine’s Day.

"She was hit in the head and body four times in total. But police now believe the first shot was fired at her in the master bedroom — hitting her hip as she fled to the bathroom.

"Wounds to the top of her head suggest that as she sat doubled up in pain on the toilet she was hit three more times by bullets that ripped through the door.

"Experts say she may have been covering her head protectively with her hands, which explains the bullet wounds to her finger and arm."


Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...Reeva-Steenkamp.html#ixzz2P86Er8oY



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 140, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2646 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 138):
Between the jealousy, screaming, etc. the suggestion that a burger locked himself in the bathroom will be thrown out and with it the rest of Pistorius' version of the events.


Only if the prosecution can provide admissible evidence to prove that Pistorius' version of events is false. Every aspect of his testimony are to be taken individually and not as a whole, that means even if one part of his affidavit has been proven to be false, it doesn't mean the rest of it is. It's not enough to simply not believe it. The judge cannot simply throw it out because he/she doesn't believe it!

[Edited 2013-03-31 08:50:49]


Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 141, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2631 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 140):
Only if the prosecution can provide admissible evidence to prove that Pistorius' version of events is false. Every aspect of his testimony are to be taken individually and not as a whole, that means even if one part of his affidavit has been proven to be false, it doesn't mean the rest of it is. It's not enough to simply not believe it. The judge cannot simply throw it out because he/she doesn't believe it!

What you're saying is that if he claimed an alien beamed in to the bathroom and shot her then for lack of evidence that is what happened... Reality is that it would be thrown out. I expect the exact same to happen with the story he gave, it just doesn't add up. Even less so when you consider the evince that are present.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 142, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2602 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 140):
Every aspect of his testimony are to be taken individually and not as a whole, that means even if one part of his affidavit has been proven to be false, it doesn't mean the rest of it is.

I'm afraid that in court proceedings, CXB77L, things tend more often to work the other way round; if one untruth can be proved the rest of the testimony can more or less be disregarded. This may well happen in this case - we 'crossed posts' above, but it looks as if the police have leaked a bit more evidence, rather confirming the 'passageway shot."

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 139):
"But police now believe the first shot was fired at her in the master bedroom — hitting her hip as she fled to the bathroom.

"Wounds to the top of her head suggest that as she sat doubled up in pain on the toilet she was hit three more times by bullets that ripped through the door."

Forensics will be able to establish whether that 'first shot' was fired from longer range - and it sounds as if it may have hit her in the back, too. If so, that couldn't possibly have happened in the toilet. And if that turns out to be the case, IMO the whole of Pistorius' affidavit can and will be thrown out.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 143, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2519 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 141):
What you're saying is that if he claimed an alien beamed in to the bathroom and shot her then for lack of evidence that is what happened... Reality is that it would be thrown out.

Except that's not what he's claiming. He doesn't deny shooting through the toilet door, what he does deny is that he knew Steenkamp was there and had intended to kill her.

Quoting cmf (Reply 141):
I expect the exact same to happen with the story he gave, it just doesn't add up. Even less so when you consider the evince that are present.

In his affidavit, he stated that the bathroom window was open and there was a ladder outside. The possibility of there being a burglar in his house is demonstrably greater than zero. This creates reasonable doubt. As long as there is reasonable doubt, the accused must be acquitted. That's the law.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 142):
I'm afraid that in court proceedings, CXB77L, things tend more often to work the other way round; if one untruth can be proved the rest of the testimony can more or less be disregarded.

Not without the prosecution proving, by presenting evidence which is consistent with their case theory and contradicts the defence's case theory, that the defence's evidence does not add up. I don't know where you get your information from, but evidence cannot simply be disregarded based on a "hunch" or a belief, there must be admissible evidence to the contrary.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2367 posts, RR: 8
Reply 144, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2482 times:

When is this guy going to jail and for how long? Ugh.


oh boy!!!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 145, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2478 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 144):
When is this guy going to jail and for how long?

Apparently there's another court appearance in June, Pellegrine. But the courts are vastly over-crowded, last I heard the actual trial won't be until about October at the earliest.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 146, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2453 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 143):
In his affidavit, he stated that the bathroom window was open and there was a ladder outside. The possibility of there being a burglar in his house is demonstrably greater than zero. This creates reasonable doubt. As long as there is reasonable doubt, the accused must be acquitted. That's the law.

"I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains. I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom. I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside.
...
I was too scared to switch a light on. I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed. I noticed that the bathroom window was open. I realised that the intruder/s was/were in the toilet because the toilet door was closed and I did not see anyone in the bathroom. … As I did not have my prosthetic legs on and felt extremely vulnerable, I knew I had to protect Reeva and myself. I believed that when the intruder/s came out of the toilet we would be in grave danger. I felt trapped as my bedroom door was locked and I have limited mobility on my stumps. I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police."

The story doesn't add up. He slept with open door and worried about not having a bar on the bathroom window? He didn't dare to turn on the light but he thought nothing about screaming? He approached the burglar feeling extremely vulnerable without his legs? Why would a burglar lock himself in the bathroom?

Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt his actions are equal to murder.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 147, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2442 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 146):
He slept with open door and worried about not having a bar on the bathroom window?

Where does he say that the door was open? He brought in the fan, and closed the door after bringing in the fan. Whether it was open when he was sleeping, or that he only opened it to bring in the fan, remains unknown.

Quoting cmf (Reply 146):
He didn't dare to turn on the light but he thought nothing about screaming?

Have you ever tried turning on lights in the middle of the night without momentarily blinding yourself?

Quoting cmf (Reply 146):
He approached the burglar feeling extremely vulnerable without his legs?

I think unless one is a double amputee, one cannot truly understand how vulnerable they may be in these circumstances. Nevertheless ...

Quote:
I knew I had to protect Reeva and myself. I believed that when the intruder/s came out of the toilet we would be in grave danger. I felt trapped as my bedroom door was locked and I have limited mobility on my stumps.

... instinct took over, as they would when one's safety is threatened.

Quoting cmf (Reply 146):
Why would a burglar lock himself in the bathroom?

To hide. He might have broken in, heard that the residents aren't asleep, and hid hoping no one would notice he was there.

Quoting cmf (Reply 146):
Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt his actions are equal to murder.

No, it doesn't. Self defence is a legitimate defence to the charge of murder.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 148, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2440 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 140):
Only if the prosecution can provide admissible evidence to prove that Pistorius' version of events is false.

It's not a "version of events" it's what happened in his head, or rather, what he says happened in his head. Remember, there was no intruder. Pistorius doesn't deny this.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 149, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
Where does he say that the door was open?

It was stated in court.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
Have you ever tried turning on lights in the middle of the night without momentarily blinding yourself?

I have never shouted when i have suspected someone I fear may shoot me is hiding close by.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
I think unless one is a double amputee, one cannot truly understand how vulnerable they may be in these circumstances. Nevertheless ...

Why his actions don't make sense.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
... instinct took over, as they would when one's safety is threatened.

Instinct is to run away, with those you care about. Not to limp handicapped towards danger.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
To hide. He might have broken in, heard that the residents aren't asleep, and hid hoping no one would notice he was there.

Don't buy that for a second.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 147):
No, it doesn't. Self defence is a legitimate defence to the charge of murder.

Self defense doesn't supersede common sense. His actions were not in compliance with self defense.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 150, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2435 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Aesma (Reply 148):
Remember, there was no intruder. Pistorius doesn't deny this.

The fact that there was no intruder does not exclude the possibility that he thought there was, and that he was firing at an intruder in self defence.

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
It was stated in court.

Link?

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
I have never shouted when i have suspected someone I fear may shoot me is hiding close by.

He shouted for who he thought was the intruder to get out of his house and for Reeva to call the police. That's not hard to believe.

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
Why his actions don't make sense.

 

Try putting yourself into his shoes for a minute. A famous athlete, well known throughout the world, not just in South Africa, who has received death threats, and who lives in a country where violent crime rates are very high. Someone who also happens to be a double amputee with limited mobility unless he has his prosthetic legs on. Someone deeply in love with his girlfriend who would do anything for her.

I believe it is legitimate, and indeed highly probable, that he genuinely thought his life was in danger.

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
Instinct is to run away, with those you care about. Not to limp handicapped towards danger.

Maybe for some. Maybe, for others, it would be to confront and neutralise the threat in order to protect the person they care about.

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
Don't buy that for a second.

You don't have to "buy" it. It's not what you or I believe that matters, it's what can be proven in court.

Quoting cmf (Reply 149):
Self defense doesn't supersede common sense. His actions were not in compliance with self defense.


Elements of self defence (as per Australian law, may differ in South Africa):

1. That the accused believed the use of force in self defence was necessary, and that the accused believed that the degree of force used was necessary; and

2. That the force used was proportionate, that is, conduct must be objectively reasonable in the circumstances as the accused perceived them to be, and that the accused had reasonable grounds for believing what he actually believed.

It is irrelevant, therefore, that there was in fact no burglar. What is relevant is that he believed there was a burglar and whether he had reasonable grounds to hold that belief. What is also relevant is that he believed he needed to use force to protect himself and his girlfriend. Given his evidence about receiving death threats, open bathroom window and a ladder outside, I believe he has reasonable grounds to believe that there was a burglar.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 151, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2423 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 150):
Link?

"Pistorius said that he and Steenkamp were in bed asleep when he awoke and went to the balcony to close a sliding door and get a fan."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog...bail-hearing-day-two-live-coverage

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 150):
He shouted for who he thought was the intruder to get out of his house and for Reeva to call the police. That's not hard to believe.

I find it hard to believe. Last thing I would do is to make someone aware I was coming when I'm in a situation where I feel I am in a disadvantage.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 150):
Maybe for some. Maybe, for others, it would be to confront and neutralise the threat in order to protect the person they care about.

That works when you're attacked, he wasn't. Buying his version he walked in to the attack. After making the attacker aware he was coming. While stating he was feeling vulnerable. It doesn't add up.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 150):
You don't have to "buy" it. It's not what you or I believe that matters, it's what can be proven in court.

Nor what you believe.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 150):
It is irrelevant, therefore, that there was in fact no burglar. What is relevant is that he believed there was a burglar and whether he had reasonable grounds to hold that belief

Per the prosecuter (same link as above)
"But even if Pistorius had thought she was a burglar, Nel said, this was still premeditated murder. "If I arm myself, walk a distance and murder a person, that is premeditated," he said. "The door is closed. There is no doubt. I walk seven metres and I kill." Firing four shots into the door of a tiny room could not have been intended simply to scare someone, he suggested."

I suspect the prosecutor is aware how self defense is defined in South Africa.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 152, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2418 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 151):
"Pistorius said that he and Steenkamp were in bed asleep when he awoke and went to the balcony to close a sliding door and get a fan."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog...erage

Thanks for the link.

The fact of his having to close the balcony door after getting the fan does not automatically mean that it was left open in the first place. Even if it were open, I do not believe the case pivots on this point.

Quoting cmf (Reply 151):
Last thing I would do is to make someone aware I was coming when I'm in a situation where I feel I am in a disadvantage.

You're not Oscar Pistorius.

Quoting cmf (Reply 151):
That works when you're attacked, he wasn't. Buying his version he walked in to the attack. After making the attacker aware he was coming. While stating he was feeling vulnerable. It doesn't add up.

The fact that he was at a disadvantage with not having his prosthetic legs on meant, to him, that he had to overcome that disadvantage by arming himself to confront and neutralise the threat in order to protect him and his girlfriend.

Quoting cmf (Reply 151):
Per the prosecuter (same link as above)
"But even if Pistorius had thought she was a burglar, Nel said, this was still premeditated murder. "If I arm myself, walk a distance and murder a person, that is premeditated," he said. "The door is closed. There is no doubt. I walk seven metres and I kill." Firing four shots into the door of a tiny room could not have been intended simply to scare someone, he suggested."

I suspect the prosecutor is aware how self defense is defined in South Africa.

Yes he would. But then again, so would the defence barrister. I've found a few quotes from the summary of the first day of bail hearing:

Quote:
on the state's version, every time someone picks up a firearm it is planned - that's not premeditated.
Quote:
Roux says will put forward case after case where husbands shot wives through doors, where fathers shot children through doors, thinking they were burglars.
Quote:
Roux says it is "the cold and unfortunate facts" that Pistorius shot Steenkamp through the door. "Does he says the reasonable inference is that he knew it was Reeva behind that door? If that's the state's case please tell us."

Roux says there are "so many" murders in security complexes, places that given you "a false sense of security".

Roux: "His case is she was shot through the bathroom door. Why would you then break open the door?"

Roux suggests that Pistorius broke down the door to get to Reeva, to help her, not harm her.

Roux says every day people take refuge in toilets when they break into houses.

The quotes immediately above are especially important because it shows that this isn't an isolated incident, and the mere fact of Pistorius living in a secured, gated compound does not necessarily make it any less likely that there would be a burglar in his house wanting to do harm to him and his girlfriend. I contend that it is reasonable in the circumstances for him to believe that there was in fact a burglar in his house, and that he fired in self defence and not premeditation.

Quote:
There's no reason to think the broken door suggests guilt, Roux says. Pistorius shot first, then broke it to discover his mistake, Roux says.

Roux: "All we know is that she locked the bathroom door and he shot, thinking she was a burglar."

This was never, ever a premeditated murder, he says.

What is there in the state's case to say he didn't mistake her for a burglar, Roux asks.

The state cannot prove that Pistorius did actually know Steenkamp was in the toilet at the time.

Quote:
• Defence lawyer Barry Roux argued that this was not premeditated murder. “This was not even murder,” he told the court. He said Pistorius thought Steenkamp was a burglar, and asked how the state knew Pistorius was aware that it was Steenkamp behind the door. He said he would lay out case after case in which husbands shot wives and fathers shot children through doors thinking they were burglars. And he suggested that Pistorius broke down the door afterwards to help Steenkamp. Roux said Pistorius would set out his own version of events, but not yet. But he suggested that Pistorius did not accept that he put on his prosthetic legs to get up and walk to the toilet to shoot Steenkamp, and asked rhetorically if the state had a witness who saw Pistorius do that. Roux told magistrate Desmond Nair that he did not have the facts in front of him to call this a “schedule six” crime.

There is also quotes from statements made by friends of the couple who have all described the couple as being madly in love with each other, which further dispels the notion that there was any animosity between them to the extent that Pistorius would knowingly and intentionally kill her.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 153, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
The fact of his having to close the balcony door after getting the fan does not automatically mean that it was left open in the first place.

That isn't what is said. It clearly state he was asleep and then went up to close the door, and get the fan.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
Even if it were open, I do not believe the case pivots on this point.

It certainly doesn't. It pivots around if his story is believable and if the actions he took are reasonable as self defense. This is just one of the inconsistencies in his story.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
You're not Oscar Pistorius.

Are you?

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
The fact that he was at a disadvantage with not having his prosthetic legs on meant, to him, that he had to overcome that disadvantage by arming himself to confront and neutralise the threat in order to protect him and his girlfriend.

That is what he wants you to believe.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
I contend that it is reasonable in the circumstances for him to believe that there was in fact a burglar in his house, and that he fired in self defence and not premeditation.

It isn't reasonable to shoot blindly like that. You need more than just fear and suspicion.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
The state cannot prove that Pistorius did actually know Steenkamp was in the toilet at the time.

So you know every fact of the case?

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 152):
There is also quotes from statements made by friends of the couple who have all described the couple as being madly in love with each other, which further dispels the notion that there was any animosity between them to the extent that Pistorius would knowingly and intentionally kill her.

If you argue like this then how can you ignore all the jealousy issues?


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2597 posts, RR: 5
Reply 154, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2395 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
That isn't what is said. It clearly state he was asleep and then went up to close the door, and get the fan.

It still does not necessarily mean that the door was left open before he went to get the fan. But that is truly not important.

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
It pivots around if his story is believable and if the actions he took are reasonable as self defense. This is just one of the inconsistencies in his story.

Let's assume for the moment that the balcony door was left open. It's a secured compound, so it's reasonable to believe that there may be patrols along the roads during the night. The balcony faces the road, so it may make it easier for a burglar to get in, but it's also easier for him to get caught. The bathroom has a window to the side of the house, where there is plenty more cover. There is also a ladder which contractors had left outside. Pistorius' affidavit doesn't mention where exactly the ladder is outside, but there's no reason to suggest that it was in front of the balcony so that anybody could climb up. It was perhaps outside the bathroom window instead. The risk of the burglar entering the house through the bathroom window, therefore, is considerably higher than entering through the balcony.

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
That is what he wants you to believe.

Granted, it's a case theory of mine, but it's no less valid than what the prosecution, and many of you here, have put forward. The point I'm making is not to try and prove Pistorius did not kill his girlfriend. He did, and he has admitted as much. But I believe that there is reasonable doubt as to his intention at the time.

If the prosecution wants to have him convicted for premeditated murder, they need to prove that Pistorius planned and intended to kill her. If I am to assume that what has been reported in the media is the complete account of the evidence presented, then they have, as yet, presented no evidence other than speculation and conjecture that he did so. The fact that he shot through the door, and allegedly put on his prosthetic legs and walked to the bathroom door to do so, does not prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt, nor does it prove that Pistorius knew Steenkamp was in the toilet. More importantly, it does not disprove the defence's burglar theory, that Pistorius truly believed there was a burglar in the house and that he needed to take action to prevent harm being done to him and/or his girlfriend.

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
You need more than just fear and suspicion.

Yes, the accused has to believe that the use of force and the degree of force used was both reasonable and necessary, and that such use of force and the degree of force used is objectively reasonable in the circumstances as the accused believed it to be, regardless of the fact that what actually transpired was different from what he reasonably thought was the case at the time of the alleged crime. Or in simple language, to put yourself in his shoes without the benefit of hindsight. I see a lot of people here using hindsight - the fact that there was in fact no burglar - to dismiss his testimony as lies. I don't care whether you believe his theory or not, as it's irrelevant to the question of self defence.

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
So you know every fact of the case?

No. I should probably re-word that to say "has not proven" instead of "cannot prove".

Then again, neither do the people here calling for his head know every fact of this case, yet seem so adamant that Pistorius should be locked up with the keys thrown away. Hmm ...

Quoting cmf (Reply 153):
If you argue like this then how can you ignore all the jealousy issues?

The police have evidence from witnesses who heard a couple arguing. Those witnesses happen to live 600 metres away and could not identify the voices as belonging to Pistorius and Steenkamp. It would appear that they have very little to go on from that angle.



Boeing 777 fanboy
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 155, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 154):
in the circumstances as the accused believed it to be

Self defense doesn't give you the right to fire at shadows. What he did was reckless. Even if you think there is a burglar locked in the bathroom you do not have the right to fire blindly in there. For the very reason we see here, if we believe his story is true.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 154):
Then again, neither do the people here calling for his head know every fact of this case

I'm only using the facts that have been presented. I'm certainly open to change my mind as more comes to day.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 154):
yet seem so adamant that Pistorius should be locked up with the keys thrown away. Hmm ...

We have not discussed what the proper sentence is so don't try to attach any such suggestion to me.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 154):
The police have evidence from witnesses who heard a couple arguing. Those witnesses happen to live 600 metres away and could not identify the voices as belonging to Pistorius and Steenkamp. It would appear that they have very little to go on from that angle.

That isn't the sum of the jealousy argument, is it.