Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Oscar Pistorius Trial Part 5

999 replies

Roussette · 18/04/2014 17:46

Time for a new thread - Part 4 nearly full

OP posts:
LookingThroughTheFog · 04/05/2014 10:01

I think she was trying to talk to him or reason with him through the door - that's why the first shot hit her,

It is possible, but it's only one possible scenario. It's also possible she thought there was an intruder in the bathroom, to whom OP was talking. So she stood at the door quietly and locked herself in (hence the noise), so as not to be attacked by them.

It is also possible that she had just gone to the toilet, so was standing ready to come out, and that's when Oscar screamed to get out and shot her.

The latter of these makes the least sense with his timeline. From what he was saying, there was a couple of seconds between the shout and the gunshot.

What's tricky in all of these scenarios is that it's pretty reliant on OP's testimony, and even after all those days on the stand, I can't tell what he heard when or what he was thinking because that all seems to leap around a little.

Nerf · 04/05/2014 10:07

If he deliberately killed Reeva though, as opposed to thinking it was an intruder, it's pretty handy for him that she ended up in the toilet, locked in, making an intruder theory possible.
So either he is a quick thinker or he engineered it or it's true.

LookingThroughTheFog · 04/05/2014 10:37

I don't know, Nerf. I regularly swing towards him thinking, at first, that it was an intruder, to wondering if the row suggestion holds water. Both sides, to my mind, seem possible, and which seems more probable changes from day to day.

There are huge chunks that seem improbable to me. Fussing with the jeans to make the room pitch black because, despite the fact that he's slept so soundly he didn't hear her go and get a snack, he suddenly can't sleep with that tiny amount of light. Without having even tried. I think it's improbable that he carried his gun, the gun that apparently went off without him even thinking about it, into the bedroom, across the bed, with him while he opened the curtains and went onto the balcony, back into the bedroom to find his legs, during which he had to find his socks in the dark... all of which happened without this hair-trigger going off accidentally again.

Those, to me, are the really implausible bits of his story.

However, I can't make the leap to 'he must have known it was Reeva' just from that.

That's why I keep getting stuck on what he thought when he fired for the first time, and whether the situation changed when he then shot three more times.

I think it's possible (though entirely conjecture) that he though it was an intruder right up until the moment he shot first, but by the time he'd finished shooting, he'd already realised his terrible mistake. I think that's possible.

But that's just my personal thoughts, and I'm not entirely convinced that I'm not missing out massive chunks of evidence to make it fit. Particularly with the other big vaguely implausible one - she got up, got out of the bed and went into the toilet without talking to him, and without him noticing she was not in the room any more. And there are the witnesses who heard voices before the shooting.

So I'm still well and truly on the fence when it comes to whether or not he knew it was her.

BookABooSue · 04/05/2014 10:46

I don't see how Reeva being in the toilet fits better with an intruder story than her being in any other location iyswim. I think if he knew it was Reeva then the intruder story was the only option if he wasn't going to automatically admit to shooting her during an argument.

RonaldMcDonald · 04/05/2014 10:53

I believe that wherever she had been shot on that evening if it could have been it would have been explained away as 'I thought it was an intruder'
Therefore if she'd gone to the pantry or had hidden in a wardrobe on the balcony wherever, if the scenario was that they had an argument and as a result he had shot her, the explanation would have been intruder.

I didn't think OP had said he though he heard the door locking.
specifically as this makes it worse for him. It would be harder for him to be frightened for his life if he had just heard the intruder lock themselves in
I thought that he said he heard a wood noise
When asked about the locked door and why he didn't hear it lock he said that it must have been locked in the same movement as closing the door and that is why he missed the sound of the lock

Nerf · 04/05/2014 10:57

No, the lock unlocking. It's in the testimony as he says he heard what he thought was the lock (ie unlocking) but it must have been the magazine rack because actually the lock stayed locked.

RonaldMcDonald · 04/05/2014 11:01

Also the noise of wood will be hard to give as justification for shooting 4 bullets of that type into a tiny toilet imo
If you follow his version
He knew there was an intruder in the toilet
He screamed at them to get out of his house. He was shouting call the police
He also knew that the only way for them to leave the toilet was to jump via a 2 storey high window to the ground below
that would have required them to open the toilet window and stand on the wooden toilet seat to exit
The other way was for them to leave via the toilet door

Oscar fired when he heard a noise of wood moving in the toilet
He didn't see the handle moving so he knew that no one was coming out of the toilet
He also knew that there was a magazine rack in there

i think that that is very damaging

YNK · 04/05/2014 11:36

I think it would be useful to remind ourselves that it is only relevant to the ear witness evidence to prove the victim was Reeva (because of the screams). All the evidence so far (factual and circumstantial) indicates there is a good chance he knew it was her.
However motive does NOT need to be established NOR does the victims identity.

Whoever was in that toilet was killed by OP.
The only question is was it murder?

YNK · 04/05/2014 12:09

Brilliant post Ronald.

I think that cuts to the very heart of the matter!

YNK · 04/05/2014 12:57

Op from his own admission knew SOMEONE was in the toilet FOR AT LEAST 15 Minutes.

He had them cornered for 15 minutes. He did not ask them to surrender.

Did he shoot to kill?

a) He admits he thought about a lot of things during that 15 minutes including if he shot a warning into the shower it might ricochet back.
b) Reeva was fatally wounded by his 4th shot at the end of this 15 minutes.

Roussette · 04/05/2014 13:58

Is that honestly fact YNK? He knew someone was in there 15 minutes? If so, that is 15 minutes he could have checked where Reeva was and if she was OK.

OP posts:
emotionsecho · 04/05/2014 14:24

Is there a definite time that the first shot was fired?

Nerf · 04/05/2014 14:37

I'm not convinced he actively thought about a bullet ricocheting. When Nel asked him why he didn't fire a warning shot, I felt OP was led into saying it might have ricocheted - ie with hindsight he agreed this might happen rather than he actively considered and rejected it.

Nerf · 04/05/2014 14:41

news.howzit.msn.com/oscar-pistorius-trial/movement-in-toilet-questioned

Ronald - a report about the noise

YNK · 04/05/2014 15:22

My timeline.

3am - Stipps heard first bangs.
3am - OP claims he fired the gun into the toilet.

Shortly after 3am, there were calls made to security,

3.17 - 5 neighbours hear a second set of bangs following loud screams.
3.17 OP claims he used the bat to break the door open.

3.28 - After op carries RS downstairs, Stander calls the ambulance.
Dr Stipp has established RS is dead by then.

YNK · 04/05/2014 15:27

Emotion, according to the pathologist and the blood spatter expert,
(as well as reports of a woman screaming - OP claims it was him screaming) the shot to the head must have been the last bang heard at 3.17.
OP says it was 3am.

ballsballsballs · 04/05/2014 15:32

How would OP know the exact time? Given it was the wee small hours, adrenalin pumping blah blah blah. Did he have the presence of mind to check his watch? I don't know how insistent he is on this point, btw, just if he is that's a bit odd.

LookingThroughTheFog · 04/05/2014 15:41

Yes, I think that mostly shows there are two conflicting timelines, rather than him having someone cornered or 15 minutes.

YNK · 04/05/2014 15:45

Nerf I don't agree OP was led into saying that and neither would the prosecutor or the defense.

OP claims he was thinking all sorts of things after hearing the batyhroom window open.
Nel asked him why he didn't fire a warning shot into the shower since he said HE WAS THINKING and intruder might be waiting to come out and kill him, he then panics and claims HE WASN'T THINKING and almost scuppers his own defense!

YNK · 04/05/2014 15:49

Mrs Stipp heard the first bangs at 3am.
OP doesn't give a time, but tells a story that would corroborate the time of 15 minutes before the second set of bangs.
ie his own circumstantial evidence fits Mrs Stipps story.

YNK · 04/05/2014 16:02

Sure Looking, depending on if you believe the pathologist, blood spatter expert, plus the neighbours.......... or OP.
Who has the most reason to lie?

OP's timeline
3am - kills person in toilet

(lots of contrary evidence, as above)

3.17 - breaks in and releases RS. says at first she is not breathing, cradles her for 5 minutes then claims she takes her last breath

(contrary the pathologists who say she could only have taken 3 breaths max after the bullet enters her brain).

ballsballsballs · 04/05/2014 16:03

Thanks Fog and YNK that makes sense.

YNK OP was able to 'think' that a shower shot would ricochet and possibly hit him. Hmm

LookingThroughTheFog · 04/05/2014 16:07

Can someone remind me at what time various people called security?

YNK · 04/05/2014 16:12

If he wasn't THINKING his whole story falls apart and he has no defense.
ie he would not have THOUGHT there was any danger from an intruder.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread