Pistorious - (free) Prime documentary about Oscar's trial

[XelaM]

Have anyone seen this? What did you guys think?

At the time of the trial I found his version of events completely improbable, however, having seen extracts from the trial in this documentary I must say that the defence's version of events actually makes more sense, particularly because:

1. The defence's timeline is a lot more realistic and ties in with what the witnesses had heard.
2. The next door neighbours (those closest to the house) never heard any arguments between them that night or a woman's screams.
3. Out of the thousands of messages between Reeva and Oscar the prosecution only found 4 that indicated any kind of mild disagreements between them and even those were followed by nice lovey-dovey messages.
4. He was clearly an extremely anxious and paranoid person in constant fear of intruders/hit men.
5. His reaction to her death was so extreme that I thought it came across genuine. It's also supported by witnesses who first arrived at the scene, so it wasn't just for show at court.
6. The police did an absolutely horrendous job contaminating/losing evidence.

I can see why he was eventually convicted of murder rather than manslaughter given that he must have intended to kill whoever was behind the door (whether Reeva or the intruder) but I do now believe that he may have mistaken her for an intruder.

I feel very sad about his downfall from being the poster-boy for overcoming incredible adversity to utter humiliation in front of the whole world. When he was asked to stand on his stumps during sentencing it was quite heartbreaking to watch.

What do you guys think about the documentary?

Didn’t he get acquitted of murder and then convicted on appeal? I remember the threads and everyone being really pro the judge until she let him off!

Yeah, the judge was strange. It was like she didn't really know what to do with him or how to punish him.

@AlternativePerspective You refuse to read what I said, so there is no point repeating 1500 times what I said earlier, which is that I AGREE with the murder conviction. I did NOT say he was innocent! I just believe his version of events, which does not make him innocent. The judges agreed

But the prosecution's timeline didn't tie in with what the witnesses were saying. They never explained why witnesses thought they heard 2 sets of gunshots. The defence said that the first set of gunshots was when he killed her and the "second" was when he broke down the door with the bat. The prosecution just ignored this completely and said she was killed with the "second" set of gunshots. It didn't tie in with what the prosecution's own witnesses heard. And if she was killed with the first set of gunshots, she couldn't have screamed because it was not in dispute that she was so mortally wounded, she would have been incapable of screaming.

I've always believed him. Why would he batter his girlfriend enough to kill here, even I'd he is nasty and arrogant?

Not batter sorry. Shoot.

I thought the judge was very good and people just wanted to make an example of the arrogant white boy superstar. She made a very brave an independent decision despite what the media were gunning for.

@Justkeeppedaling I agree. There was no apparent motive whatsoever

@XelaM

There are many books and other videos about this murder. It's always good to look at all sides of a story rather than just taking the angle of one documentary maker.

If you have the time and motivation the whole trial is still available on YouTube.

I've always believed him. Why would he batter his girlfriend enough to kill here, even I'd he is nasty and arrogant? seriously? Maybe you need to ask the men who do exactly to the two women a week who die at the hands of their partners.

Honestly the way people are defending this lowlife is disgusting.

No one thought Chris Watts would kill his wife and both kids. Until he did.
I’m sure there are lots more examples of men who suddenly killed their other half.

You refuse to read what I said, so there is no point repeating 1500 times what I said earlier, which is that I AGREE with the murder conviction. I did NOT say he was innocent! I just believe his version of events, which does not make him innocent. The judges agreed because there doesn’t need to be an analysis of whether he meant to kill her or not. He did kill her. So if you agree with the murder conviction then you have no place questioning whether it was her he intended to murder.

If someone dies at the hands of a murderer, say in a gang fight, or in a shooting or a stabbing where they get the wrong person do we defend them and say “well, I’m sure they didn’t mean to kill that particular person”? No. We recognise that the fact they are murdering scum means that innocent people have died at their hands.

You know that Reeva isn’t the only victim here don’t you? I mean there is her family and friends who have to be subjected to the countless arguments put out there by these sensationalised documentaries who are desperate to prove that he wasn’t violent and didn’t kill her, when he violently killed her.

Whether he meant to or not isn’t debatable. What is so hard about that for you to understand?

It's a bit weird that people who haven't seen the documentary claim it makes out that he is innocent. It really doesn't!!! It interviews both sides and hives extracts from the court proceedings and doesn't make a judgment one way or the other. However, having seen the evidence presented at court, Pistoriou's version of events sounds more plausible to me now

You are minimising his crime though.

If his victim hadn’t been Reeva it would have been some unknown intruder. And then you wouldn’t have had the defence trying to argue that he didn’t mean to kill that particular person.

It’s a bit like the rough sex defence that men so often use. They watch toO much hard porn and then strangle their partner during sex leading her to die. And then when they’re up in court for murder they argue that they didn’t mean to kill her. This is very similar.

We don’t need to know whether he meant to kill Reeva or whether he thought he was killing an intruder. The outcome was the same. So why do there need to be documentaries trying to argue that he didn’t mean to kill her, when he did kill her whether intentional or not.

Yes, I saw it quite a while ago. I think he is innocent.

@Justkeeppedaling

I've always believed him. Why would he batter his girlfriend enough to kill here, even I'd he is nasty and arrogant?

Are you being deliberately naive or just stupid? Have you any idea how many women are killed at the hands of men every week?

@XelaM

And he was never convicted of murder because the prosecution proved he intended to kill Reeva. They never managed to prove that. He was convicted of murder because he must have intended to kill whoever was behind the door.

That’s it in a nutshell. Whoever was in that tiny toilet cubicle, Reeva or an intruder, had no chance because there was nowhere to get away from the shots that he fired. He was responsible for her death, either because of his temper or paranoia. Very sad for her parents.

Guilty as hell.