Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

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:
WileyRoadRunner · 19/02/2013 15:53

Is it irrespective mrsrochester in the eyes of SA law? I don't know, am sure that someone here must though?

If it turns out the judge believes he meant o shoot at an intruder nd the result was death how will he be dealt with. Sorry if this has already been covered.

The tide seems to be turning in America and even recently the UK where it seems to be more acceptable to shoot when defending your home. The defence inferred it was not uncommon for loved ones to be accidentally killed by gunshots through closed doors - what sentence to these people receive?

onlymeee · 19/02/2013 15:57

"I don't know how credible it is that a DV situation could have been ongoing and so major a part of the relationship after only 2 months."

It doesn't need to have been 'ongoing' or a 'major part of the relationship'. All it takes is a sudden outburst of rage.

BeCool · 19/02/2013 16:09

onlymeee yes of course.

Montpellier · 19/02/2013 16:26

Hmmm I see that he's using total stupidity as his defence. Somehow I doubt that he was having a oneway conversation with a bathroom door that made him need to put bullet holes through it. His place must be covered in bullet holes. Don't grant him bail, he's clearly a menace to society.

applepieinthesky · 19/02/2013 16:30

rouge it doesn't matter whether he shows regret after or not. That wouldn't change the fact that it was premeditated.

EllieArroway · 19/02/2013 16:43

I think his defence is ridiculous.

He kept a gun under the bed. So, he goes to the balcony, hears a noise, thinks there's a intruder in the bathroom and shoots through the door.

This might be vaguely believable if it weren't for the fact that he'd have to go to the bed to retrieve the gun before he could shoot it - and would see that Reeva wasn't there.

This does not look good for him at all.

msrisotto · 19/02/2013 16:44

I'm not sure it matters what he admits either because either way, he shot to kill or severely maim - through a door he couldn't have known which would happen - premeditated no matter who the victim was? The whole defense of protecting your home against intruders doesn't really hold water when the 'intruder' is behind a door does it?

RougePygmy · 19/02/2013 16:48

Yes applepieinthesky.....so, the only defence then is, he thought it was an intruder, and meant to shoot to scare them away...

The fact that it turns out to have been Reeva adds an extra layer of horror to it.

So the defence will be arguing he thought it was an intruder and meant to scare them away.

Whereas the prosecution can argue, well, he may well have thought it was an intruder but he had intent to kill "someone".

So, he can still be found guilty for pre meditated murder, even if it is found that he had no intention to shoot Reeva herself? Would that be right then.

Also, I wonder, if he is found guilty, if there would be an difference in sentencing, if he is found to have meant to kill Reeva, or had the intention of killing an intruder?

So far his defence seems to be concentrating on the fact that he thought there was an intruder, but so far, no mention of what his intentions were to an "intruder" when he picked up the gun.

So, his defence about if he meant to actually shoot Reeva is pretty much irrelevant then? It is all about, at the point he picked up the gun, did he do it with the intention of shooting to kill.

wannaBe · 19/02/2013 16:50

the only problem with the DV argument though is that there doesn't actually appear to be a history of DV. In fact former girlfriend has come out and said that they were together for five years and he was never violent towards her - ever. That doesn't tie in with the notion of a violent man who eventually killed his partner.

"Why wouldn't he be charged with murder?" Because if it was an intruder it could be argued that he was defending himself. People are allowed to own guns in SA for a number of reasons - self defense is one of them.

I grew up in Africa (zambia, Botswana, South Africa, Namibia) and the unwritten understanding is that if someone breaks into your house then you aim to shoot them dead. The unwritten rule is also that if you shoot an intruder on your own property then you will not face prosecution, and therefore it is widely stated that if you shoot someone as they are leaving your property, you bring the body back on to your property so as to avoid getting into trouble.

wannaBe · 19/02/2013 16:53

just to add, I don't actually know anyone who has ever shot a burglar though.

msrisotto · 19/02/2013 16:55

I take it back, shooting a robber isn't necessarily murder according to this article
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/9871195/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-charge-South-African-self-defence-law.html

EllieArroway · 19/02/2013 16:59

wannaBe - But the SA police quite clearly said that they'd been called out to incidents of a "domestic nature" before - some quite recently. OK, they didn't specifically say DV, but I think there's little doubt that that's what they were alluding to.

And, while one of his girlfriends said that he was never violent, another one is saying something else entirely. So, I think it's a mistake to say that there appears to be no history of it - at the moment, it appears that there may well have been.

I think the cricket bat may be his undoing. If it's found that he hit her with it (and some reports say that her skull was crushed) then his defence will fall apart utterly.

Poor Reeve. Her last moments must have been utterly terrifying.

EllieArroway · 19/02/2013 16:59

Reeva Sorry for the typo.

perceptionreality · 19/02/2013 17:05

This case particularly upsets me and I can't even put my finger on what it is that makes it stand out from other bad news but it gets me every time.

applepieinthesky · 19/02/2013 17:10

I don't know about sentencing but looks like the prosecution are out to get him. I'm guessing they will try to build a picture of DV. Failing that they will argue that by firing four shots into a 1.4m x 1.4m room he fully intended to kill whoever was behind the door. Do you fire four shots just to scare someone? I'm not sure you would.

DizzyHoneyBee · 19/02/2013 17:17

If he shot to scare somebody, why not one shot? I'm in agreement with applepie on that one.
I feel for Reeva, if OP (Oscar, not the OP!) did shoot her and was violent towards her then that is even more awful since she has apparently said to have experienced DV in a previous relationship. Terrible once, even worse twice if that is what happened.

TheCraicDealer · 19/02/2013 17:17

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but does "incidents of a domestic nature" cover more than just DV? Does it also mean, like playing music too loud or having mad parties which wind your neighbours up?

The locked bathroom door sort of makes sense- if he woke up suddenly, hearing a noise and moving for a weapon, she may have stirred too. Hearing him check the house may have made her think to hide in case it was an intruder. In which case the bathroom with its lockable door would've been pretty ideal for hiding until the coast was clear. Hearing him shout, probably panicked and through a door and over a corridor, may have made her unsure of who it was, so cautiously she might have decided to wait to see who it was before answering.

If he's used to sleeping on his own and panicked, there's a chance he just didn't think to check where she was before investigating the noise.

Ah dear. It's all just speculation. Either way he's killed her and he has to love with that.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/02/2013 17:19

I just can't get past the idea that, in a house containing only two people, it didn't occur to him (allegedly) that the person using the bathroom in the small hours was the house-guest. He's either a liar or a moron...

Maryz · 19/02/2013 17:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

applepieinthesky · 19/02/2013 17:21

I'm the same perception. Whatever happened that night I think it's all terribly sad. All those lives destroyed in the blink of an eye.

Maryz · 19/02/2013 17:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BigAudioDynamite · 19/02/2013 17:22

apple I think it is the prosecutions job to 'get him'?

vivizone · 19/02/2013 17:23

the only problem with the DV argument though is that there doesn't actually appear to be a history of DV. In fact former girlfriend has come out and said that they were together for five years and he was never violent towards her - ever. That doesn't tie in with the notion of a violent man who eventually killed his partner.

Be careful re these types of reports. They could be getting paid serious bucks to spin stories that he was not abusive.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/02/2013 17:23

"incidents of a domestic nature"

There was a past incident in September 2009 where he spent a night in the cells accused of assaulting (intent to cause GBH) a 19 year-old female guest at a house party.

applepieinthesky · 19/02/2013 17:24

Yes I know Big but I mean even if he didn't believe it was Reeva it looks like he could be screwed.