Oscar Pistorius shoot's girlfriend dead

reply to post by namine




I'm with Power_semi on this one

I suggested in a previous post that things were being put in position for him to get off on a

mistaken? identity verdtct??

reply to post by eletheia


Sure, what you described does happen, but what evidence is there to suggest that was the case for their relationship? Because he got angry when he lost a race? Up to this point, we know she'd never reported any violence before, her family hasn't mentioned any violence, her friends haven't mentioned any violence, his friends and family haven't mentioned any violence either. None of his ex girlfriends have reported any violence, only the opposite in fact. Is it really probable that no one close to either him or her has known about any kind of abuse in their relationship, but you do?

Just because it's possible this incident might've been the first instance of violence, doesn't make it probable when his track record hasn't suggested anything of the sort. Not even the crime scene suggested a physical confrontation. So I'm not sure where this conjecture has found its legs for you -- maybe you know something I haven't come across yet. I dunno all the facts either. I don't see any credible evidence that he was physically abusive though. I'm just saying, maybe we should look at what the evidence does suggest and not assume something it doesn't.

reply to post by eletheia


Well, are you suggesting someone who contaminated the crime scene, neglected to investigate different avenues of possibility, contradicted his own testimony during the hearing, admitted to jumping to conclusions without verifying information or even testing evidence for that matter, that someone like that should remain on a high profile case such as this?

Personally, I'd be more suspicious if they let him stay.

EDIT: And also keep in mind you are agreeing with someone who thinks the incident happened at her house, not his.

Originally posted by namine
For anyone who is interested, you can find a summary of today's proceedings here.

Nice comprehensive article, thanks!



A pic of him in the dock, almost surreal.

This isn't the trial, only a bail hearing, and cell phone records have not yet been provided to the court. Sloppy perhaps, but only a delay, even if Oscar deleted messages they'll still be on the servers. They'll find out what OP found out that night.
The whole urine thing makes me uncomfortable, partly because i know little about it, but it seems .... like a distraction of sorts by the defense.
Following twitter rumours from beforehand, it seems that their relationship was under a lot of pressure, both rumoured to have had interested parties. If she was being unfaithful, would that make him snap?

Lights in the house were on and shouting was heard well past midnight, 1h30 cops/security was there, 2h30 there was still shouting. In these fancy estates the houses are huge, but very little space between them, you would hear if your neighbours were screaming at each other with an open patio door.

Power_semi: You're wrong. By his own account he's guilty of murder, the only question is to what extent he was criminal in his actions.

This is why the state is taking the bail so seriously, he has a house in italy, funds, and a very good reason for not spending the next 20 years in prison. Armed self defense is very much out of favour with the courts here.

reply to post by namine




Its early days and its only the trial to see if he gets bail. All we are doing is inference

and guesswork....

I personally think if he gets bail he will do a 'runner'

The evidence that is coming out on many things changes by the day. ie. I had read the charge

against the investigating officer was from 2009? and today I read it was from 2011? Nice

timing to throw some 'red herrings' around??


I'm going to wait and see what new evidence comes up However if he gets bail I think

it will be another case like that of Lord Lucan, he was not known for being violent either

however he did murder the 'nanny' mistaking? her for the 'wife' :puz

Originally posted by eletheia

The evidence that is coming out on many things changes by the day. ie. I had read the charge

against the investigating officer was from 2009? and today I read it was from 2011? Nice

timing to throw some 'red herrings' around??

About that. A SAPS presser at 16h00 Phiyega stated that the were only informed yesterday, and there was no way IO could have been aware of it. Plus the date bungle. The story was broken by Alexei Alisev on eNCA last night.

Regardless he is up for manslaughter. He will still go to jail and I think, it is unlikely he will get bail.

Just my thoughts.

reply to post by harryhaller


Nice pic.

And you're right, it's still only the bail hearing, more evidence to come to light. Haven't heard anything about the twitter rumours being verified, and the defence was trying to dismiss the neighbour's account due to the distance between their house and Pistorius's; the defence attorny claimed the witness lived too far away to be sure if the commotion she heard was coming from Pistorius home, but funny thing was, he claimed the shouting she heard was from Pistorius screaming about the intruder. So he actually admits it would've been possible for her to hear them.

Interesting to see where everything goes. The bail decision is expected to be made shortly.

Live audio stream, current:

www.youtube.com... 3afa6770c6653f6e1f1c58ba

Jeez, I'm listening to this LIVE on BBC News. Crickey, does this magistrate like to go on or what? I know he's being thorough, but there are parts of it that have been repeated word for word multiple times.

Just get to the verdict on bail already!

Originally posted by magma
Regardless he is up for manslaughter. He will still go to jail and I think, it is unlikely he will get bail.

Just my thoughts.

Pretty sure he's going to get bail, bt the way that this magistrate is going we may not find out for another couple of weeks. This guy loves the sound of his own voice.


EDIT: Sounds like he's getting close to it now. For a second there I thought he was actually going to say it, but no..off he goes again on another tangent.

EDIT 2: Finally!

It's official. Bail granted.

Summary
Magistrate Desmond Nair has granted bail to Oscar Pistorius. These were the judge’s main reasons:


• He did not think Pistorius was a flight risk.

• He did not think the prosecution had shown that Pistorius had a propensity for violence.

• He did not think the prosecution had shown their would be public outrage if he were released on bail.

• He did not think the prosecution’s case was so strong that Pistorius’s only reasonable reaction were he released would be to flee.


But he also pointed out holes in Pistorius’s story which may prove important when the case comes to trial:


• Why did he not ascertain Steenkamp's wherabouts?

• Why did he not verify who was in the toilet?

• Why did Steenkamp not scream back from the toilet?

• Why did the deceased and the accused not escape through the bedroom door rather than venture into the toilet?

• Why would the accused venture into danger knowing the intruder was in the toilet, leaving himself open to attack? He returned to the dangerous area. What if the intruder was waiting for him?


And he said he had difficulty with the defence's version of why the accused slept on the other side of the bed from usual that night.

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by glen200376

Please,could you explain what you mean,i honestly dont understand?

Well - I was wrong. Shame really as it seems there is a strong support on this thread for a murderer. It will be amazing if he gets off completely. Which now may seem possible. Oh well, it is the innocent people who pay the price for others wrongdoing's.

reply to post by magma


I doubt he will get off completely. It's just bail. I mean, he still went out there and deliberately killed someone. The prosecution started off on the wrong foot, but I can't see them making a hash of the trial too. Although, they may have to reduce their charge to culpable homicide for a better shot at getting a conviction. All this assuming he doesn't off himself before the trial begins.

I don't think he'll do a runner, I think he may top himself though.

Either way, if he didn't mean it... he STILL killed the love of his life, his future is ruined, her family will hate him, he may never recover from something like this and he will have the haunting memories from that night replaying over and over again.

If he did mean it, he may well just end it all rather than face trial... he may crack in a trial, the truth may out... all of his dirty laundry aired in public and even if he gets off...people always suspecting, always shooting him looks, friends, fellow athletes always wary of him.


It's a really messed up case for sure and I don't usually follow celeb cases and these kinds of things, but this one really intrigues me.

I wonder where it'll end up.


As the judge said and as I thought to myself.

Why not shout through the bathroom door "I have a gun, who are you? I'm going to shoot"

Why not go back to the bedroom (just 7 metres away) and check if it is your wife?

Too strange man...

Seems like he was extremely reckless and careless.


We'll see though.

Hypothetical situation for all of you on this thread Interested on your views of the

scenario


You're in bed asleep with your girlfriend. Two mobile phones will be either on bedside

table chest or dressing table? Most likely bedside table?

You get up to close the balcony door and hear a noise in the toilet, so you go for your gun

which I believe is under your bed?? You're concerned for your girlfriend? wouldn't you scan

the bed to see if she is OK? or indeed whether she is still in it.

You have shouted to her to ring the police, would she not also have acknowledged you with

a reply:- yes, got it, will do, be careful or some such thing

Now you've got your gun and are looking straight at the toilet door (whoever is inside is

not able to go any where even if they had a weapon) you have the advantage.

Would you not say I have a gun and will use it?

The police will be here shortly?

Come out with your hands up?

It seems to me that the girl friend was mute during the whole episode (which I find highly

unlikely otherwise she would have said something In reply to him.

BOTOM LINE He was in the advantageous position and even if there was an intruder

I think he majority of people would have given them the opportunity of coming out and not

firing blindly through a door??

reply to post by magma

Well,South Africans are used to being the victims of home invasions-we live behind security doors,burglar bars,with at least one watchdog(whom we often,as in my case,keep inside to stop them being poisoned with Aldicarb-and for those of us who can afford it-high priced security systems and pay a monthly fee to an armed response response company.Okay well i dont live like that-but most South Africans in the cities and larger towns do.

That was why,the moment the thread came out here-it did'nt seem so unfeasible that he could think it was a burglar-like i said,it tragically happened in my province,not far from us,when a dad shot his daughter under these circumstances.I don't think its a matter of support for a murderer-if he is guilty of premeditated murder-as its beginning to seem-he will get no support from me.
Please dont assume those who supported him at the start of the thread,are coldhearted supporters of a murderer-when the story broke there were very few facts-and if you're not South African,you have no idea how deeply living in constant danger has affected the national psyche.

reply to post by glen200376

Still waiting for an explanation as to what on earth race has to do with this?