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.

I thought Oscar used a cricket bat to lock the bedroom door as the lock was broken?

If that's true then reeva must have moved it to go to the bathroom. So Oscar must have noticed that the bedroom was no longer locked

I could be wrong though

Anya. Not sure what you mean. She wouldn't have gone near th bedroom door to get to the toilet

Anya the bedroom door led downstairs not into the bathroom so Reeva wouldn't have had to move it to go to the toilet.

Ah I wrong then!

I'm still on the fence. What I don't understand is, if she was scared of him because they were having a violent row, why didn't she just run downstairs ? He had no legs on so she could have outrun him. Why go to a room with no means of escape down a corridor ? All very sad.

emotion, I feel the same as you, I`m desperately looking for ways that he didnt, but failing.

Can we discuss the bathroom window (yy I know Im banging on about it, but I cant get my head around it)

So, Reeva left the bedroom to go to the toilet, the bedroom had the doors open and at least one fan going, so not stuffy... the toilet is a seperate little room, no window which is in the main bathroom. She cant be overwelmed with heat, the room must be cool. It would have no impact on either the toilet or the bedroom. She was aware of the security of not leaving open a window with no bars.

So why did she open it?

mumsneed I think it's an automatic reaction to head for a place that is secure and where you can be sure you'll be able to keep the threat out by locking the door.

I mentioned on one of the other threads that my friend used to do the same thing when her violent dad was chasing her. It's not logical but impulsive. In some ways, panic rooms feed into that theory as they encourage people to put themselves into a small secure space.

Of course you're right that a much better idea is to run outside and away from the threat but that also feeds into the issue of taking a private problem into a public arena. When I first read about this case, I hoped some domestic abuse charity would use it to publicise that escaping outside is nearly always better than heading for a locked room. A locked room is only safe if the threat on the other side respects its boundaries and sadly that isn't always the case.

He said he didn't have his legs on.

But mum it might not have been particularly violent, she may have just walked away for space. Perhaps the argument carried on whilst she was in the toilet, maybe he was shouting at her to get out of the toilet and she wouldnt......

Some people when arguing cannot bear it if someone wont stand there and carry on with an argument, or are ignored.

OneStep we only have OP's word about the window opening so maybe it had always been open and he hadn't realised? Implying that Reeva opened it means he doesn't have to face questions on why he was making himself so vulnerable to an intruder by having open windows/doors on both sides of the house. I'm not even sure it would be a deliberate lie on his part, he maybe just didn't realise? The only reason I can see for Reeva opening it was to shout for help and that really doesn't bear thinking about.

Sorry - my post above is meant to show that we only have his version - maybe he did have his legs on.

Do you think we`ll ever hear the truth of what happened that night?

jacky it's impossible not to discuss the trial without mentioning why Reeva may or may not have done something. That certainly does not mean she is 'on trial', slightly disturbing that you would even consider that.

Just catching up on the other posts - emotion you are making me head towards the fence for the first time. Not sure what to think anymore.

Again I don't understand why she would hide from him. He had no legs on so movement was slow and she would have easily been able to defend herself. If she wanted space I don't think I would head to the toilet - not the bathroom as that didn't have a door - but a loo. It's a big house with lots of other rooms to go to. Just seems a strange response and, as this case is all about what a 'normal' response would be, it's an oddity. I think in SA there is a law like in Florida that you can protect yourself if you are scared - ridiculous to us Brits. But not murder if he can prove he was threatened.

mums I can see what book is saying though about her poor friend who used to hide from her dad in a small place :( That then makes much more sense to me.

Although I would have thought that he would feel very vulnerable on his stumps too (at least, relative to wearing his prostheses anyway). Although not so vulnerable when carrying a gun.

Hes very strong mum and hes not necessarily slow on his stumps, the thing with DV is that its not always easy to see it coming, thats why so many woman are killed each week by men.

I agree that if I was hiding from a violent man then I would want a locked door between us. But I haven't heard anyone suggest he was knocking Reeva about. He is strong but so was she and he is unstable on his stumps so would be easier to defend herself. If he had a gun before she locked herself in then it seems an even madder place to run. It's a dead end down a corridor - I would be getting out of house v fast if saw a gun. None of us will ever one the truth and at the moment it will seem like he is more quilt as only prosecution has presented case. Now its the defence turn it will be evidence for him. All horrid and he will have to live with what he has done.

There doesn't need to be evidence of him "knocking her about" for her to have been in an abusive relationship.

"jacky it's impossible not to discuss the trial without mentioning why Reeva may or may not have done something. That certainly does not mean she is 'on trial', slightly disturbing that you would even consider that."

Bonnie - your posts come across as if she IS on trial. You need to be aware of that! Your relentless bias in favour of Pictorious (on every page) comes across a bit obsessive and disturbing to me.

Im sorry <strong>mum</strong> but Im not getting your point, is it you believe that in order to kill his partner a man has to build up over a number of weeks/months/years? And when you mean evidence, like what previous brusies that shes shown people, or that shes said hes abusive.

It just doesnt work like that, it really doesnt. As for being faced with a gun, she probably wasnt.

she probably wasnt..

by that I mean, he probably wasnt waving it around in front of her, she probably didnt know it was coming, lets hope to god not.

No, sorry. Would never minimise DV. It's just that I feel it IS different because of his disability. Physically harder for him to harm her when his legs are off. I have no idea what was going through either of their heads and just find it incredibly sad that such a lovely lady is dead at the hands of a man who loved her. And I'm very glad we live in a country where guns are rare.

I am too mum.

After everything I've read about Nel over the past few days, I have a real respect for him. Lawyers don't have the best reputation (sometimes) but I think he's s