Oscar Pistorius trial part 3

[JillJ72]

Hiya,

Thread 1 here - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2022610-Oscar-Pistorius-trial

Thread 2 here - www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2049921-Oscar-Pistorius-trial-part-2

To continue our respectful, open, interesting discussion.

True Redcoats. No need for me to remain confused.
The trouble is , if two stories remain plausible, her family will never really know. And that is so sad; I really hope they are given the truth.

I had the impression today that he didn't know that the door was locked when he shot. He thought he implied he was watching the handle, expecting it to turn, which is why he was so scared.

The question I had about the lock, was why he found the key on the floor. The shots in the door weren't around the lock, so I wouldn't have thought they'd dislodge the key. I mean, maybe I'm wrong, but it made me think that the key had been deliberately taken out of the lock, then dropped on the floor.

God, poor Reeva.

AFAIK he could still be convicted of murder even if he believed it to be an intruder behind the door
I’ve missed a lot today but just saw the quick catch up on BBC. I think Nel knows he doesn’t have enough evidence to convict OP of deliberately murdering Reeva so he’s trying to get him for general murder.

However, even if you know there is someone behind the door, if you think they are armed and could come out and kill you, are you not allowed to fire? Or would you have to wait until they opened the door and then hope to shoot them before they got you? In other words, generally does it matter than there isn’t a threat as long as you genuinely believe there is? (I do appreciate that it is impossible to prove unless you have a witness.)

I thought he didn't know the door was locked, he said he heard it slam but nothing about the lock, this was only discovered afterwards.

Im just struggling with the whole silence of Reeva, silent when asked a question in bed, silent getting out, silent walking down the corridor into the bathroom, but then loud enough opening a window (that doesnt need opening) and slaming a door, then silent again when OP shouting to get the fuck out of my house` silent when shot the first time. Thats quite a lot to ask people to believe.

Can someone confirm, was Reeva s clothes packed away in a bag neatly? barr the jeans?

So has he said he tried the door, found it locked so had to go back for a cricket bat?

He hasn't got to that point yet, although he has already been through this part before, I'm sure he said he tried the door (once had his prosthetics on) then he tried to kick it, then I believe he went back for the bat.

Onestep apparently Nel did say all Reevas stuff was packed in her over night bag, apart from the jeans.

OneStep - yes, apparently all her clothes bar her jeans were neatly folded in her overnight bag on the side of the bed nearest the bathroom.

does it matter than there isn’t a threat as long as you genuinely believe there is?

I think this is true, but I'm not a lawyer, and not a South African.

The thing is though, I think he'd be hard pressed to claim he thought he was in genuine, life threatening danger, seeing as he didn't see an intruder at all, let alone see whether they were armed, and there was a door between them, and he could have shouted 'I'm armed - I'm calling the police; stay where you are or I'll shoot you'.

I remember his answer from the gun licence questionnaire - Are you allowed to shoot an intruder who is stealing your television - to which he'd answered 'no; there is no clear danger to yourself.'

I'm guessing, from that, that you're not allowed to shoot simply because someone was an intruder. You'd have to have an honest belief that they were armed, and were intending to harm you.

I didn't know who OP was until I heard what had happened in the news. At that point I was right over the other side of the fence thinking 'why would you shoot until you know who's there' and 'why not check where Reeva was first'.

My opinion changed as soon as I heard OP testify. He may be an incredibly good actor but I find him believable every time I hear him speak.

However, having chosen not to listen to the words being spoken today and reading them first instead, I am thinking one thing one minute, and another the next.

Re the gun point, it makes total sense to me that he would keep it with him until he knew exactly who was behind that door (intruder theory). Agree will be interesting to find out at exactly what point he said he knew for certain as that could be very telling.

Still think he is guilty of the premeditated murder of Reeva.

Why would he creep very quietly down the passageway in order not to give himself away to the potential intruder to then suddenly shouting at said intruder and Reeva thus totally giving his position away?

Also think the "get the fuck out of my house" was directed at Reeva which is why he got upset.

Opening curtains, doors etc., whilst unsteady on his stumps with a cocked, loaded gun in his hand - no, then placing it on the bed to put on his prosthetics to get Reeva out of the toilet and then pick up the gun again - no.

Thanks voice and Free gosh that is rather odd isnt it, why leave her jeans on the floor?

He was very familiar with his guns and knew exactly what they would do, I just cant see/cant believe that he did not think he would have killed whoever was behind the door.

Emotion - he creeped after the shouting/screaming, he then shot.

Still

what was OP hoping the intruder would do?

the toilet window was two floors up
the bathroom only 1 because of the balconies.
the ladder would have been against the bathroom window

how was OP ever going to allow the intruder/s to exit the toilet alive?
they would either have to come out the door = shot multiple times
making a noise, for instance trying to escape out the hight window = shot multiple times
either way he was going to end a life/s

why does he keep talking about the lack of burglar bars on the bathroom window. None of his windows had burglar bars
his bathroom window was as vulnerable to burglary as any other window.

i think that he intended to end a life.
what other result could there have been?

I believe he said it dawned on him once he had checked bed/floor etc that it was Reeva in the toilet, then after putting on his prosthetics, there was absolutely no reason whatsoever to take the gun back with him.

nerf yes that is odd that the bat only has blood on the bottom, that would indicate that someone has carefully put it against a wall, not flung away in total panic.

Was the bat in the toilet or the bathroom?

Why would he creep very quietly down the passageway in order not to give himself away to the potential intruder to then suddenly shouting at said intruder and Reeva thus totally giving his position away?

That could perhaps be explained - he didn't want the intruder to know he was about to enter the bathroom in case they shot as he rounded the corner, so he crept down the corridor. When he established the intruder was not in the bathroom but in the toilet, he was able to start shouting.

Louise read this for a clear outline of the OP defence and the difference between murder, putative private-defence and invountariness (accident)...
criminallawza.net/2014/04/13/pistoriuss-new-defence/

I think there is some confusion there. I mentioned the locked door because I heard a lot of people saying "Why would an intruder lock himself in?" As in surely he must have known it couldn't be an intruder the door was locked The point is OP didn't know the door was locked- how could he?

Why wouldn't you leave your jeans on the floor? Do people always pack their clothes away neatly when going to bed. Weren't Oscars Jeans also found on the floor if I recall?

Free I thought he said he spoke softly to Reeva at the entrance to the passageway then crept along as that was the point at which he was most in danger because he couldn't see anything, then as he had a view of the bathroom he then screamed and shouted, after he had heard the toilet door slam.

I thought Nel made a good point about how was the intruder to exit his house.

He said he spoke in a low tone to Reeva, this was in the bedroom, when he heard the window.
He then started going down the passage and he shouted out to the intruders and to Reeva. He then said as he crept to near the end of the passage where the carpet meets the tiles to the bathroom he kept quiet as to not give his position away to any intruders, he then said he thought the toilet door was opening (heard a noise sounded like wood) he then shot.

"Why wouldn't you leave your jeans on the floor? Do people always pack their clothes away neatly when going to bed. Weren't Oscars Jeans also found on the floor if I recall?"

That might suggest a bit of passion, jeans chucked off etc, and OP isn't mentioning it.

Personally most of the time I am very tidy but every now and again I just can't be bothered and will leave the odd piece of clothing on the floor. My middle dd always leaves her clothes all over the bedroom floor, much to my annoyance.

Do people always pack their clothes away neatly when going to bed.

The thing is, again it's not about what other people do, or what most people do - it's about what Reeva did. She folded all of her clothes and put them in the bag apart from her jeans. The questions becomes 'why weren't her jeans with the rest of her clothes?'

If everything was sprawled over the floor, then it wouldn't matter, because they wouldn't be odd. Folding everything but dropping her jeans is a bit of an oddity, and as an oddity, it needs to be explored.

It might simply be; her bag wasn't big enough for her jeans. It could be anything, really. But it is a murder case, and it does seem reasonable for people to wonder about the things that aren't like all the other things.

I agree he has been convincing.

In regards to lying it is very shocking to people who don't / can't lie that someone can maintain this front. I fall into the can't lie to save my life camp. I think unless you are a liar or have experienced (irrefutably) a pathological liar - it is very hard to believe someone can do this for so long. But they really do. In fact, the con artist / liars rule is to never ever admit they lied.

I have confronted a liar with water tight evidence and they've still lied brilliantly to get themselves out of trouble. They operate on a very different moral compass. The chutzpah is limitless. The fact that Oscar is still able to do this is not evidence he's telling the truth.

Bonnie - I'm fascinated by the fact the written transcripts tell a different story to listening to the testimony.