Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 5

[Roussette]

Time for a new thread - Part 4 nearly full

Iirc OP dad made some comments about needing to be safe and SA police not up to the job - suspect implied black intruders etc and prob not a great idea to be visible daily in court room.

I don't know why, but I've come off the fence. I don't believe it was an accident.

I'm not frothing at the mouth for his conviction or anything, but I just feel that he's guilty of murder and hope he gets a sentence.

I did think he was just an immature twat, but after reading the VF article and some other bits, there's something deeper there. His inability to take any responsibility for anything is a joke.

I'm still v interested in arguments for his innocence, I'm not going to dismiss things but I just think he's guilty.

OP did say that he hadn't had contact with his father for years

11.06 Nel asks Pistorius if he or anyone tried to make contact with his father to confirm that it was hs ammunition after the shooting. Pistorius says that he had very little communication with the outside world. He didn't have his phone.
11.03 Pistorius says that he puts the ammunition in the safe when he is away or at night. He says that the ammunition wasn't for his use.
10.59 Nel says that coming from a family of gun owners, Pistorius should have known the rules.
10.56 Oscar Pistorius says that he hasn't spoken to his father for years.
10.55 On to the safe in Pistorius's room. He says that several people had the combination to the safe. Pistorius says that his father owned the ammunition and asked him to keep it in the safe. Nel says that his father, Henk, refused to make a statement.

Just marking my place

Same here Howabout, the whole thing does not have the ring of truth.

He is a dangerous man and needs to be held accountable for taking a life.

The judge seems impartial and fair, I believe justice will be done as far as possible.

Thanks, Ronald. I remember being surprised at OP saying he had had no contact with his dad for years while also saying he was storing ammo for him. Yet more lies.

I think upstream someone made a very valid, very thought provoking post - which is that while our comments, almost without exception are relevant appropriate, considered - they are largely speculation based and not wholly evidence based. Quite true. Thank you poster for that dose of reality. That post about speculation really resonated with me. I've already spent many a moment, many a day (and night) thinking and rethinking the Trial (and trials) of Oscar Pistorious.

I think for me- that is the crux of it - the Trial and Trials of Oscar that has made this so very haunting, because I can't separate the two.

That is an admission I know, and one that I'm sure will shame me on Mumsnet, but not before it has already shamed me in the front of my computer. I can't separate his current state of being from his past experiences, his sense of loss - physical, maternal, competitive. I desperately want to unravel the mystery, to pursue a truth and to believe that that truth is not something that makes me sob with a very grim realisation. This is like a modern tale of epic Greek like proportions, of our protagonist being slighted by the Gods through his disability, overcoming hardship, then feted by the same Gods - and the irony of his achievements that come through his "winged feet" is not lost on me. You couldn't make it up. I have found it impossible, not to be invested him, because I so want to believe he is telling the truth, that while he may be slighted again by the Gods now, that truth will prevail and dear Oscar will rise Phoenix like and go on to do even greater things. I can't help but think Oscar might think that too....but again there is that word again..speculation. A little bit of me, also thinks, "there but for the grace of God go we"....I am invested because he represents a brother, a son, an uncle, and the desperate desperate mess that he has created is so Unfixable, that I can really see why his sister Aimee sobs at every turn.

That -aside, the evidence is of a woman shot four times in the home of her lover. Just him. No one else. He admits he did it. Ear witness accounts, character references of the accused, suspected motive are all at the moment like fog on a cloudy day.

The facts - a confession, and just him and her. Murder, Culpable Homicide, Self Defence, Mistake. Which one do I think the state has proved? There but for the grace of God go I....and I am pleased that My voice is only as a mum and not as a judge...because based on the evidence and with no speculation....I would say it was a mistake. Probably his account is implausible, but I don't believe it has been proved that it is truly improbable. Who can say that OP in his mind didn't genuinely think there was an intruder. There is no evidence for what is inside someone's mind, and there has been no hard evidence, as far I see it to prove that any factors outside his mind made him act the way he did (argument). I know there are the screams, people have testified to these under oath (there is that God again!), but that does not negate the fact that it could have been a mistake, if as OP has testified, that he didn't hear the screams......how can we prove what he was thinking, how can anyone. It would be speculation....and there we are again.

Anyone else have a position they wish to take, murder, mistake,self defence, CH or otherwise?

Even if Pistorius is found not guilty he will always be seen as a reckless killer, at best

Moss that is one of the oddest posts on this thread imho

I agree, Ronald. Whatever happens, his life as he knew it is over. I do think quite a lot of the next part of his life will be spent in prison because it is not relevant whether he mistook Reeva for an intruder or not - he murdered whoever was behind the door and the state has shown his intent.

MummyMoss, I can see OP as being like a Shakespearean tragic hero, brought down by his own flaws, but I have far more pity for Reeva and her family.

I think Moss is just saying it's so easy to get sucked in, to start ascribing thoughts and feelings to two people we don't actually know, and to think of him as some sort of representation.
In quite flowery language

is like a modern tale of epic Greek like proportions, of our protagonist being slighted by the Gods through his disability, overcoming hardship, then feted by the same Gods

MummyMoss, that's an interesting story, but it's not the only story we can tell about this case.

There's another one. The one of the little girl who grew up strong and clever. Everyone told her she could be a lawyer. She'll go far, she said. So she studied and worked hard, but then, right before her finals, tragedy struck. A riding accident left her in hospital for 6 weeks and with a shockingly uncertain future.

'Do I want this?' she asked. 'Is this really the life I want?'

She got better, and took her finals because she didn't give up on anything. She achieved very high scores, but she knew she'd never waste her life doing something she didn't utterly love. She moved to the big city and took hold of her own life.

'You're too old!' they said. 'You're not thin enough!'

'Watch me!' she replied, and she took the world in her hands, and things were going well for her. She loved life. She lived well. She was loved.

Then a man happened across her path. She wasn't sure, but he was exciting. She slowly started a relationship with him, finding fun times, tempered by rows. He blew hot and cold, and she couldn't understand it. She always seemed to have something new to apologise for.

She wanted it to work. She went to his house to spend some time with him. She drove through the front gates of the estate, waved to the security man who would keep her safe. This was safe - only two break ins to the perimeter in five years. She drove on to the house where her man was, feeling the world was at her feet. She could achieve anything.

She didn't know that she was driving towards the man who would cause her death.

Of course there are stories. People have told stories to make sense of things for thousands of years. I think yours is an interesting one, and it gives an insight into why people want him to be acquitted, the tragic hero is, like you say, a loved protagonist.

But I personally don't buy it.

I also don't buy 'there for the grace of God...' If it was a tragic accident, it happened because this man had a thing for firearms and was careless in the extreme.

I started out believing OP's version but cannot deny Nel did a good job in pointing out implausibilities/ inconsistencies, and that OP was a bad witness in terms of his demeanour.

However what I still come back to is this....

If we believe the version of argument/ shooting, OP had very little time, convulsed by grief/regret (which Nel agreed he did suffer) to come up with the story that by and large he has stuck with ever since. All the detail about going here, going there, going back here, cricket bat, shouting, etc etc etc has really never changed. To remember this "story" on repeated retellings under a great deal of pressure and personal jeopardy is quite difficult I would imagine. And let us not forget he is genuinely a God fearing man

. Would he really pursue this bare faced lie all this time?

Yes his version is improbable but the State did not prove it to be IMPOSSIBLE. If I was on a jury hearing this that would be enough reasonable doubt to me. At most I think he is guilty of culpable homicide because he (or more accurately the reasonable man in the circs)must have known that shooting at someone in a very small space would have led to very serious injury or death

he (or more accurately the reasonable man in the circs)must have known that shooting at someone in a very small space would have led to very serious injury or death

That would be one above culpable homicide - it would be murder - Dolus Eventualis.

There the identity of the victim doesn't matter - the only thing on trial is the action. Did he (or would a reasonable man) know that his actions would result in the death of another person.

On the speed that he made the story up - I'm with you there. Though it's worth noting that he didn't say what had happened to the first people on the scene. He was asked, but didn't answer.

It sort of depends (assuming he's lying) on how used to lying he is. The lie 'I thought it was an intruder' may have happened fast, but the embellishments may have taken more time.

(If he is lying - I'm not saying he is.)

If we believe the version of argument/ shooting, OP had very little time, convulsed by grief/regret (which Nel agreed he did suffer) to come up with the story that by and large he has stuck with ever since. All the detail about going here, going there, going back here, cricket bat, shouting, etc etc etc has really never changed. To remember this "story" on repeated retellings under a great deal of pressure and personal jeopardy is quite difficult I would imagine. And let us not forget he is genuinely a God fearing man

I agree with that up to a point in that he had very little time on the night to come up with something plausible. But now in April 2014, to counter that he has had a whole year to be coached, to practise, to fine tune his story.

MummyMoss - interesting post. But I think we have to realise that him being a role model and an icon does not preclude him from also possibly being a murderer too. He had the whole of SA at his feet, he was feted and adored and he threw it all away. Now whether it was because he wanted to silence Reeva or whether it was because he thought there was an intruder - I have no idea and I do think we will possibly never ever know. The only thing I think is, he should be guilty of culpable homicide. He was reckless, he was stupid, he maybe felt untouchable. And he ended up killing someone.

On this I am invested because he represents a brother, a son, an uncle, and the desperate desperate mess that he has created is so Unfixable, that I can really see why his sister Aimee sobs at every turn. I find that quite hard to read because I can only think of Reeva's family and what they are going through. She has siblings and parents and they are probably in some sort of living hell with this.

But there was a well-known case in SA where a man shot and killed his own daughter mistaking her for an intruder. I think OP knew about that and so the idea came to him quickly. Then he had time to make all the details fit the original lie.

I liked your story, Looking. Very sad. Poor Reeva.

Hillwalker - what I can't get my head round is the fact OP has pleaded Not Guilty to all charges. Did he really think he could get off and walk scot free? Does he honestly still think that now? There was always some sort of intent there whoever he thought was behind the door, I think.

I think he has probably got away with stuff all his life and did think he could get away with this too. To admit to anything would go against the image he has created. I wonder if the next two weeks will give him time to think and maybe change his plea - or is it too late for that?

Just read this from SA news -

Pretoria - The pathologist hired by Oscar Pistorius will not give evidence at the athlete's murder trial because of scheduling issues and not due to any contradiction with the defence's case, one of the Paralympian's lawyers said Friday.
Private forensic pathologist Reggie Perumal, who witnessed the autopsy of Pistorius's girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, told AFP on Thursday he would not testify, sparking speculation that his decision was because his findings back key parts of the prosecution case.

"That is not true!", Brian Webber, one of Pistorius's lawyers told AFP on Friday.

"If we want him to testify, he will. He remains a member of the defence team."

Webber said that while the pathologist "won't probably testify", the decision to call a different forensic pathologist to give evidence "was made on the basis of Dr Perumal's availability".

Perumal's decision to not take the stand attracted the attention of his fellow forensic pathologists.

Steve Naidoo, another pathologist, had said he had "heard that it might be because he refused to amend his version".

In Perumal's place, the Pistorius team called former state pathologist Jan Botha to give evidence in the athlete's defence.

In a break with protocol, he was called as the team's first witness instead of Pistorius.

Going back to Dixon though, the only thing I gained from the Twitter thing was that the prosecution hadn't tested any of the evidence - no sound tests, light tests etc to back up the witnesses.

On the assumption it could be genuine, has anyone reverse image-searched the Em twitter profile pic? I'm just wondering if it's a model from the same sort of circuit as Reeva.

Away for weekend, so marking place!

"I think he has probably got away with stuff all his life and did think he could get away with this too."

Funnily enough I'm starting to think he will!

The evidence remains muddled - particularly around the subject of an argument between Reeva and Pestorious prior to the shooting. If witnesses heard shouting why hasn't the prosecution tried to get to the bottom of it and pursued that line of questioning, and established why Reeva took 2 phones into the toilet?

I read some of that twitter stuff. That person has ishoos.

I was imagining OP being found guilty and wondering, if it does happen, if he'll cry like a baby/vomit.