Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Oscar pistorius

999 replies

spiderbabymum · 14/02/2013 07:11

Heard the news this am

I'm just Devastated for him and his family and partners family

OP posts:
Animation · 21/02/2013 15:42

"For all we know, they could have been awake and arguing. She may have threatened to leave, he loses his temper, starts threatening her, she runs into the loo in fear, locks herself in and he shoots her through the door in a violent rage."

This senario makes more sense to me. And why lock yourself in a toilet? Is it usual to actually lock yourself in when you need to go in the night?

lougle · 21/02/2013 15:46

"Schnarkle - I can't believe the callous disregard some people seem to have toward the violent death of a young woman. It's sickening."

It's nothing to do with being callous.

This case hinges on the events before death, because his whole defence is that until the moment he saw the bed was empty, it wasn't Reeva in there. Only at the point that the threat was reduced/gone, did he notice that the bed was empty, break down the door, and find Reeva.

Now, whether that stands up to trial is one thing. But you can't sensibly evaluate his defence if you think 'poor Reeva, such a violent death' along side it. You have to try and view it from the context of his defence, which was 'pitch black, no prosthetics, intruder (feared) present, probably armed, no way to get out of bedroom, must stop them, toilet door shut...shoot. Realise bed is empty -crashing realisation - could be Reeva. Cricket bat to door - find Reeva'

Andro · 21/02/2013 15:49

In the context of SA crime rates, that ^^ is an entirely plausible thought/action process (unfortunately).

runningforthebusinheels · 21/02/2013 15:50

until the moment he saw the bed was empty, it wasn't Reeva in there. Only at the point that the threat was reduced/gone, did he notice that the bed was empty, break down the door, and find Reeva.

You don't know that - he could be telling a pack of lies.

Bue · 21/02/2013 15:52

Even if his side is true, the fact is that no partner is safe in his home, that she is at risk of being pumped full of bullets merely for moving around the house. It's a terrifying prospect and just another reminder of how women are vulnerable to violence from intimate partners.

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 15:52

And why lock yourself in a toilet? Is it usual to actually lock yourself in when you need to go in the night?

Because your boyfriend is shouting that there is someone in the house.

If I was Reeva in living in South African society I would push the lock and hide.
Her bladder was apparently empty (trial will confirm/deny this) which is highly unusual for 3am, unless of course you had just been to toilet.

lougle · 21/02/2013 15:52

Which is why I said "because his whole defence is that"

lougle · 21/02/2013 15:53

I'm not saying it is true. I'm saying that to evaluate his defence, you have to view it in the context of his defence.

runningforthebusinheels · 21/02/2013 15:54

Why? What if his defence is one big lie?

BeCool · 21/02/2013 15:55

she had not been asalted physically in any way, the only harm to her was the gunshot wounds
Confused - do you see what you actually said there?

re the empty bladder, of course they could just have easily been arguing, she needed to go to the toilet and went, locking the door as she was PO'ed or even fearful, or just wanted some peace, and then he shot her through the door. The empty bladder tells us nothing.

lougle · 21/02/2013 15:55

Because the only way to discredit something is to thorougly evaluate it, which you can't do if you won't consider every detail of it.

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 15:57

I think some people will never believe Pistorius even if he is cleared using forensics and a full trial. That's clear from this thread.

I currently think his version is much more viable than that presented by the prosecution. Whether that can be backed up during trial remains to be seen.

If the evidence says he's a liar then he will rightly serve a long time in prison.

I don't know what will happen if he is found innocent of pre meditated murder as he still killed Reeva? I presume there is a string of precedent cases in SA where people who kill loved ones under the impression they are an intruder do not serve any time.

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 16:01

The bottom line is will his story bring unreasonable doubt to the prosecutions version that he is an abusive murdering piece of shit?

It probably will.

No judge will sentence Oscar Pistorius to serve 25+ years in Pretoria prison without being 100% sure he premeditated killing Reeva.

runningforthebusinheels · 21/02/2013 16:20

I think some people will never believe Pistorius even if he is cleared using forensics and a full trial. That's clear from this thread.

Possibly true - I'm probably one of them. Reason is that a woman was brutally shot and killed. And Oscar Pistorius admits he pulled the trigger.

diddl · 21/02/2013 16:21

I suppose I don´t think that "thinking" she was still in bed is enough.

He came in from the balcony, asked her to call the police, was getting his gun-& there was nothing from her-no acknowledgement, no movement to get to a phone.

And why had he left the bathroom window open if he is so worried about intruders-let alone that there were also ladders outside!

Bluegrass · 21/02/2013 16:29

Thing is Wiley, even if I believe everything he says I still think he should be put in prison for rather a long time.

I have a friend who lived in Jo'burg for many years and loved it there. Said you need to keep your wits about you on the street in some places but they certainly didn't live in constant fear, feel the need to own a gun or shoot first and ask questions later every time they had a guest over and heard the toilet flush.

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 16:30

Possibly true - I'm probably one of them. Reason is that a woman was brutally shot and killed. And Oscar Pistorius admits he pulled the trigger.

But (and it is a big BUT) if he is telling the truth running do you really think that any true justice would come from throwing him into Pretoria prison where able bodies men are raped and infected with HIV on purpose?

Reeva's family said they have no hate in their hearts for OP. I think you would have to hate someone an awful lot to throw that on top of living with what he has already done.

Bluegrass · 21/02/2013 16:37

I'm not sure you can really argue that someone who has committed an imprisonable offence shouldn't go to prison purely on the basis that the prisons are bad places and anyway he is too famous.

In any event I'm sure if he gets a custodial sentence they could sort out a safer place for him to go or keep him separated from the prison's general population.

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 16:46

But is it an imprisonable offence in SA? The defence already say that they have a huge number of recent cases where loved ones have been killed, even through closed doors, which have not resulted in custodial sentences.

I genuinely don't know btw - am curious whether custodial sentences are the norm in that situation?

I was also wondering, in the UK doesn't the coroner state whether something is murder/accidental death/ natural etc. what happens in a case like this here or in SA? Do they wait for the trial to do an inquest or do they say death by gunshot wound rather than murder?

YellowFlyingPineapple · 21/02/2013 16:48

I am presuming that a lot of the posters on here who are casting doubt on OP version of events that we know of thus far have never experienced life in SA or indeed Africa outside of a trip to the Kruger or the V&A Waterfront at the very most.

Let me tell you some facts because your naivety is really starting to really P. me off:

people tend to drive cars which lock the minute the engine starts so they cannot be opened from the outside. When stopping at robots windows are up and again no stopping if their is an accident.

If there is a car accident people are advised not to step out of their car to politely exchange insurance details but instead to drive to a police station and report it there instead because there is a high chance robbery is a motive.

People live a fortified life behind high walls which have razor wire on the top or are electrified. Walls of houses which face out onto roads tend not to have windows and access is through a single metal or strong door only allowed once identity of person is known. The windows have burglar bars on them so that people can't climb in, internally houses tend to have lockable internal doors which means that they can lock themselves within certain areas of the house i.e metal door at the top of the stairs, so when they are asleep behind another locked door if somebody does break into their house they have a chance to call their Armed Response provider. Yes you need to pay to be linked to a system so when you press a panic button or make a phone, people armed with guns that will injure people or kill them come and try to stop this intruder who is 9/10 time - armed and high on Tic and quite happy to destroy your family to get enough money to feed his miserable addiction to alcohol and drugs. This is not a choice most insurers insist on it. Oh yes people also have big snarly dogs which are not pets but guard dogs in a vain attempt to scare people off.

If they are too scared of living in such a fortified place they have the alternative of living on a Secure Estate, like OP and providing they have enough money to get a bond, buy somewhere and pay the very high associated Homeowners costs they to can sleep better in their bed at night, as long as the security staff who actually police who goes in and out of these secure complexes have not got hacked off with seeing the life some people have before returning to their own shack and have taken a bribe to let some Tic-head through the gates who then produces a gun to the side of the sleeping homeowners head. So yes, even living on a secure estate is not a guarantee that you will go to sleep and wake the following morning. So a sound in the night can make you very jumpy, assume the worst and act in a manner that would not be seen in leafy Berkshire for example.

Going out to restaurants - you don't just walk in through the door and confirm your reservation but ring the bell and wait to be buzzed in through a secure locked-at-all-times door. No strolling down by the Waterfront on a summers evening after a few drinks or dinner because there is a very high chance you get robbed at best. So a braai at home or at another secure complex becomes normal.

Shall I go on? put the facts into a SA context it is the most amazing country in the world, fact IMO, however is has a horrific problem with violent crime. Don't condemn OP because what you would do in your bedroom in leafy Berkshire at 3am is not reach for you gun and shot to protect.

runningforthebusinheels · 21/02/2013 16:50

Thing is - and this has been pointed out by the Prosecution lawyer today - the decent one not the bumbling police investigator on a murder charge the point is premeditation. He went and got the gun with an intention to kill - that is premeditation - whether he knew it was Reeva in the bathroom or not. Personally, I just don't believe that a man would shoot through a door without at least laying eyes on his gf first to check it wasn't her! But maybe that's just me.

Secondly, even if his story is 100% true - then his reckless actions with a firearm have caused the death of a young woman who was his gf and houseguest. People capable of that should not have either houseguests or firearms. At the very least, his negligent actions on the night, of not verifying where Reeva was before shooting through a closed door, must constitute manslaughter (or whatever the SA equivalent is).

Thirdly, I find his story so incredulous that I think there is a significant chance that he has invented a story which is a pack of lies, but that fit in with (and explain) the scene that the police arrived at. We only have his word for what happened- and my God he'll probably say anything to stay out of that Pretorian jail.

As far as my 'callous' remark is concerned - I do think it's callous that friends of his leave the courtroom smiling and saying 'that was a good day' when a woman is lying dead. They should show a smidgeon of respect, at least in public.

Xenia · 21/02/2013 16:53

Awful place.

His version sounds the best at present. The police have made a right mess of things so far, even tramping through the evidence.

Might well be self defence. If a woman on here thought a burglar was in their house and shot and killed their child or husband don't we think self defence would ever apply? Don't we believe accidents sometimes happen?

BeCool · 21/02/2013 16:58

do you really think that any true justice would come from throwing him into Pretoria prison where able bodies men are raped and infected with HIV on purpose?

Well as much 'true justice' as anyone else convicted of a crime and sent to prison in SA receives. It is a shocking state of affairs - but why should he be treated any different to other SA citizens? Because he ran at the Olympics?

lougle · 21/02/2013 16:59

I think it would. listening to my SA friend

WileyRoadRunner · 21/02/2013 17:00

No becool I have already talked about precedent aaaaargh!

Why should he when others haven't? Because he ran at the Olympics Wink?