Oscar Pistorius trial

[JillJ72]

Starting a new thread as as was pointed out on the other thread, it is not an appropriate place to "talk" and continue to "promote" a really poor excuse for a "joke".

Yesterday's post-mortem evidence was awful; if ever there's a way to get across just how unglamorous guns are, post-mortem evidence is a painfully honest way of doing so.

I listened to the trial live today. My main impression? That Darren Fresco consulted with legal experts to ensure his affidavit did not incriminate him, yet left room for questions that weren't explicitly answered. If he'd paid for that input from legal experts, they didn't sew it up nicely and tightly. I got the impression he was a bit of an unwilling witness really, and had problems remembering some things, yet was very insistent on others. Some good journo feeds on twitter that give different flavours and interpretations.

I'll be honest. I hope this was as OP said, an appalling mistake. But equally so many questions, the constant "whys". And so I am sitting on the fence, listening to argument and counter-argument, and waiting for the judge's final decision.

Never have been in a court of law before, are proceedings usually this long, slow, going round in circles, playing cat and mouse?

"Angel, please don't say a thing to anyone. Darren told everyone it was his fault." This message from the athlete was most likely referring to the incident at the Tasha's restaurant where Pistorius accidentally discharged a firearm. His friend, Darren Fresco told management he had discharged the gun because Pistorius had asked us to.

The pair were arguing over Pistorius' serial dating, and how when she brought up an incident where she smoked marijuana with an ex-boyfriend, he had gotten upset.

"I'm scared of you sometimes. Of how you snap at me and react to me," she wrote.

She also defended herself from Pistorius' suggestion she had been flirting with a friend at a party, and how she wouldn't because it was her friend's husband.

"We are living in a double standards relationship," she wrote.

"I do everything to make you happy, you do everything to throw tantrums," she continued.

She revealed that Pistorius had scolded her for chewing gum and touching his neck.

"I am the girl who let go for you, even when I was scared out of my mind. I'm the girl who loves you."

But Pistorius sent back a lengthy apology. "I want to talk to you and sort this out. I don't want to have anything less than amazing for you and I," he wrote.

Another argument was also read to the court where Pistorius apologised for getting upset with Steenkamp for talking to another man.

He then also apologised for driving too fast after leaving the event, saying he was upset and hungry.

However, Moller also told the court that 90 percent of the conversations were "loving".

this is from the Independent.

and this one.

I found those text messages quite scary, they were only in the first few months of their relationship, actually at anytime in a relationship that would not be acceptable.

I agree they are very disturbing. They paint a picture of an ego out of control, jealousy and controlling tendencies.

Add this to being trigger happy - it's not looking good.

Abusive men follow a script of humiliation, jealousy and control. She'd probably finally had enough and wanted out. Poor Reeva.

Oscar apologists and minimisers are either naive & lucky they've never had to experience someone like this - or they still think domestic violence is the woman's fault too.

It really doesn't make a difference but who pursued who?

Sounds to me like OP had issues. An intense man, driven, in the public eye, worries about what people think of him whilst giving an air of arrogance and can't touch me.

Sounds also like Reeva had issues. Intense, driven, wanting to please him.

Context though. If put in context of all the other messages, what's going on at the time, would it seem ok?

My feeling is no. And I am no expert and I am in a balanced relationship, I have not been subjected to DV. I think those messages shout insecurity, a desire to please, too much intensity too soon.

He does not come across well at all in those texts. I see he did manage some actual wet tears today. I'm swinging towards him being guilty, as I did want to believe he was a nice guy... but I don't think that now.

They make me feel very uncomfortable. They sound like 100mph and scary rather than happy skipping down the road. Imbalanced, unhealthy.

Abusive men groom - that nice guy image is an act. I've spent a year with a man like Oscar.

Poor Reeva.

This evidence is really ringing alarm bells for me - and I too have been in a relationship with an outwardly nice guy, who was (or at least tried to be) controlling, jealous and aggressive. (PS thanks book for your sweet comment upthread)

That whole "you touched another guys arm at a party and ignored me so now I'm having a tantrum" crap screams anger and jealousy and someone who feels like he has a form of ownership over his P.

I know we're only seeing one side of the messages. .. in a way.. but I've never been & wouldn't be with someone who spoke to me or acted like that.

Perhaps reeva was high maintenance or highly strung? Perhaps she was with him based on his fame? Regardless, it's a sorry mess & sounds like an unhealthy relationship.

He sounds like a toddler who has a tantrum if he can't have his own way. And toddlers shouldn't be given real guns to play with.

Stockhausen - that's a terrible thing to say.

You have shown zero understanding of the complex dynamic of being in am abusive relationship.

Your post reeks of victim blaming, misogyny and believing women are somehow to blame for being subjected to emotional and physical abuse and violence.

I am sure this is not the first. his autobiography talks of a firey relationship with his first girlfriend with lots of screaming matches. Samantha's mum commented , thank god she got away from that man. her ex was concerned only a week or so before and reeva reassured him. Folk at his gym complained about his foul temper.
Non of this proves murder though. he just wasn't always very nice.

He did murder her. He's being tried for pre meditated murder.

All the evidence you mentioned goes a long way to suggest premeditated.

"Perhaps reeva was high maintenance or highly strung? Perhaps she was with him based on his fame?"

let's say (for the sake of argument re the point above) she was - so if that is the case are you then thinking she deserves to be subject to jealous rages? Nasty abuse from her boyfriend? Does she deserve to be 'put in her place'? To be shouted at? to be shot?

Of course not.

And what Sauce says.

A high maintenance, highly strung girlfriend can be very annoying.

A reasonable man would break off the relationship. Not shoot her.

Exactly BeCool

I'm not getting banned from mumsnet for fucking twat face Oscar Pestorious

Wow. The text messages are something else aren't they? "I'm scared of you sometimes" ..... at least we are hearing Reeva's testimony in a way.

You just know we'd be saying LTB if she'd posted a thread about it.

And the sad thing is, maybe she tried - maybe that's what prompted that final night?

Speculation, speculation, I know.

YY and that "I'm scared of you sometimes" message was after 2 months. TWO months!!!

are we only seeing one side of the messages though? they are obtained from Reeva's phone are they not? So whatever OP may ahve deleted on his own phone/s, his message will still be on Reeva's phone unless she deleted them.

I think we are seeing two sides of the messages - at least in the reporting I am reading.

I have a horrible feeling Roux is going to twist things and make Reeva look bad with drug use.
At least the judge is a DV expert.
I don't think Reeva was planning to end the relationship that night. Her gift was photo,s of them and sweets which according to her housmate she had been excitedly putting togetther.
Her jo'burg dad didn't,t like Oscar. Funny how instincts can so often be right.

Roux will have to tread very very carefully re making the victim look bad.