Oscar Pistorius trial part 2

[JillJ72]

To continue from previous thread

I thought a wooden door would take most of the impact of it.

I suppose it depends on the door - and the bullet. I read something early in the trial about whether or not it would lessen the impact of these particular bullets, but obviously it didn't - or not much anyway.

If you think twitter is crazy re Pistorius you can have had no exposure to the utter fucking lunatics that are 'Pistorians'
A more grotesque bunch of sub humans you could not meet.

Contrary to most I though Pistorius wasn't too bad today.
His version seems incredibly unlikely but not impossible at this point

While we're on about grim things on the internet, O.P wasn't exaggerating about Reeva getting lots of hate on twitter. I remember one account in particular (who by the level of detail must have known them both in real life) used to tweet hate at her incessantly, telling her she was desperate, OP wasn't that into her and other nasty things.

In the realms of speculation, upthread it's been said that even if there was an intruder 4 shots = murder. That's a fair point, however in that scenario Reeva would still be alive and presumably very willing to be in support of OP - I imagine the tone of the case would be very different indeed.

Louise - you ask why OP says certain things which don't paint him in a good light, if he is lying (eg. eating early and not going onto the balcony). With the first, surely he would have said that before knowing any pathology results? It would look very suspicious for him to change it after the fact. And I suspect that the cables to the fans don't stretch out to the balcony and he knows that.

Louise The prosecution have presented all their evidence and yet you, and others, still appear uncertain Apart from OP's testimony the defence have yet to present their case which should, obviously, strengthen their case.

I think you have a good point here. At the end of the state's case, I wasn't even sure. It seemed to me that there wasn't very much evidence and certainly nothing substantial. I have a feeling that lots of us on this thread will be wavering towards thinking OP is guilty by the time Nel has finished with him, but will feel differently again when the defence has finished presenting their case.

Yes, the Pistorians.... As overloaded in their support and absolute conviction that Oscar is innocent (he isn't, he knows he isn't - of killing Reeva), as the vitriols are in their vitriol.

I sometimes click on the tweets to see the comments below and I do read things with at how others unleash their words. The interweb is a marvellous invention, but boy does it allow people to voice things we may never otherwise hear in our own circles.

I personally will obviously take the verdict as the correct one. I think the justice system over there seems fair. However, I do think he should go to prison even if he did think it was an intruder. He is too trigger happy and needs to accept he committed an awful crime because he shot 4 bullets into a room where his girlfriend was. He wanted to protect her, yet he killed her.

I just sometimes think he is too intent on saving his skin as opposed to baring his soul and speaking the truth. Even yesterday when Nel asked him if Reeva had called out from the bathroom, he said something like 'if only she had but she didn't' like it was Reeva's fault she'd got herself killed because she didn't shout out. I am trying to be imaprtial, honest guv.. but don't we all on this thread go on gut feeling, radar, bullshit-o-meter etc?

Still baffled. Just a take. This is not a blame Reeva post!

Lots of talk about, implausible, improbable. What I don't get is that Reeva is painted as a completely passive person through the whole thing. What do I know, but her personality seemed that like of an independent, strong, intelligent woman, she certainly gave OP a piece of her mind In emails. Can't believe, she was so in love that she would have put up with anything, or so keen to pursue a celeb profile, that she would continue to go out with him no matter what.

Is it probable and plausible that Reeva saw an argument escalating, and that she was scared of OP, feared for her welfare, saw the argument turning violent, throwing of stuff...felt terrified, thought her life is fatally threatened, and she didn't run from danger. Any evidence that she tried to escape (through the bedroom door)' try and escape by jumping out of the bathroom (window), try to diffuse the situation (by just saying, I need some water, so that she could go down stairs, maybe lights on downstairs, when security patrolled) and then escape. Wouldn't you make a desperate call to someone, send a text to a friend (as you had your phone), make concessions, just to keep your self safe (I'll do anything you want).

Is it not implausible that Reeva apparently did none of these things. I know it's hard to prove if she did/didn't.

That apparently, she went into danger, had her phones, never used them to call for help, never sent a message to her mother, or a friend, never used her able bodied ability to literally outrun Oscar through the bedroom door (while he was on his stumps) , by all accounts she was a very strong character, and yet there appears to be no evidence that she was anything more than absolutely passive(maybe the screams?????) Can't imagine she'd want to protect OP if she really thought her life was in danger.
Reeva's actions also seem a bit improbable. just can't believe, she didn't call or text...maybe there is still more to come from that..

My point. Maybe Reeva didn't see (through an apparently lengthy escalating argument) that OP was on the edge. Could it be that Reeva was passive because there was no aggressor. there was no fight. By all accounts, it appears that they had never had a really bitter fight , as is being alleged. Yes, there were disagreements, that were resolved - if Reeva, had really seen the fury of hell fire that OP unleashed in an argument that night - would she have have been wise enough to leave...ok let's calm down, let's take a breather, grab those car keys and flee....are we to think that Reeva was just as implausible and improbable by going into danger. I know Reeva didn't go into danger per se -OP wrecklessness and possible anger killed her.

can't figure out what on earth could escalate to such a horrible, violent argument. So either intruder argument is actually bizarre but true...... Or Reeva's actions are just as implausible. To lock herself into somewhere with no escape route,when she was close to the bedroom door, it was on her side of the bed...had access to call/text help..who knows

As far as I can see there was gun negligence- is that prison worthy?

I think he should go to prison for murder- intruder or not he still shot to kill.
He's been very desperate to point out he shot by accident and didn't mean to shoot four times. That is v significant for me- as far as his panic/self defence/ desperation that story is so mangled.

He didn't hear Reeva get up because of the fans but heard a window open further away? First he spoke quietly and prepared his gun, then he approached the bathroom despite feeling vulnerable without his legs, then he started screaming and shooting incontrollably... That doesn't make sense to me.
He wasn't in immediate danger and didn't need to shoot.

Of course we will wait for the verdict but based on what I have heard at this trial I don't think he should avoid some kind of jail time. I don't think he will ever admit the truth as to what really happened that night and I do think there is plenty of inconsistencies in his story but I don't think the argument-killing in anger scenario will be proven in court.

MummyMoss that's an interesting post and I get it. Yes I think she came across as a strong woman which is why she called him in texts on his behaviour and argued the toss as to how he made her feel at times. She wasn't passive I don't think.

On the night, would she have had time to text someone? If the whole thing escalated really quickly, would you honestly be able to text or ring someone. Texting or ringing takes concentration and perhaps she needed to just react to what was going on without any diversions. (not saying this was what happened but just my take on it at the moment but I do waver all over the place with all of this..)

anonacfr you've summed it up for me, that's exactly my thoughts.

Apart from just not getting why he didn't check Reeva was there (which has always been the one thing I just can't get past), I don't understand how he didn't hear Reeva go to the bathroom yet he did hear a window open far further away.

Also agree that you can't say you feel vulnerable, yet you walk toward the danger and put yourself in an even more vulnerable position. He says he was trying to protect Reeva, yet he doesn't even know where she is. I would love to know the timescale on this... is it seconds or minutes?

Agree that some of the twitter stuff is incredibly bad, I saw one Bon Reeva for what happened to her and she was apparently violent to OP! As you all know I was a big fan of his, as was my eldest so it's been more difficult to assess the case fairly I think, but I'm properly fence sitting. because I can't decide either way what the truth is. I think the total cock up by the police has jeopardised any fair trial and so far I'm less than impressed with the prosecution witnesses called, it remains to be seen what the defence will pull out of the bag though.

Right I'm off out for the morning.

I agree mummymoss, interesting points :)

However, could she had gone to the loo to calm down or let him cool off after a minor spat? Was she going to have a pee before heading home?

Perhaps they'd had words, but she logically thought a wooden door was enough of a barrier to him... Not thinking he would pull a gun and shoot through the door.

I still think the position of the holes is telling, I.e. around the handle/lock area. I know he was on his stumps, but if you thought a potentially six foot intruder was behind the door coming at you, would you fire there? If it was me, I think I'd spread the shots more.

Also, be under no illusions about these bullets. They are particularly 'nasty' designed to mushroom & explode when they meet a 'moist' target... that means a person or animal. OP bought them, knowing that.

Having seen the layout if the space, I can't believe he advanced towards the danger whilst being so vulnerable. He had to walk past the bedroom door which was an easy escape route. He'd heard the toilet door lock so knew he had time to get out. Personally I'd have called my partner to get behind me and with gun trained into the bathroom would have exited out if the bedroom door. Maybe even firing a few warning shots into the darkness to she I meant it. This would have set off the alarm and security would have been there quickly, as evidenced when OP contacted them.

What I see is a man who has grown up with guns and been surrounded with them all his life. He has developed an interest in them not unlike the way you see with quite a lot of people (usually blokes) about cameras, cars, stereos etc, where they read magazines, know about the different types, like to buy the best equipment etc. I suspect he bought those dreadful bullets because they were the "best" and I think that along the way he lost sight of the fact that guns are used to kill people and that if you fire a gun at someone you will maim or kill them. I know it seems obvious and I am not excusing them but I think his pattern of behaviour and general carelessness with guns suggests that he no longer remembered how dangerous they are.

I agree there is no particular evidence supporting an argument, except I do feel that the text messages suggest he was capable of being jealous and controlling and picking away at something he was not happy with. Because it was the middle of the night, many people would be asleep and not necessarily woken by an argument, so the fact that some witnesses didn't hear it, doesn't mean that it wasn't happening. I think that the argument led to him threatening her and her hiding in the toilet and him pursuing her immediately and shooting. I doubt she would have had time to phone. The fact that he wasn't on his prosthetics would suggest he jumped straight off the bed after her.

I don't think he really thought about the consequences of what he was doing until he opened that toilet door and realised actually what a gun does. So in some ways I don't think he is guilty of premeditated murder but he is in the sense that he is an adult and he should have thought about it.

Then I think he was panic stricken and extremely sorry and would have called the ambulance etc immediately to try and save her. I am sure he deeply regrets what he has done and a lot of his remorse is genuine. So I don't think that the fact that he called for help immediately means it was an accident. In fact isn't it a pattern with domestic violence that the violent partner is sorry afterwards and promises not to do it again.

The shots around the handle are important, surely he must have been trying to break the lock? Being close together would look as though it was a more controlled shot wouldnt it? If it was as frenzied as OP says you would think that the bullet holes would be more spread out.

Back on fence, I just dont know.

I don't think he really thought about the consequences of what he was doing until he opened that toilet door and realised actually what a gun does this is what I think expect only in relation to the effect on an intruder hiding behind. If you are so petrified that you think an intruder is in your toilet, how would you have time to consciously think about whether you firing at a door will actually kill them. It is maybe negligence or not excusable, but it makes sense to me. Agree same could hold for if Reeva was behind the door, ie didn't intend to kill. But I don't like the lack of a clear motive.

Agree if intent to kill anyone then you would spread the bullets out.

I'm starting to wake in the bloody night thinking about it so am going to try very hard not to follow it next week. But what stuck me (at 2am no less) was how he had to be in a position to hear her go to the toilet because that is the only way to explain why he could think on the night with absolute certainty (and without needing to check) that she was still there. I think his instant thought was that she had to be there because otherwise he would have heard her, but in reality he didn't hear her. I'm not sure if this is the revelation it felt to me in the early hours, or that it makes as much sense to me now as it did then, but it only makes me sit more firmly on the 'he is telling the truth' side of the fence.

At least 2 witnesses testified to hearing a man and woman arguing before the gunshots - Roux tried to annihilate them, but it's important evidence. It's why OP says in his evidence that he shouted and screamed at the 'intruder' when going down the hall. He's making his story fit the witness evidence.

Could she have hidden in the bathroom rather than driving home because she didn't feel safe driving at night (car jackings?)

I'm not sure Reeva being a strong personality is proof she would have called for help. Plus, I'm not sure she even knew how much danger she was in. I think she was in the loo planning to leave once he'd calmed after an argument - and he got the gun in fury. I don't think that shows her as a passive person - she could have been in the loo, getting away from the argument, waiting for the anger to subside so she could get her stuff and go. I'm unsure about whether he intended to kill her - I think he wanted to get to her so his remorse is real and saying he never meant to kill could be true. He'd seen guns as a toy for so long.

I do not believe though that he thought she was an intruder. As Pretoria said up thread he was too relaxed about alarms and windows for the intruder paranoia to wash. Plus the apartment and route past the bed to bathroom is too small a space - impossible to imagine your "beloved cherished" girlfriend is there at a time of danger.

Victims of emotional abuse and domestic violence rarely talk to anyone - certainly not in the early stages. Texting someone, calling someone would have depended on her knowing how much danger she was in and maybe she just didn't think her life was in peril.

Poor Reeva. Whatever his motives - she was terrified, alone and in pain. Too many OP supporters (not on this thread) refuse to imagine how horrendous her final moments were. He must pay a price for that and serve a prison sentence. He's lucky not to be in prison now whilst on bail with his reckless "I don't know how the gun fired" attitude.

If they had had an argument, why would she have called for help?

If he had perfect security measures then his paranoia wouldn't wash, as it would be less likely for an intruder to break in.

You mean the paranoia is justified because he knew he was being lax in security?

But why didn't he have better security measures? If he was so bloody paranoid, he wouldn't have had ladders propper up outside. It doesn't wash with me either. He says he's vulnerable/paranoid/threatened when it suits him but doesn't take the measures to ensure he doesn't feel like that.

That doesnt really make sense, hes paranoid because his security is not good enough, but not paranoid enough to do anything about it?

Or am I reading that wrong?