Oscar Pistorius

[easty]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278492/Oscar-Pistorius-arrested-accidentally-shot-dead-girlfriend-mistaking-burglar.html

:eek:

[Sir David Gray]

Saw this on the news this morning before I went to work.

Absolutely astonishing news, even more so given that I actually met him and had lunch with him about 3/4 years ago.

Having been in his company, I would find it hard to believe that he has shot her deliberately and that it was really an accident.

Either way, this will ruin him and he'll struggle to get over this if it was mistaken identity.

Can't believe it!

[IWasThere2016]

Terrible accident by the sounds of it. How will he ever forgive himself?!?

[J-C]

Reports saying he shot her thinking it was a burglar, seemingly a Valentines surprise gone horribly wrong, sneaked into his home as a surprise and got shot, he's apparently very distraught.

Guy on Talksport was saying many parts of S Africa are still very violent and having guns in the home for protection is the norm, also said that many wealthy people have electrified fences etc round their homes for protection.

[Betty Boop]

Police opposing bail, and apparently a history of domestic incidents at his home.

http://www.2oceansvibe.com/2013/02/14/oscar-pistorius-update-police-suggest-history-of-domestic-incidents-at-pistorius-home/

[Beefster]

Worst Valentine's Day gift ever.

[heretoday]

It's getting like the States. Guns everywhere.

[Pretty Boy]

How did he manage to shoot her 3 times before realising who she was?

[carnoustiehibee]

Roses are red
Violets are glorious
Don't sneak up on Oscar pistorius

[Sergio sledge]

Police are going to charge him with murder apparently and there are witnesses from an incident earlier in the evening.

[Scouse Hibee]

As soon as I heard shot whilst mistaken for an intruder my gut reaction was aye right that's a cracking thought out defence to murder right enough!

[easty]

Worst Valentine's Day gift ever.

dunno...I got an electric toothbrush, that was pretty crappy. maybe as bad.

[Scouse Hibee]

Saw this on the news this morning before I went to work.

Absolutely astonishing news, even more so given that I actually met him and had lunch with him about 3/4 years ago.

Having been in his company, I would find it hard to believe that he has shot her deliberately and that it was really an accident.

Either way, this will ruin him and he'll struggle to get over this if it was mistaken identity.

Can't believe it!

How many times have you had lunch with folk and thought they could be capable of murder?

[Pretty Boy]

As soon as I heard shot whilst mistaken for an intruder my gut reaction was aye right that's a cracking thought out defence to murder right enough!

Pretty much my thoughts especially when, as I mentioned above, its being reported he shot her 3 times.

Did he not call out a warning? Is it acceptable to open fire without establishing any kind of facts? Did she not give any indication it wasn't a burglar after the first shot was fired? Why are the Police making it very clear the 'accident' theory is not coming from them and they are treating it as murder?

[easty]

How many times have you had lunch with folk and thought they could be capable of murder?

I've had to sit through lunch with a few folk and thought I would maybe be capable of murder...:greengrin

[Beefster]

Pretty much my thoughts especially when, as I mentioned above, its being reported he shot her 3 times.

Did he not call out a warning? Is it acceptable to open fire without establishing any kind of facts? Did she not give any indication it wasn't a burglar after the first shot was fired? Why are the Police making it very clear the 'accident' theory is not coming from them and they are treating it as murder?

Surely, if he thought there was an intruder, the first thing he would do is check when his girlfriend was? I sometimes wake up to hear Mrs Beefster bumbling about downstairs but I don't jump up and take the baseball bat (kept purely for sporting purposes, law fans) to her.

[Sir David Gray]

How many times have you had lunch with folk and thought they could be capable of murder?

Point taken!

All I was meaning was that he was a really genuine, humble guy who was very approachable and very relaxed.

I just can't believe that this might be a deliberate act.

Even got my photo taken with him!

[J-C]

I've had to sit through lunch with a few folk and thought I would maybe be capable of murder...:greengrin

:greengrin

[--------]

How did he manage to shoot her 3 times before realising who she was?


Very good question. Semi-automatic set to fire bursts?

Or maybe he's just slow on the uptake.

Sounds like "Blade Runner" was just about right.

[hibsbollah]

How many times have you had lunch with folk and thought they could be capable of murder?

Every Christmas work 'do' :rolleyes:

[Hibrandenburg]

How did he manage to shoot her 3 times before realising who she was?

Maybe he was still half asleep?

[lord bunberry]

Pretty much my thoughts especially when, as I mentioned above, its being reported he shot her 3 times.

Did he not call out a warning? Is it acceptable to open fire without establishing any kind of facts? Did she not give any indication it wasn't a burglar after the first shot was fired? Why are the Police making it very clear the 'accident' theory is not coming from them and they are treating it as murder?

I've been told there has been compelling evidence found at the crime scene that will clear him of all charges. Footprints

[Scouse Hibee]

I've been told there has been compelling evidence found at the crime scene that will clear him of all charges. Footprints

Please also recovered several blades.

[lord bunberry]

Please also recovered several blades.

Apparently it was pitch black when he shot her he couldn't see 2 feet in front of him

[Phil D. Rolls]

Has anyone ever met a nice South African?

[Hibs Class]

Has anyone ever met a nice South African?

I've met several.

[s.a.m]

Has anyone ever met a nice South African?

"....and that ain't bliddy surprisin' man" :singing:

[Beefster]

Has anyone ever met a nice South African?

Yup.

I hear that Nelson Mandela's a nice chap too.

[carnoustiehibee]

The incident in 2009 with the speedboat crash where he injured himself. The media covered up the fact he also killed a family due to him being such an up and coming star.

[Beefster]

The incident in 2009 with the speedboat crash where he injured himself. The media covered up the fact he also killed a family due to him being such an up and coming star.

Where did you get the speedboat cover-up stuff?

[yeezus.]

.

:not worth

[carnoustiehibee]

Where did you get the speedboat cover-up stuff?

Guy at work who is from there.

[Beefster]

Guy at work who is from there.

Sounds unlikely to me. It would require the SA police, worldwide media, killed family's relatives/friends/neighbours/colleagues, witnesses and loads of other folk/organisations to keep quiet to protect an athlete for very little reason.

[GhostofBolivar]

Now being reported that she was shot through a bathroom door...

[carnoustiehibee]

Haha, was expecting that reply. Considering he is from there and has no reason to make it up then I'll believe it. Maybe another guy in the boat to the rap,they got paid off. I'll ask him next time. But you have to be very naive to think cover ups for celebs,sports stars etc don't happen.

[--------]

Now being reported that she was shot through a bathroom door...


Four gunshot wounds to the head and upper body.

You know how long a woman takes in the toilet - maybe he was really desperate to go to the loo?

Don't see why they let him cover his face in court - do they do that for all murder accused in SA?

[Sylar]

Haha, was expecting that reply. Considering he is from there and has no reason to make it up then I'll believe it. Maybe another guy in the boat to the rap,they got paid off. I'll ask him next time. But you have to be very naive to think cover ups for celebs,sports stars etc don't happen.

We do have them on here...:paranoid:

[Beefster]

Haha, was expecting that reply. Considering he is from there and has no reason to make it up then I'll believe it. Maybe another guy in the boat to the rap,they got paid off. I'll ask him next time. But you have to be very naive to think cover ups for celebs,sports stars etc don't happen.

I think cover ups can happen but I'd be skeptical about the deaths of an entire family being covered up. Aside from the fact, if your colleague had heard about it then lots of other folk would have and the Internet would be awash with speculation and conjecture about it (like it was with Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong), which doesn't seem to be the case.

[carnoustiehibee]

I think cover ups can happen but I'd be skeptical about the deaths of an entire family being covered up. Aside from the fact, if your colleague had heard about it then lots of other folk would have and the Internet would be awash with speculation and conjecture about it (like it was with Tiger Woods and Lance Armstrong), which doesn't seem to be the case.

Like I said, maybe someone else on the boat went to jail for it, the true story might come to light now that he's been done with this.

[(((Fergus)))]

How did he manage to shoot her 3 times before realising who she was?

Perhaps he used an automatic weapon?

[Beefster]

Perhaps he used an automatic weapon?

He used a 9mm pistol. I'd be surprised if it was anything more than semi-automatic so he'd need to push the trigger for each shot AFAIK.

[(((Fergus)))]

He used a 9mm pistol. I'd be surprised if it was anything more than semi-automatic so he'd need to push the trigger for each shot AFAIK.

Could have been a 9-mm machine pistol but they would probably have mentioned that. Was probably single-shot.

[snooky]

Now being reported that she was shot through a bathroom door...

Holy crap, batman!

[Apocalypso]

Poor guy. He had the world at his knees.

[Corstorphine Hibby]

Yup.

I hear that Nelson Mandela's a nice chap too.

The murdered victims from his 'freedom fighting' days may disagree

[marinello59]

The murdered victims from his 'freedom fighting' days may disagree

:rolleyes:

[marinello59]

Has anyone ever met a nice South African?

That reference is more than a bit dated FR.

[Beefster]

The murdered victims from his 'freedom fighting' days may disagree

Yeah, probably. To be honest, the 'nice chap' chat came from his 'helping to end apartheid, being president, being a nice chap' phase.

[carnoustiehibee]

Beefster, maybe the guy at work meant the car accident, shortly after the speedboat crash was his fault. he certainly has had a troubled past

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/pistorius-never-far-from-controversy/

[Corstorphine Hibby]

Yeah, probably. To be honest, the 'nice chap' chat came from his 'helping to end apartheid, being president, being a nice chap' phase.

:agree:

[Allant1981]

Something very weird with this, the guy seemed genuinely upset on tv. Unless it has finally dawned on him what he has just done. Feel for both families

[Corstorphine Hibby]

:rolleyes:

The penny drops, the secret to 17000 plus posts.

My turn.

:rolleyes:

[Sir David Gray]

Something very weird with this, the guy seemed genuinely upset on tv. Unless it has finally dawned on him what he has just done. Feel for both families

I've just seen the video of his court appearance today and it's very uncomfortable viewing.

I know it doesn't look too good for him and there's been a lot of media reports since yesterday, dropping strong hints about his alleged darker side, but I genuinely cannot believe that he's guilty of deliberately murdering someone.

Perhaps I'll be proved wrong, given time, but I really hope that this still ends up being a huge mistake.

It won't make his girlfriend come back and it won't make it any easier on him either but at least he wouldn't be branded a murderer.

Just an extremely sad version of events.

[s.a.m]

I've just seen the video of his court appearance today and it's very uncomfortable viewing.

I know it doesn't look too good for him and there's been a lot of media reports since yesterday, dropping strong hints about his alleged darker side, but I genuinely cannot believe that he's guilty of deliberately murdering someone.

Perhaps I'll be proved wrong, given time, but I really hope that this still ends up being a huge mistake.

It won't make his girlfriend come back and it won't make it any easier on him either but at least he wouldn't be branded a murderer.

Just an extremely sad version of events.

I know what you mean. Important role model and inspiration for a lot of people, and very upsetting (not least for the poor dead lass and her family).
Not looking good for him, though.

[Beefster]

Something very weird with this, the guy seemed genuinely upset on tv. Unless it has finally dawned on him what he has just done. Feel for both families

I'd be upset at the prospect of spending the next few decades in prison too.

[marinello59]

The penny drops, the secret to 17000 plus posts.

My turn.

:rolleyes:

Aye very good Corrie. Using quotation marks when describing the fight against apartheid is of course the height of sophisticated debate.

[RyeSloan]

He used a 9mm pistol. I'd be surprised if it was anything more than semi-automatic so he'd need to push the trigger for each shot AFAIK.

Shirley you pull not push a trigger? :confused: :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

I know what you mean. Important role model and inspiration for a lot of people, and very upsetting (not least for the poor dead lass and her family).
Not looking good for him, though.

The guy is a huge role model to many young disabled people looking to make their way in sport. He was the face of the Paralympics, the poster boy and the iconic name that everyone seemed to know. Even those who don't take a huge interest in the Paralympics, or even sport in general, often know who Oscar Pistorius is.

Any time I've seen him on TV, and the one time that I've met him personally, he's always come across as such a charming individual with a great personality and someone you would want to spend time with.

It just all seems completely at odds with the kind of picture that the media is trying to portray now and it's not the person that I recognise.

Either way, I don't see any way back for him as a top level athlete. Obviously if he's found guilty of murder then he's probably looking at 30 years in prison at least so he's not going to get out until he's a fairly elderly man. But even if he's acquitted or convicted of a lesser charge, I don't think from a psychological point of view that he'll be capable of competing again.

From that point of view, it's extremely sad that disabled sport has lost such a huge name and such an inspirational character.

[lord bunberry]

Shirley you pull not push a trigger? :confused: :greengrin

Maybe he wad trying to shoot himself and missed

[Pete]

Shirley you pull not push a trigger? :confused: :greengrin

You do neither, you squeeze it.

This is where people are going wrong. Not Oscar, obviously!

[Beefster]

Shirley you pull not push a trigger? :confused: :greengrin

I knew I'd been doing something wrong. Mrs Beefster's luck just ran out!

[--------]

The guy is a huge role model to many young disabled people looking to make their way in sport. He was the face of the Paralympics, the poster boy and the iconic name that everyone seemed to know. Even those who don't take a huge interest in the Paralympics, or even sport in general, often know who Oscar Pistorius is.

Any time I've seen him on TV, and the one time that I've met him personally, he's always come across as such a charming individual with a great personality and someone you would want to spend time with.

It just all seems completely at odds with the kind of picture that the media is trying to portray now and it's not the person that I recognise.

Either way, I don't see any way back for him as a top level athlete. Obviously if he's found guilty of murder then he's probably looking at 30 years in prison at least so he's not going to get out until he's a fairly elderly man. But even if he's acquitted or convicted of a lesser charge, I don't think from a psychological point of view that he'll be capable of competing again.

From that point of view, it's extremely sad that disabled sport has lost such a huge name and such an inspirational character.


Has it occurred to you that the fact he competes in athletics at world level doesn't mean squat in terms of his character or what he is or isn't capable of doing?

I believe Hitler could be very charming in company and was very nice to dogs and children - until he fed cyanide to his German shepherd and recruited the Hitler Youth into the Volkssturm to fight the Red Army ...

I once knew a very charming chap from Edinburgh whose wife was in very frail health - mainly due to his regularly beating her up and kicking her ribs in. Popular chap - none of his friends could believe it when the truth finally came out.




They call Pistorius "Blade Runner" - any bets his defence will be that the lassie was a Replicant? :rolleyes:

[snooky]

Shirley you pull not push a trigger? :confused: :greengrin

"Calling Roy Rogers, calling Roy Rogers........."

[Sir David Gray]

Has it occurred to you that the fact he competes in athletics at world level doesn't mean squat in terms of his character or what he is or isn't capable of doing?

I believe Hitler could be very charming in company and was very nice to dogs and children - until he fed cyanide to his German shepherd and recruited the Hitler Youth into the Volkssturm to fight the Red Army ...

I once knew a very charming chap from Edinburgh whose wife was in very frail health - mainly due to his regularly beating her up and kicking her ribs in. Popular chap - none of his friends could believe it when the truth finally came out.




They call Pistorius "Blade Runner" - any bets his defence will be that the lassie was a Replicant? :rolleyes:

I do understand that.

However I'm not just going on the fact that he's good at athletics when saying that I can't believe he would be capable of murder.

I'm going on how he comes across whenever he's on TV and the one time I've been in his company.

Of course you can never tell what goes on behind closed doors and people can have a dark side.

Perhaps that is the case with Oscar Pistorius, maybe he has got skeletons in his closet and maybe he has gunned his girlfriend down in cold blood.

I'm just really struggling to take it all in, that's all. This has really shocked me.

[carnoustiehibee]

Read my link and more info on his past.

He seems to have a more troubled past than you think.

[Sir David Gray]

Read my link and more info on his past.

He seems to have a more troubled past than you think.

I have read it and whilst a couple of those incidents certainly don't put him in a very good light, I think they're a far cry from going out and deliberately shooting and murdering your partner inside your own home.

I will wait to hear all of the evidence before I cast any judgement. I'm not saying that he's definitely innocent of murder, I obviously have no knowledge of what went on a couple of days ago. However there's something that doesn't really seem right with all this and I would like to hear the evidence heard in court before saying anything either way.

Needless to say though, I really hope that it still turns out to be one big mistake.

[RyeSloan]

Falkirk....what big mistake are you referring to?


I think it is quite telling that his family have referenced the word premeditated in their statements. I've not yet heard a denial that he was the shooter

[GhostofBolivar]

Nowhere does this make it look like an accident...

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/exclusive-the-case-against-oscar-2/

[Peevemor]

Nowhere does this make it look like an accident...

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/exclusive-the-case-against-oscar-2/

The steroid thing would explain a lot and was one of the first things I thought of when reading about his history of paranoid and aggressive behaviour.

[Betty Boop]

Nowhere does this make it look like an accident...

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/exclusive-the-case-against-oscar-2/

He thought she was an intruder, that's his story and he is sticking to it. Notice he has flown over Stewart Higgins, ex editor of the Sun as his PR troubleshooter. I wonder how they will spin out this story.
Poor lassie, my heart goes out to her friends and family.

[carnoustiehibee]

Nowhere does this make it look like an accident...

http://www.citypress.co.za/news/exclusive-the-case-against-oscar-2/

this was one of the comments in that article. Beefster this should interest you

Defenderofthefaithless • 3 hours ago

Perhaps he will avoid jailtime by paying blood money to the steenkamp family like bees le roux did when he murdered the traffic cop. Bees paid 750 000' Oscar can afford r7.5 million which her parents can use to open up a trust for abused women under her name. If bees can do it then so can Oscar right?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/9874684/Oscar-Pistorius-Not-the-boy-I-knew.html

[Beefster]

this was one of the comments in that article. Beefster this should interest you

Defenderofthefaithless • 3 hours ago

Perhaps he will avoid jailtime by paying blood money to the steenkamp family like bees le roux did when he murdered the traffic cop. Bees paid 750 000' Oscar can afford r7.5 million which her parents can use to open up a trust for abused women under her name. If bees can do it then so can Oscar right?

I read the story of Bees Roux on the back of seeing your post and it appears ridiculous that a sum can be paid to have a sentence suspended.

Still not a cover-up though!

[Sir David Gray]

Falkirk....what big mistake are you referring to?


I think it is quite telling that his family have referenced the word premeditated in their statements. I've not yet heard a denial that he was the shooter

A mistake in that he didn't intend to murder an innocent person and he did really believe that he was shooting an intruder.

I'm not trying to suggest that he wasn't the person who fired the gun, I think that is fairly clear cut. The circumstances are a little less so.

It won't make it any better for the girl's friends and family, she's gone and nothing can bring her back, but I hope that he's not guilty of deliberately murdering his girlfriend.

[--------]

I do understand that.

However I'm not just going on the fact that he's good at athletics when saying that I can't believe he would be capable of murder.

I'm going on how he comes across whenever he's on TV and the one time I've been in his company.

Of course you can never tell what goes on behind closed doors and people can have a dark side.

Perhaps that is the case with Oscar Pistorius, maybe he has got skeletons in his closet and maybe he has gunned his girlfriend down in cold blood.

I'm just really struggling to take it all in, that's all. This has really shocked me.


Sorry - came on a bit too strong there, FH.

My experience, it's easy to put over a pleasant front in public, covering up a darker private character.

And when someone's a prominent role-model, someone who's overcome a major obstacle to succeed in some field, we tend to think well of them. Case in point Stephen Hawking, whose treatment of his first wife was something a lot less than loving, fair, or even decent. We make excuses for such folks, and goodness knows, I wouldn't take Hawking's life with a £50,000,000 golden handshake. BVut they're just folks, with the same weaknesses and failings as anyone else.

Top athletes are very focused, very competitive, and usually with a streak of aggression in them, otherwise they wouldn't be top athletes, I think. If Pistorius has been using steroids, then that would just make everything worse.

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe the 'accidental shooting' story. It was eiuther cold-blooded, or a case of 'roid rage.

[M6hibee]

Once saw a documentary on South African prisons. A white guy in there? Gonnae be a tough future if he ends up there

[--------]

Once saw a documentary on South African prisons. A white guy in there? Gonnae be a tough future if he ends up there

Don't worry about it - he'll only be getting what he deserves, right?

[GhostofBolivar]

Once saw a documentary on South African prisons. A white guy in there? Gonnae be a tough future if he ends up there


What I'm saying is I don't care how this guy got killed, he deserved it and he is no loss. All this talk about him and his supposed rights, kind of takes attention away fae the poor kids who he tortured and killed in the first place. Eye for an eye, good riddance

Hmmm....

[M6hibee]

Fail tae see what you two are on about. Enlighten me as tae how they contradict

[M6hibee]

Unless your both labour under the misapprehension I feel fae this fella? Just stating a fact. South African prisons are tough, he will be in fae a nightmare. Does he deserve it? If he killed that lassie and it was first degree murder, I won't be worried at all

[Betty Boop]

Prosecution is alleging that the murder was premeditated, as he had time to put on his prosthetic legs before firing shots through the bathroom door, where Reeva Steenkamp had barricaded herself in.
The magistrate has determined that he will consider the charge as premeditated murder.

[--------]

Fail tae see what you two are on about. Enlighten me as tae how they contradict


Unless your both labour under the misapprehension I feel fae this fella? Just stating a fact. South African prisons are tough, he will be in fae a nightmare. Does he deserve it? If he killed that lassie and it was first degree murder, I won't be worried at all


You really don't get it.

What you're advocating is lynch law - anybody can do anything they like to anybody, just as long as you approve.

Prisons aren't - or shouldn't be - beyond the law. Three women were covicted and imprisoned on charges of murdering their children. They were subjected to months and years of brutality and torment by their fellow-prisoners while the prison officers - officers of the law - turned their backs and let it happen. Then it turned out they were INNOCENT. They were freed - but no apology, no prosecution of the cons who tormented them, no disciplining of the screws who let it happen, no inquiry into who in the CPS had broken the rules and perverted their trials.

If Oscar Pistorius deliberately is guilty he deserves to go to jail. That's the law. But that doesn't give his fellow-cons the right to torture him once he's there.

Either the law works for everybody or it fails everybody.

Dave Jones - Sheffield Wednesday's manager - was manager of Southampton when he was accused of having abused boys in his care when he had worked in a kids' home.

"In June 1999 Jones was formally questioned by police over alleged sexual abuse at St George's School in Formby, Merseyside, a home for children with educational and behavioural problems, where he had been employed as a care worker from 1986 to 1990. After voluntarily attending the police station, he was arrested then questioned, before being released on bail without charge.


He was subsequently charged on 27 September with nine offences against young boys of indecent assault and child cruelty. He denied all the allegations and stated he was "confident that [his] innocence will be established in due course". He appeared before Merseyside Magistrates Court on 2 November 1999 where he formally pleaded not guilty to all charges and was granted bail.


The case reached Liverpool Crown Court in December 2000, by which time Jones had parted company with Southampton. He stood trial on an eventual 21 charges, which was swiftly reduced to 14 after two other alleged victims pulled out of proceedings on the eve of the trial.

After a further alleged victim declined to appear or refused to give evidence, the Judge directed the jury during the fourth day of proceedings to return a formal not guilty verdict on four charges relating to the absent party. After decreeing a retrial would not be "just" on the remaining charges, the Judge recorded not guilty verdicts on the remaining 10 charges. Jones left cleared of all allegations and was told by the Judge: "No wrongdoing whatsoever on your part has been established".


One of the key "victims" was later found to have fabricated their claim of abuse in Jones' and other cases brought from Operation Care – the police investigation into child abuse – in order to win compensation. Jones himself later spoke bitterly of the handling of the case and claimed it was the cause of his father's death, who had died shortly after the allegations became public.


Jones speaks in more detail about the case in his autobiography, "No Smoke, No Fire" published in June 2009."

While he was being questioned that first day - the day he was released without charge - someone in the police station called the tabloids and told them that Jones had been arrested - after all, he was manager of a Premiership team at the time. Jones' father saw the headlines in the papers before Jones could get home to tell the old man himself. Jones' father soon after.

But then Jones had been arrested, hadn't he? He must have been guilty, so he didn't have any rights under the law, had he? Nor did his family?

There are plenty of cases where innocent people have been charged with, even convicted of crimes that you and I find abhorrent.

Until the judicial process can be guaranteed to be 100% infallible and trustworthy, the possibility of a miscarriage exists. Which means that every convicted accused has the right to protection while in jail.

[M6hibee]

Oh I clearly do get it pal. Where it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt, I have no problem with execution or that person being taken out. The guy we were talking about on the other thread deserved what he got. End ay story. Perhaps you don't get it

[M6hibee]

Lynch law? That's your interpretation, don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is that people like that guy in the other thread got what they deserved. And again, your talking about rights of people who committed heinous acts. Their victims don't have any rights or any chance cos they are dead and don't have a chance of anything. That's where my sympathies lie

[Sylar]

The prosecution argument (according to the Tweets I've read) is quite ridiculous (and almost a little discriminatory?).


not like waking up with someone over your bed and shoot on instinct. No, he woke, put on legs, took gun and walked 7m to shoot.

If you wake up with someone over your bed, I'd wager that you wouldn't have time to reach for a gun and shoot so the comparison is laughably bad.

However because he "had to put on his legs" and move towards her, it's premeditated? How many stories (both fictional or real-life) have featured someone being awoken by a noise in their home, grabbing a weapon and moving towards said noise? If he thought an intruder was in the bathroom (breaking in? looking for things of value?) and he's got up and moved towards noise from that room and shot at them, it's far from solid grounds to declare premeditation.

Maybe it was in cold blood and maybe it wasn't, but the line of argument from the prosecution is amateurish and very easily fallible...though the Magistrate appears to side with them in his ruling of premeditation being the charge.

[--------]

Oh I clearly do get it pal. Where it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt, I have no problem with execution or that person being taken out. The guy we were talking about on the other thread deserved what he got. End ay story. Perhaps you don't get it


Lynch law? That's your interpretation, don't put words in my mouth. What I am saying is that people like that guy in the other thread got what they deserved. And again, your talking about rights of people who committed heinous acts. Their victims don't have any rights or any chance cos they are dead and don't have a chance of anything. That's where my sympathies lie


Then let's hope you're never unjustly accused of a crime involving assault or murder against a child, because what you advocate works just as well in remand as it does after conviction.

And lynch law is exactly what you're advocating.

[M6hibee]

What a load ay tosh and ill tell you gain, don't put words in my mouth. I'm advocating that the punishment fits the crime. End of. I'm sure you believe prisons are full of innocent people. Where it's proven beyond doubt and where the crime is heinous, the death penalty should be utilised rather than keeping these sickos in prison at the tax payers expense. Look forward to the glib reply from the resident do-good era (daily mail reader, bnp supporter etc etc)

[Betty Boop]

The prosecution argument (according to the Tweets I've read) is quite ridiculous (and almost a little discriminatory?).



If you wake up with someone over your bed, I'd wager that you wouldn't have time to reach for a gun and shoot so the comparison is laughably bad.

However because he "had to put on his legs" and move towards her, it's premeditated? How many stories (both fictional or real-life) have featured someone being awoken by a noise in their home, grabbing a weapon and moving towards said noise? If he thought an intruder was in the bathroom (breaking in? looking for things of value?) and he's got up and moved towards noise from that room and shot at them, it's far from solid grounds to declare premeditation.

Maybe it was in cold blood and maybe it wasn't, but the line of argument from the prosecution is amateurish and very easily fallible...though the Magistrate appears to side with them in his ruling of premeditation being the charge.

So in your scenario his girlfriend must have rushed into the bathroom and locked herself in, without uttering a sound ? I would have thought there would be quite a bit of noise in that room.

[Sylar]

So in your scenario his girlfriend must have rushed into the bathroom and locked herself in, without uttering a sound ? I would have thought there would be quite a bit of noise in that room.

I'm not presenting any scenario...

I'm merely stating that suggesting premeditation because he heard a noise, got up, attached his legs*, grabbed a weapon and walked towards the noise and shot blindly is a weak argument.

(*Incidentally, the prosecution seem to be suggesting that because of the time taken to do this and walk towards the scene of the shooting suggests premeditation - to me, this seems to infer that the criteria for premeditation varies in the case of amputees?)

Let's assume that his story is legitimate and he thought he heard a noise in his home (which I don't think he denies but how do the prosecution convince the judge and associate magistrates without any doubt that he knew it WAS her) and assumed it to be an intruder. What is he supposed to do? Lie in bed and shout at them to get out because it takes time to attach the devices which provide him with the mobility to do what most of us would do if we heard an intruder in our homes (minus the gun in most cases)?

If his story is true, he took action against a perceived intruder and realised what he'd done afterwards.

[Sergio sledge]

The prosecution argument (according to the Tweets I've read) is quite ridiculous (and almost a little discriminatory?).



If you wake up with someone over your bed, I'd wager that you wouldn't have time to reach for a gun and shoot so the comparison is laughably bad.

However because he "had to put on his legs" and move towards her, it's premeditated? How many stories (both fictional or real-life) have featured someone being awoken by a noise in their home, grabbing a weapon and moving towards said noise? If he thought an intruder was in the bathroom (breaking in? looking for things of value?) and he's got up and moved towards noise from that room and shot at them, it's far from solid grounds to declare premeditation.

Maybe it was in cold blood and maybe it wasn't, but the line of argument from the prosecution is amateurish and very easily fallible...though the Magistrate appears to side with them in his ruling of premeditation being the charge.

I get what you are saying, but if his girlfriend got up in the middle of the night to go to the toilet, he heard a sound in the bathroom, put on his prosthetics, got his gun walked to the bathroom door and fired 4 shots through it without trying to find out who is in the bathroom before shooting, then surely his premeditated intention is to kill whoever is in there, no matter whether he thought it was an intruder or not.

I suppose it depends on how you define premeditated, but the fact that he put his prosthetics on, got his gun and walked to the bathroom does not suggest a heat of the moment/instinctive reaction. Is there time delay set down in law between the decision to kill and the actual killing which determines premeditation?

In my opinion, if I was in his situation and heard a sound in my bathroom, (and the door was closed) I would go near enough to the bathroom but not too close and try to determine who was in the bathroom before taking any action, perhaps calling security first. If the events transpired as is suggested and his defence is accurate in his claim that he thought it was an intruder then it still doesn't paint a very good picture of the guy as he was clearly out to kill or injure whoever was in the bathroom without any questions asked or giving them a chance.

Some might argue that if it was an intruder they are fair game, but I think he's got to at least try to stop them/capture them first using lethal force as a last resort.

[Sylar]

I get what you are saying, but if his girlfriend got up in the middle of the night to go to the toilet, he heard a sound in the bathroom, put on his prosthetics, got his gun walked to the bathroom door and fired 4 shots through it without trying to find out who is in the bathroom before shooting, then surely his premeditated intention is to kill whoever is in there, no matter whether he thought it was an intruder or not.

I don't doubt he didn't "shoot to kill" but that's responsive and not premeditated. Premeditated suggests he planned and executed the murder of another person.


I suppose it depends on how you define premeditated, but the fact that he put his prosthetics on, got his gun and walked to the bathroom does not suggest a heat of the moment/instinctive reaction. Is there time delay set down in law between the decision to kill and the actual killing which determines premeditation?

As per my latest post, are we saying premeditation hinges on whether you're fully able bodied or not?

Assuming (God forbid) that I lost both of my legs and was awoken by what I deemed to be an intruder, I'd certainly take the time to attach the devices which permit me mobility, grab something and investigate.


In my opinion, if I was in his situation and heard a sound in my bathroom, (and the door was closed) I would go near enough to the bathroom but not too close and try to determine who was in the bathroom before taking any action, perhaps calling security first. If the events transpired as is suggested and his defence is accurate in his claim that he thought it was an intruder then it still doesn't paint a very good picture of the guy as he was clearly out to kill or injure whoever was in the bathroom without any questions asked or giving them a chance.

Obviously all we have on here right now are opinions which is all I'm putting forth too. However, it's hard to say that what we'd do is comparable to how someone would react in another country. In the USA for example, I dare say the response to such a crime would probably be similar to what transpired here. Wide gun ownership presents people with the luxury of "shoot first, ask questions later" and most people exercise this right in the name of defending themselves, family or property. If he gets to the bathroom and finds someone armed (owing to the equally wide gun ownership laws in South Africa) then he has few options. To me, it doesn't paint a great picture of the society in South Africa where people evidently feel a need to defend themselves with terminal force. If he's been brought up in that social environment and suddenly has a lot to protect, it doesn't surprise me that he opened fire.


Some might argue that if it was an intruder they are fair game, but I think he's got to at least try to stop them/capture them first using lethal force as a last resort.

Again, I think it comes down to culture. I certainly wouldn't have the intent of killing someone here but in a country where an intruder will most likely be armed, perhaps stopping and capturing isn't likely without significant risk to your own person?

[Sergio sledge]

*Incidentally, the prosecution seem to be suggesting that because of the time taken to do this and walk towards the scene of the shooting suggests premeditation - to me, this seems to infer that the criteria for premeditation varies in the case of amputees?

I would argue the opposite, it is applying the same criteria for premeditation to a disabled person as an able bodied person. Are you suggesting that a physically disabled person is allowed a longer window of time in which to perform an act before premeditation is determined? It's not a mental disability he has as far as I know. (I'm assuming premeditation is determined by some sort of time criteria)If an able bodied person woke up to a noise in their house, waited 30 seconds, got their gun, walked a few metres away and fired at wherever the noise was coming from without any sort of warning or establishment of the source of the noise and ended up killing someone, I'd have thought they would get charged with premeditated murder too?

The fact that he had a disability which increased the length of time he took to perform an action also gave him the opportunity to think about what he was doing and any alternative actions.

It seems pretty callous to shoot someone through a door without at least establishing who they are and whether they are a threat?

[Sylar]

I would argue the opposite, it is applying the same criteria for premeditation to a disabled person as an able bodied person. Are you suggesting that a physically disabled person is allowed a longer window of time in which to perform an act before premeditation is determined? It's not a mental disability he has as far as I know. (I'm assuming premeditation is determined by some sort of time criteria)If an able bodied person woke up to a noise in their house, waited 30 seconds, got their gun, walked a few metres away and fired at wherever the noise was coming from without any sort of warning or establishment of the source of the noise and ended up killing someone, I'd have thought they would get charged with premeditated murder too?

The fact that he had a disability which increased the length of time he took to perform an action also gave him the opportunity to think about what he was doing and any alternative actions.

It seems pretty callous to shoot someone through a door without at least establishing who they are and whether they are a threat?

I guess I've addressed some of this in my latest post so I won't repeat many of the points again here :)

[Sergio sledge]

I don't doubt he didn't "shoot to kill" but that's responsive and not premeditated. Premeditated suggests he planned and executed the murder of another person.



As per my latest post, are we saying premeditation hinges on whether you're fully able bodied or not?

Assuming (God forbid) that I lost both of my legs and was awoken by what I deemed to be an intruder, I'd certainly take the time to attach the devices which permit me mobility, grab something and investigate.



Obviously all we have on here right now are opinions which is all I'm putting forth too. However, it's hard to say that what we'd do is comparable to how someone would react in another country. In the USA for example, I dare say the response to such a crime would probably be similar to what transpired here. Wide gun ownership presents people with the luxury of "shoot first, ask questions later" and most people exercise this right in the name of defending themselves, family or property. If he gets to the bathroom and finds someone armed (owing to the equally wide gun ownership laws in South Africa) then he has few options. To me, it doesn't paint a great picture of the society in South Africa where people evidently feel a need to defend themselves with terminal force. If he's been brought up in that social environment and suddenly has a lot to protect, it doesn't surprise me that he opened fire.



Again, I think it comes down to culture. I certainly wouldn't have the intent of killing someone here but in a country where an intruder will most likely be armed, perhaps stopping and capturing isn't likely without significant risk to your own person?

I know there's a cultural element involved and I certainly wouldn't discount that as a factor, I can't say how I'd react if brought up in that culture, but he wasn't in any apparent danger, the door was closed and he was 7m away, couldn't he have tried to establish the facts first before shooting then if he saw someone coming out of the bathroom with a gun/weapon defended himself?

Edit: You've spent some time living in the USA haven't you? So you'll have a better understanding of the cultural elements than me... :wink:

[Beefster]

I don't doubt he didn't "shoot to kill" but that's responsive and not premeditated. Premeditated suggests he planned and executed the murder of another person.



As per my latest post, are we saying premeditation hinges on whether you're fully able bodied or not?

Assuming (God forbid) that I lost both of my legs and was awoken by what I deemed to be an intruder, I'd certainly take the time to attach the devices which permit me mobility, grab something and investigate.



Obviously all we have on here right now are opinions which is all I'm putting forth too. However, it's hard to say that what we'd do is comparable to how someone would react in another country. In the USA for example, I dare say the response to such a crime would probably be similar to what transpired here. Wide gun ownership presents people with the luxury of "shoot first, ask questions later" and most people exercise this right in the name of defending themselves, family or property. If he gets to the bathroom and finds someone armed (owing to the equally wide gun ownership laws in South Africa) then he has few options. To me, it doesn't paint a great picture of the society in South Africa where people evidently feel a need to defend themselves with terminal force. If he's been brought up in that social environment and suddenly has a lot to protect, it doesn't surprise me that he opened fire.



Again, I think it comes down to culture. I certainly wouldn't have the intent of killing someone here but in a country where an intruder will most likely be armed, perhaps stopping and capturing isn't likely without significant risk to your own person?

I'd be surprised if the time taken to get out of bed before he started shooting was the prosecution's only reason for considering it pre-mediated.

IMHO mentioning that he put on his prostheses is relevant to the case and is no more discriminatory than mentioning someone who lives in the Article Circle put on their coat before shooting.

It may not be surprising that he opened fire but, even if his story is true, he had a duty of care to make sure that the person in the bathroom wasn't the only other person in the house that he was definitely aware of.

[Sylar]

I know there's a cultural element involved and I certainly wouldn't discount that as a factor, I can't say how I'd react if brought up in that culture, but he wasn't in any apparent danger, the door was closed and he was 7m away, couldn't he have tried to establish the facts first before shooting then if he saw someone coming out of the bathroom with a gun/weapon defended himself?

Edit: You've spent some time living in the USA haven't you? So you'll have a better understanding of the cultural elements than me... :wink:

In the US, there would be a reasonable number of people who would simply shoot. I dare say most people would take aim and threaten to shoot unless any such intruder left the premises. Each case would be a myriad of circumstances though and not necessarily as black and white as "person A would shoot, person B wouldn't".

As for South Africa, I don't have a clue...

[Sylar]

I'd be surprised if the time taken to get out of bed before he started shooting was the prosecution's only reason for considering it pre-mediated.

IMHO mentioning that he put on his prostheses is relevant to the case and is no more discriminatory than mentioning someone who lives in the Article Circle put on their coat before shooting.

Agree on your first point - my comment was in response to the tweets which the BBC have been circulating - I dare say there is probably a lot more to the argument we're not hearing right now. I might be reading your post wrong Beefster (and if so, my apologies in advance) but doesn't it contradict itself a little? Precisely true that putting on his prostheses is an unavoidable fact of the case but in light of that, the time taken to do so can hardly be considered evident of premeditation (either in conjunction with other evidence which may be more clear cut or as a standalone). He has no option but to attach his prostheses before he does anything so the time taken cannot be considered evident of anything else IMO.


It may not be surprising that he opened fire but, even if his story is true, he had a duty of care to make sure that the person in the bathroom wasn't the only other person in the house that he was definitely aware of.

I can't say how I'd react in that circumstance in all honesty so I'd be responding with supposition. I might check the rest of the house first or I might check to see what I'd just done.

[Betty Boop]

I'm not presenting any scenario...

I'm merely stating that suggesting premeditation because he heard a noise, got up, attached his legs*, grabbed a weapon and walked towards the noise and shot blindly is a weak argument.

(*Incidentally, the prosecution seem to be suggesting that because of the time taken to do this and walk towards the scene of the shooting suggests premeditation - to me, this seems to infer that the criteria for premeditation varies in the case of amputees?)

Let's assume that his story is legitimate and he thought he heard a noise in his home (which I don't think he denies but how do the prosecution convince the judge and associate magistrates without any doubt that he knew it WAS her) and assumed it to be an intruder. What is he supposed to do? Lie in bed and shout at them to get out because it takes time to attach the devices which provide him with the mobility to do what most of us would do if we heard an intruder in our homes (minus the gun in most cases)?

If his story is true, he took action against a perceived intruder and realised what he'd done afterwards.

Considering the fact that he has already admitted in an affidavit to the court that his girlfriend was in the house, in bed with him when he fell asleep, would you not have expected him to shout out to her, to identify whether it was her in the bathroom ? :confused:

[lord bunberry]

I wonder what we would do in his position. He wakes up and realises someone is in his house. He isn't going to shout who's there in case the intruder is armed and comes and shoots him. He is going to quietly as he can put on his legs grab his gun and go and investigate. Obviously we know what happened after that. The question is is that premeditated murder. If your in your own home in fear for your own life does that give you the right to open fire. Obviously I don't know if that's how thing's happened but I would imagine that will be his defence

[RyeSloan]

Agree on your first point - my comment was in response to the tweets which the BBC have been circulating - I dare say there is probably a lot more to the argument we're not hearing right now. I might be reading your post wrong Beefster (and if so, my apologies in advance) but doesn't it contradict itself a little? Precisely true that putting on his prostheses is an unavoidable fact of the case but in light of that, the time taken to do so can hardly be considered evident of premeditation (either in conjunction with other evidence which may be more clear cut or as a standalone). He has no option but to attach his prostheses before he does anything so the time taken cannot be considered evident of anything else IMO.



I can't say how I'd react in that circumstance in all honesty so I'd be responding with supposition. I might check the rest of the house first or I might check to see what I'd just done.

I'm not getting your argument here.

From what I can see they prosecution has shown there was a time delay in terms of him deciding to get out of bed and deciding to fire the gun. It would seem reasonable to suggest then that IF he knew it was his girlfriend that the time taken to go from A to B would have given him a window in which to make a considered choice of action. In this case his action was to fire a number of shots through a door, which it can (and is) being argued was a premeditated action. That action resulted in her death ergo murder that was the result of a premeditated action.

The facts of the case may change but seriously from what has been presented so far does anyone think the Pistorius didn't know it was his girlfriend in there? There has already been comment that it was clear from the crime scene that she had been in bed previously so he would have known it was her. Also if it was an intruder WTF were they doing in a locked bathroom...caught short on the job?

[Sylar]

I'm not getting your argument here.

From what I can see they prosecution has shown there was a time delay in terms of him deciding to get out of bed and deciding to fire the gun. It would seem reasonable to suggest then that IF he knew it was his girlfriend that the time taken to go from A to B would have given him a window in which to make a considered choice of action. In this case his action was to fire a number of shots through a door, which it can (and is) being argued was a premeditated action. That action resulted in her death ergo murder that was the result of a premeditated action.

I don't for one second doubt he made up his mind to pull the trigger but to me, premeditated suggests careful planning and execution of killing her: he decided to shoot at whoever was behind the bathroom door but without any guarantee that a) he knew who he was shooting at or b) he knew he would hit them. Granted, b) is a bit silly as he shot multiple times (thus showing intent to hit whoever was on the other side) but from his story, he was reacting to a situation and not carrying out a planned attack. He made the choice to pull the trigger but that's not akin to meticulously planning the murder of his girlfriend.


The facts of the case may change but seriously from what has been presented so far does anyone think the Pistorius didn't know it was his girlfriend in there? There has already been comment that it was clear from the crime scene that she had been in bed previously so he would have known it was her. Also if it was an intruder WTF were they doing in a locked bathroom...caught short on the job?

Having now read his statement (which in response additionally to Betty's question above, I hadn't read prior to our initial conversation as the BBC didn't update their article until a short while ago) there is a reasonable argument that he might have known it was her. His statement seems to suggest he was on the balcony (not in the bedroom) without his prosthetic legs and heard a noise. Knowing his girlfriend was in the house, then yes, the question very much becomes why he didn't check it was her firstly. It has changed my opinion a little...

However, the definition of premeditation is where we differ. He made a decision to pull the trigger and kill whoever was behind that door, sure. Premeditation to me suggests the planning and killing of another person. It can only be considered premeditated if the prosecution can prove he knew she was behind the door as deciding to pull the trigger and kill a person in reaction to a perceived position of threat is not the same thing?

[carnoustiehibee]

Here are today’s key points:

• Oscar Pistorius has given his account of the night his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp died at his house in Pretoria. In a statement read out by his lawyer, the Paralympic and Olympic star said the two were in bed asleep on Wednesday night when he got up and went to the balcony to close a sliding door and get a fan. He heard a noise in the bathroom and assumed it was an intruder, he said. Feeling vulnerable without his prosthetic legs, he got his gun and shot through the door, he said. He then saw that Steenkamp was not in bed, he said. He broke the bathroom door down with a cricket bat, he said; Steenkamp was still alive but died in his arms. He denied that he had murdered her, saying nothing could be further from the truth.

• The prosecution gave a different version of events. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel said there was an argument before the shooting, and laterPistorius got up from bed, put on his prosthetic legs, armed himself, walked seven metres to the toilet door and shot Steenkamp four times; three of the shots killed her. Even if he thought she was a burglar, it was still premeditated murder, Nel said. But he asked why a burglar would lock himself in the toilet.

•*Magistrate Desmond Nair ruled that Pistorius should be charged with premeditated murder, a “category six” offence that will make it very difficult for the defendant to be granted bail. Pistorius must argue that there are “exceptional circumstances” that mean he should get bail. In his statement Pistorius stressed that he would not leave the country if granted bail and intended to stand trial. He said he would surrender his passport and would not interfere with witnesses, saying he knew of none in this case. Nair did suggest at one point that he may change his mind about categorising the offence as schedule six once he had heard all the evidence.

• Pistorius, the world’s best known disabled athlete, broke down frequently throughout the hearing, which was adjourned at one point to allow him to compose himself. In his statement he said he was “mortified” at having killed Steenkamp and could not stand how much hurt he had caused. He said he and Steenkamp had been “deeply in love”.

• The funeral of Reeva Steenkamp was held this morning in the coastal South African city of Port Elizabeth.

• Pistorius will be held overnight at Brooklyn police station in Pretoria. The bail hearing will continue tomorrow at 9am local time (7am GMT). I hope you can join me again then.

[Hibrandenburg]

I personally would not dream of shooting an intruder in the buff. It would take me more than a few moments to put on my Hugo Boss satin pyjamas, Harrods homestyle bathing robe and Tweed slippers. After having then removed my night cap and movie star eye covers and only then would I dare to shoot anyone. You never know it might be you that ends up on the slab and doing so in the buffty is just not Hibs class.

[GhostofBolivar]

Oh I clearly do get it pal. Where it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt, I have no problem with execution or that person being taken out. The guy we were talking about on the other thread deserved what he got. End ay story. Perhaps you don't get it

'There, but for the grace of God, goes John Bradford.'

[Beefster]

I wonder what we would do in his position. He wakes up and realises someone is in his house. He isn't going to shout who's there in case the intruder is armed and comes and shoots him. He is going to quietly as he can put on his legs grab his gun and go and investigate. Obviously we know what happened after that. The question is is that premeditated murder. If your in your own home in fear for your own life does that give you the right to open fire. Obviously I don't know if that's how thing's happened but I would imagine that will be his defence

He's clear-headed enough to be quiet, put on his prostheses and grab his gun but doesn't think to check that his girlfriend is safe in bed?

[RyeSloan]

I don't for one second doubt he made up his mind to pull the trigger but to me, premeditated suggests careful planning and execution of killing her: he decided to shoot at whoever was behind the bathroom door but without any guarantee that a) he knew who he was shooting at or b) he knew he would hit them. Granted, b) is a bit silly as he shot multiple times (thus showing intent to hit whoever was on the other side) but from his story, he was reacting to a situation and not carrying out a planned attack. He made the choice to pull the trigger but that's not akin to meticulously planning the murder of his girlfriend.



Having now read his statement (which in response additionally to Betty's question above, I hadn't read prior to our initial conversation as the BBC didn't update their article until a short while ago) there is a reasonable argument that he might have known it was her. His statement seems to suggest he was on the balcony (not in the bedroom) without his prosthetic legs and heard a noise. Knowing his girlfriend was in the house, then yes, the question very much becomes why he didn't check it was her firstly. It has changed my opinion a little...

However, the definition of premeditation is where we differ. He made a decision to pull the trigger and kill whoever was behind that door, sure. Premeditation to me suggests the planning and killing of another person. It can only be considered premeditated if the prosecution can prove he knew she was behind the door as deciding to pull the trigger and kill a person in reaction to a perceived position of threat is not the same thing?

Ok I get ya a bit clearer now.

My thoughts though are that he knew damn well who was behind that door. He also knew damn well that by firing 4 shots through it he would kill that person. Therefore IF that is indeed the case and IF it is proven then premeditated would not be an incorrect term to use and if I get you right you would agree with that statement.

[CropleyWasGod]

We are less than a week into this case, and already there are echoes of the OJ case. It's high-profile, and is being discussed to death, mainly by those of us who don't actually know what happened.

Given that, and also how popular Pistorius was/is in South Africa, how likely is it that there will be a fair trial? For example, just the appointment of a jury is bound to extremely difficult.

[Allant1981]

We are less than a week into this case, and already there are echoes of the OJ case. It's high-profile, and is being discussed to death, mainly by those of us who don't actually know what happened.

Given that, and also how popular Pistorius was/is in South Africa, how likely is it that there will be a fair trial? For example, just the appointment of witnesses is bound to extremely difficult.


How can there be witnesses when there was only the 2 of them in the house at the time?

[CropleyWasGod]

How can there be witnesses when there was only the 2 of them in the house at the time?

:brickwall

Well spotted. I did, of course, mean a jury.

[Sylar]

We are less than a week into this case, and already there are echoes of the OJ case. It's high-profile, and is being discussed to death, mainly by those of us who don't actually know what happened.

Given that, and also how popular Pistorius was/is in South Africa, how likely is it that there will be a fair trial? For example, just the appointment of a jury is bound to extremely difficult.

South Africa doesn't use a jury system:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/18/oscar-pistorius-legal-q-and-a

[Hibs Class]

We are less than a week into this case, and already there are echoes of the OJ case. It's high-profile, and is being discussed to death, mainly by those of us who don't actually know what happened.

Given that, and also how popular Pistorius was/is in South Africa, how likely is it that there will be a fair trial? For example, just the appointment of a jury is bound to extremely difficult.

I think I heard earlier that it wouldn't be a jury trial but instead would be a single judge and so less of an issue with all the current noise as the judge would decide purely on the evidence.

[s.a.m]

I think I heard earlier that it wouldn't be a jury trial but instead would be a single judge and so less of an issue with all the current noise as the judge would decide purely on the evidence.

:agree: I heard a South African lawyer explaining that yesterday, in response to a query about the police giving out information which would prejudice a trial here.

[Sylar]

Ok I get ya a bit clearer now.

My thoughts though are that he knew damn well who was behind that door. He also knew damn well that by firing 4 shots through it he would kill that person. Therefore IF that is indeed the case and IF it is proven then premeditated would not be an incorrect term to use and if I get you right you would agree with that statement.

I don't mean this to sound argumentative, I'm genuinely interested: why do you think he knew who was behind the door?

The 4 shots certainly suggests intent to kill and I don't doubt he did intend to kill the person if he viewed them as a potentially armed intruder.

Premeditation is a very fluidly defined legal term I guess and I can see why it's dividing opinion :agree:

[ancienthibby]

I don't mean this to sound argumentative, I'm genuinely interested: why do you think he knew who was behind the door?

The 4 shots certainly suggests intent to kill and I don't doubt he did intend to kill the person if he viewed them as a potentially armed intruder.

Premeditation is a very fluidly defined legal term I guess and I can see why it's dividing opinion :agree:

Because when he was sat on the bed putting on his 'legs' he spoke to she who had been in his bed and said to her 'cover yourself up, there's an intruder in the house' and so he knew that when he went to the bathroom it could only be an intruder, albeit locked in the bathroom and not causing any threat at all. Did the intruder ever threaten OP? Seems not.

Just not credible to think that OP did not know exactly what he was doing - and to whom! They had an argument in bed and she ran to escape and the steroids won!

[Mon Dieu4]

intruders always head for the bathroom, its where everyone keeps valuables

[JimBHibees]

He's clear-headed enough to be quiet, put on his prostheses and grab his gun but doesn't think to check that his girlfriend is safe in bed?

Yep IMO his story is complete nonsense. Apparently a number of episodes of domestic type arguments, a cricket bat covered in blood. If he had any respect he would admit and take his punishment rather than putting on this PR veneer of loving boyfriend nonsense. Shameless.

No doubt his house would have had some top notch security system also.

[M6hibee]

'There, but for the grace of God, goes John Bradford.'

Aye but he was a proddy (joke by the way).

Look this is an emotive subject and I will admit I got ma teeth intae it earlier. No after ridiculing people's opinions and those who Dinnae agree with me, fair enough. I just personally feel that people who have committed serious crime like murder, sexual offences or atrocities should be dealt wie in the strongest manner possible. Relating tae the other thread on that child torturer and killer in this forum, i will certainly shed no tear for his passing, however it occurred.

[Andy74]

His story is ridiculous. If he was in fear of his life it doesn't take a wee second to check that the good lady is still in bed and not the one in the loo. He knew he was sharing the room with her. Surely the first thought and only reasonable thought is that she is using the loo. Shooting four times through a door is rather extreme for being a bit spooked overnight.

[lord bunberry]

He's clear-headed enough to be quiet, put on his prostheses and grab his gun but doesn't think to check that his girlfriend is safe in bed?

i hadnt realised his girlfriend had been with him. Having now read a bit more about it i agree it doesnt look good for him

[Speedy]

I don't really understand why he is denying murdering her. Regardless of whether you believe the story of the defence or the prosecutor I think it's fairly clear that he intended to kill the 'intruder'. It may not be premeditated (i.e. it may have been a heat of the moment thing) but you don't shoot 4 times through a door at someone without intending to kill them, and it doesn't sound like he was in any immediate threat.

[Scouse Hibee]

I thought this case was beginning to sound like a plot from CSI or something similar, then I realised that their plots are more believable than the bull**** stories his defence are spouting.

[Betty Boop]

Prosecution have told the court that two boxes of testosterone and needles were found in Pistorius' bedroom, and also alleging that he fired a shot in a restaurant last month.

[Beefster]

Previous examples of him threatening folk, bottles of testosterone and needles found in his house, Pistorius let off a shot in a restaurant once and let his friend take the blame, he was so worried about crime that he kept a gun close by his bed but sleeps with the balcony doors open, gun may have been kept on the same side of the bed as his girlfriend was sleeping, witness report arguing beforehand, witnesses report shots before the lights in the house went on and more shots were fired....

Not looking good for him so far.

[Betty Boop]

Previous examples of him threatening folk, bottles of testosterone and needles found in his house, Pistorius let off a shot in a restaurant once and let his friend take the blame, he was so worried about crime that he kept a gun close by his bed but sleeps with the balcony doors open, gun may have been kept on the same side of the bed as his girlfriend was sleeping, witness report arguing beforehand, witnesses report shots before the lights in the house went on and more shots were fired....

Not looking good for him so far.

Not looking good at all, the magistrate is also studying plans of the bathroom, to check the angle of the bullets. Apparently he claims he shot through the door without his blades on.

[RyeSloan]

Not looking good at all, the magistrate is also studying plans of the bathroom, to check the angle of the bullets. Apparently he claims he shot through the door without his blades on.

I'm amazed a double amputee could walk/stand without their artificial limbs.

[Scouse Hibee]

Not looking good at all, the magistrate is also studying plans of the bathroom, to check the angle of the bullets. Apparently he claims he shot through the door without his blades on.


Without his blades on? Surely they are talking about his prosthetic legs and not blades which he only uses to run in.

[Betty Boop]

Without his blades on? Surely they are talking about his prosthetic legs and not blades which he only uses to run in.

Woops I meant his legs ! :greengrin

[carnoustiehibee]

Without his blades on? Surely they are talking about his prosthetic legs and not blades which he only uses to run in.

Maybe they mean roller blades and he just rolled past the bathroom door and went pop pop pop (the movie will slow this scene down,making it all smokey and intense with orchestra music in the background)

[Sylar]

Prosecution have cited a witness who heard "gunshots followed by a woman screaming [2 or 3 times] followed by more gunshots". The prosecution have certainly made it look increasingly difficult for him to continue his line of defense in all honesty.

Like many, I had hoped (in lieu of many facts) that it would still turn out to be a tragic accident. Some of this alleged evidence makes it increasingly hard to believe that now.

[Scouse Hibee]

Maybe they mean roller blades and he just rolled past the bathroom door and went pop pop pop (the movie will slow this scene down,making it all smokey and intense with orchestra music in the background)


:greengrin Aye the Blade Gunner is certain to be a box office hit

[carnoustiehibee]

:greengrin Aye the Blade Gunner is certain to be a box office hit

Haha

[Betty Boop]

Maybe they mean roller blades and he just rolled past the bathroom door and went pop pop pop (the movie will slow this scene down,making it all smokey and intense with orchestra music in the background)


:faf:

[Scouse Hibee]

Prosecution have cited a witness who heard "gunshots followed by a woman screaming [2 or 3 times] followed by more gunshots". The prosecution have certainly made it look increasingly difficult for him to continue his line of defense in all honesty.

Like many, I had hoped (in lieu of many facts) that it would still turn out to be a tragic accident. Some of this alleged evidence makes it increasingly hard to believe that now.


A change of plea maybe?

[Sylar]

A change of plea maybe?

Wouldn't surprise me in light of today.

[Peevemor]

Maybe they mean roller blades and he just rolled past the bathroom door and went pop pop pop (the movie will slow this scene down,making it all smokey and intense with orchestra music in the background)


Unless Tarantino does the film, in which case it'll be an inappropriate, little known, 40 year old surfing song that'll end up being a global hit.

[hibsbollah]

Prosecution have cited a witness who heard "gunshots followed by a woman screaming [2 or 3 times] followed by more gunshots". The prosecution have certainly made it look increasingly difficult for him to continue his line of defense in all honesty.

Like many, I had hoped (in lieu of many facts) that it would still turn out to be a tragic accident. Some of this alleged evidence makes it increasingly hard to believe that now.

From the BBC report it sounds like the defence had a good time rebuffing the prosecutions case. The witness who heard arguments and screams was in her house a third of a mile (600m) away.

Not over yet.

[easty]

From the BBC report it sounds like the defence had a good time rebuffing the prosecutions case. The witness who heard arguments and screams was in her house a third of a mile (600m) away.

Not over yet.

Now they're saying it was 300m away not 600m.

[RyeSloan]

From the BBC report it sounds like the defence had a good time rebuffing the prosecutions case. The witness who heard arguments and screams was in her house a third of a mile (600m) away.

Not over yet.

Incredible amount of detail for a bail hearing isn't it. SA defo has a very different legal system compared to what we are used to over here.

[hibsbollah]

http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/20/oscar-pistorius-case-police-blunders

Police witness 'crumbling under defence cross examination'. This could be more riveting viewing than the OJ.

[heretoday]

Seems like its open house on speculation regarding the case. Paradise for the media.

So much for the South African justice system. No juries. TV in the court. It is worse than the US.

Hey Mandela! I thought you were supposed to have sorted stuff out?

[Sir David Gray]

The prosecution has admitted that there have been no inconsistencies in the statements given by Pistorius and his legal team as to the version of events that day.

It also turns out that one of the key witnesses who apparently heard screaming was almost half a mile away.

Also the testosterone that police allegedly found in his bedroom was actually a herbal remedy used by many athletes, according to his defence team and is still undergoing tests.

During the post-mortem, there were also no signs of assault on Reeva Steenkamp's body or any indications that she had been forced to defend herself from an attack, which contradicts earlier reports that Pistorius may have attacked her prior to shooting her.

From watching the reports yesterday from the courtroom, I would say that Oscar Pistorius doesn't give the impression of being someone who is trying to cover up a murder and denying all knowledge of their crimes. He looks like someone who is genuinely traumatised and who is really inconsolable with grief.

Maybe that is an act, I know there are people who are good at putting on that kind of front for the cameras etc but there's really something here that doesn't sit right with me.

I don't believe he'll be granted bail later today and to be honest, I actually think that may turn out to be a good thing for him. If he does get granted bail, by looking at his demeanour yesterday, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was found dead within the next couple of weeks. He's probably going to be safer if he's kept in custody until his trial.

Although I have my doubts about his guilt, I just hope that justice does prevail in this case and that the correct decision is made, whatever that may be.

[Beefster]

It also turns out that one of the key witnesses who apparently heard screaming was almost half a mile away.

Also the testosterone that police allegedly found in his bedroom was actually a herbal remedy used by many athletes, according to his defence team and is still undergoing tests.

It was later clarified that the witness was 200-300 metres away, I think.

This Testicomp 'herbal' stuff seems to be a bit dubious and has led to, at least, one athlete being banned apparently.

It now transpires that Det. Botha is accused of attempted murder. The entire episode isn't exactly a glowing recommendation for South African justice so far.

[hibsbollah]

It was later clarified that the witness was 200-300 metres away, I think.

This Testicomp 'herbal' stuff seems to be a bit dubious and has led to, at least, one athlete being banned apparently.

It now transpires that Det. Botha is accused of attempted murder. The entire episode isn't exactly a glowing recommendation for South African justice so far.

Botha changed his testimony that the witness was 300m away from 600m away only after it became apparent it would damage the case, which is a bit suspicious to say the least. Be interesting when we find out more when it comes to court properly.

As for the news about Botha's attempted murder charge, if it was in a tv show like The Killing you'd never believe it. Why put someone with that hanging over them in charge of a high profile case like this?

[Sergio sledge]

Botha changed his testimony that the witness was 300m away from 600m away only after it became apparent it would damage the case, which is a bit suspicious to say the least. Be interesting when we find out more when it comes to court properly.

As for the news about Botha's attempted murder charge, if it was in a tv show like The Killing you'd never believe it. Why put someone with that hanging over them in charge of a high profile case like this?

BBC's Andrew Harding tweeted this:

"Prosecutor Nel confirms detective Botha facing 7 attempted murder charges. Botha not in court. Magistrate asks him to be brought in."

7 charges?! It seems daft that he was put in charge of this case, although supposedly the case was "re-opened" against him yesterday, suggesting it had been dropped. Is it a co-incidence that these charges were re-opened on the day that Pistorious's defence were trying to discredit the prosecution? Friends in high places?

It's going to be interesting when this comes to court and the police have had a chance to get and analyse all the evidence. Surely a week is too short a time to have all the forensic and lab results back, so it's mostly a theory just now.

[s.a.m]

BBC's Andrew Harding tweeted this:

"Prosecutor Nel confirms detective Botha facing 7 attempted murder charges. Botha not in court. Magistrate asks him to be brought in."

7 charges?! It seems daft that he was put in charge of this case, although supposedly the case was "re-opened" against him yesterday, suggesting it had been dropped. Is it a co-incidence that these charges were re-opened on the day that Pistorious's defence were trying to discredit the prosecution? Friends in high places?

It's going to be interesting when this comes to court and the police have had a chance to get and analyse all the evidence. Surely a week is too short a time to have all the forensic and lab results back, so it's mostly a theory just now.

I'm guessing that there were seven people in the vehicle, because the charges seem to relate to one incident. I suppose part of the reason it all looks so messy just now is, as you say, evidence gathering is incomplete because the incident is so recent, and neither side have had time to prepare a case. Are bail hearings so detailed in the UK??

[JimBHibees]

The prosecution has admitted that there have been no inconsistencies in the statements given by Pistorius and his legal team as to the version of events that day.

It also turns out that one of the key witnesses who apparently heard screaming was almost half a mile away.

Also the testosterone that police allegedly found in his bedroom was actually a herbal remedy used by many athletes, according to his defence team and is still undergoing tests.

During the post-mortem, there were also no signs of assault on Reeva Steenkamp's body or any indications that she had been forced to defend herself from an attack, which contradicts earlier reports that Pistorius may have attacked her prior to shooting her.

From watching the reports yesterday from the courtroom, I would say that Oscar Pistorius doesn't give the impression of being someone who is trying to cover up a murder and denying all knowledge of their crimes. He looks like someone who is genuinely traumatised and who is really inconsolable with grief.

Maybe that is an act, I know there are people who are good at putting on that kind of front for the cameras etc but there's really something here that doesn't sit right with me.

I don't believe he'll be granted bail later today and to be honest, I actually think that may turn out to be a good thing for him. If he does get granted bail, by looking at his demeanour yesterday, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was found dead within the next couple of weeks. He's probably going to be safer if he's kept in custody until his trial.

Although I have my doubts about his guilt, I just hope that justice does prevail in this case and that the correct decision is made, whatever that may be.

IMO that is a staggering assumption to make. There is no right and wrong way to act, some will be cool, some will look guilty as sin but not be.

[Beefster]

IMO that is a staggering assumption to make. There is no right and wrong way to act, some will be cool, some will look guilty as sin but not be.

No, no, you're wrong. Crying and looking a bit glum is definitely a sign of innocence. Scientific fact.

[Andy74]

Previous examples of him threatening folk, bottles of testosterone and needles found in his house, Pistorius let off a shot in a restaurant once and let his friend take the blame, he was so worried about crime that he kept a gun close by his bed but sleeps with the balcony doors open, gun may have been kept on the same side of the bed as his girlfriend was sleeping, witness report arguing beforehand, witnesses report shots before the lights in the house went on and more shots were fired....

Not looking good for him so far.

I've just seen the house plans - he had to go into the bathroom and then shoot into a tiny cubicle that has a very small window up high.

I hadn't realised that he hadn't just been shooting into a bathroom - it was in the bathroom and then a cubicle.

I'm not byuing that he thought a burgler was in a tiolet cubicle and that he was so frightened by someone locked in a cubicle that he had to shoot, all this without checking that the obvious candidate for being in the loo overnight wasn't in bed?

[RyeSloan]

I've just seen the house plans - he had to go into the bathroom and then shoot into a tiny cubicle that has a very small window up high.

I hadn't realised that he hadn't just been shooting into a bathroom - it was in the bathroom and then a cubicle.

I'm not byuing that he thought a burgler was in a tiolet cubicle and that he was so frightened by someone locked in a cubicle that he had to shoot, all this without checking that the obvious candidate for being in the loo overnight wasn't in bed?


And this is the key for me...this fact is not disputed by any party either.

If you felt so threatened why would you not exit the bedroom and call for assitance rather than go all vigilante?

I know we only have the varitey of media reports to go on but Oscars story just doesn't ring true and the elephant in the room is why the **** would any intruder lock themsleves in the toilet and as you say Andy it's not just a standard bathroom it's a cubicle, down a corridor and in the far corner of the bathroom...how would any intruder even know that was there!

As for his crying in court...harldy expect him to be cheery...there is no doubt that he shot and killed her so I doubt he's going to be happy about that. The only question here is if he meant it or not, not sure the volume of tears would be a reliable indicator on that front.

[GhostofBolivar]

The prosecution has admitted that there have been no inconsistencies in the statements given by Pistorius and his legal team as to the version of events that day.

It also turns out that one of the key witnesses who apparently heard screaming was almost half a mile away.

Also the testosterone that police allegedly found in his bedroom was actually a herbal remedy used by many athletes, according to his defence team and is still undergoing tests.

During the post-mortem, there were also no signs of assault on Reeva Steenkamp's body or any indications that she had been forced to defend herself from an attack, which contradicts earlier reports that Pistorius may have attacked her prior to shooting her.

From watching the reports yesterday from the courtroom, I would say that Oscar Pistorius doesn't give the impression of being someone who is trying to cover up a murder and denying all knowledge of their crimes. He looks like someone who is genuinely traumatised and who is really inconsolable with grief.

Maybe that is an act, I know there are people who are good at putting on that kind of front for the cameras etc but there's really something here that doesn't sit right with me.

I don't believe he'll be granted bail later today and to be honest, I actually think that may turn out to be a good thing for him. If he does get granted bail, by looking at his demeanour yesterday, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was found dead within the next couple of weeks. He's probably going to be safer if he's kept in custody until his trial.

Although I have my doubts about his guilt, I just hope that justice does prevail in this case and that the correct decision is made, whatever that may be.

And how does a detective know he has the right man? Nervousness, fear, confusion, hostility, a story that changes or contradicts itself - all are signs that the man in the interrogation room is lying, particularly in the eyes of someone as naturally suspicious as a detective. Unfortunately, these are also the signs of a human being in a state of high stress, which is pretty much where people find themselves after being accused of a capital crime. Terry McLarney once mused that the best way to unsettle a suspect would be to post in all three interrogation rooms a written list of those behaviour patterns that indicate deception:
Uncooperative.
Too cooperative.
Talks too much.
Talks too little.
Gets his story perfectly straight.
****s his story up.
Blinks too much, avoids eye contact.
Doesn't blink. Stares.

- David Simon, Homicide: A Year On The Killing Streets

How, pray tell, does the behaviour of Oscar Pistorius indicate innocence when it is established that there is no set way to interpret the accused's mannerisms?

[Sir David Gray]

IMO that is a staggering assumption to make. There is no right and wrong way to act, some will be cool, some will look guilty as sin but not be.


And how does a detective know he has the right man? Nervousness, fear, confusion, hostility, a story that changes or contradicts itself - all are signs that the man in the interrogation room is lying, particularly in the eyes of someone as naturally suspicious as a detective. Unfortunately, these are also the signs of a human being in a state of high stress, which is pretty much where people find themselves after being accused of a capital crime. Terry McLarney once mused that the best way to unsettle a suspect would be to post in all three interrogation rooms a written list of those behaviour patterns that indicate deception:
Uncooperative.
Too cooperative.
Talks too much.
Talks too little.
Gets his story perfectly straight.
****s his story up.
Blinks too much, avoids eye contact.
Doesn't blink. Stares.

- David Simon, Homicide: A Year On The Killing Streets

How, pray tell, does the behaviour of Oscar Pistorius indicate innocence when it is established that there is no set way to interpret the accused's mannerisms?

I just have my doubts that he's guilty of deliberately murdering his girlfriend.

People can mock or decry that assumption if they wish. I didn't say it was based on any scientific fact or anything else and as I have said in my last post, it may well be just a very good act that he's putting on.

If it is and he did deliberately murder Reeva Steenkamp then he deserves everything he gets and should go to prison for a very long time and I hope the judge comes to the correct outcome, whatever that may be.

Despite all the accusations that have appeared in the media over the past week and all of the articles that have been printed trying to paint him to be a man with a history of violence etc, I just wouldn't be surprised if he's not guilty, that is all.

[Woody70x2]

For what it's worth my opinion is... Wait a minute the wife has just went up to go to the toilet... Back in a moment I'm off to club her to death. Teach her for buying me shoes for valentines day!

[Pretty Boy]

Anyone remember Ian Huntley appearing in a tv interview with locals in Soham declaring that they had to find the 2 missing girls. He even shook one of the girls Dads hands and said how sorry he was about the guys daughter being missing. All that time he knew what he had done.

Pistorius may be innocent but I would be looking for facts as opposed to a few tears in a courtroom. Even if his burglar story does stand up I still reserve my sympathy for thr family of the poor young woman, who is seemingly being forgotten in this, rather than a gun toting, hot headed vigilante.

For me to be successful with a dark side to ones personality I would guess you have to be pretty good at hiding it.

[Scouse Hibee]

Anyone remember Ian Huntley appearing in a tv interview with locals in Soham declaring that they had to find the 2 missing girls. He even shook one of the girls Dads hands and said how sorry he was about the guys daughter being missing. All that time he knew what he had done.

Pistorius may be innocent but I would be looking for facts as opposed to a few tears in a courtroom. Even if his burglar story does stand up I still reserve my sympathy for thr family of the poor young woman, who is seemingly being forgotten in this, rather than a gun toting, hot headed vigilante.

For me to be successful with a dark side to ones personality I would guess you have to be pretty good at hiding it.



Indeed, also the countless other TV appeals over the years that have involved the guilty party.

[hibsbollah]

Im sure i read somewhere that its common for psychopathic personalities to want to be involved in the investigation of their own murder, hence Huntly et al. turning up at press conferences or launching appeals for info etc. Brings the thrill of the actual crime back to them.

[Betty Boop]

The prosecution has admitted that there have been no inconsistencies in the statements given by Pistorius and his legal team as to the version of events that day.

It also turns out that one of the key witnesses who apparently heard screaming was almost half a mile away.

Also the testosterone that police allegedly found in his bedroom was actually a herbal remedy used by many athletes, according to his defence team and is still undergoing tests.

During the post-mortem, there were also no signs of assault on Reeva Steenkamp's body or any indications that she had been forced to defend herself from an attack, which contradicts earlier reports that Pistorius may have attacked her prior to shooting her.

From watching the reports yesterday from the courtroom, I would say that Oscar Pistorius doesn't give the impression of being someone who is trying to cover up a murder and denying all knowledge of their crimes. He looks like someone who is genuinely traumatised and who is really inconsolable with grief.

Maybe that is an act, I know there are people who are good at putting on that kind of front for the cameras etc but there's really something here that doesn't sit right with me.

I don't believe he'll be granted bail later today and to be honest, I actually think that may turn out to be a good thing for him. If he does get granted bail, by looking at his demeanour yesterday, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was found dead within the next couple of weeks. He's probably going to be safer if he's kept in custody until his trial.

Although I have my doubts about his guilt, I just hope that justice does prevail in this case and that the correct decision is made, whatever that may be.

I wouldn't be surprised if he is freed on bail, the prosecution and the defence appear to be trying hard on his behalf. A bit of a farce really, four days for a bail hearing ? Any ordinary Joe would be locked up.

[GhostofBolivar]

Yowzah...

I could run a better homicide investigation. This has been thoroughly incompetent.

[Betty Boop]

Yowzah...

I could run a better homicide investigation. This has been thoroughly incompetent.

The magistrate has been summing up for over an hour (including a five minute break), for a bail application.

[Sylar]

Sounding a bit like the Magistrate is going to decline his bail request based on what he's saying just now.

[Sylar]

Scrap that - stating that he "can't see [Pistorius] as a flight risk" and that the prosecution have failed to demonstrate the grounds of predisposition to violence.

[Scouse Hibee]

He's hardly a flight risk, too well known and recognisable :greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

Bail granted!

You read it here first! :greengrin

[Hiber-nation]

At last!

Released on bail.

[Sylar]

Bail granted.

[Andy74]

No evidence he was a flight risk or a violent character.

Evidently being fast as **** and just having shot someone 4 times without trying to figure out who they were don't count.

[Scouse Hibee]

If the farcial bail hearing was anything to go by then the trial should be an absolute hoot.

[Beefster]

To be fair to the prosecution, they've made Pistorius lay his defence out in detail and made sure that he can't change his story later to deal with gaps or inconsistencies. They now know where to concentrate their investigative efforts for the next few months.

[JimBHibees]

Anyone remember Ian Huntley appearing in a tv interview with locals in Soham declaring that they had to find the 2 missing girls. He even shook one of the girls Dads hands and said how sorry he was about the guys daughter being missing. All that time he knew what he had done.

Pistorius may be innocent but I would be looking for facts as opposed to a few tears in a courtroom. Even if his burglar story does stand up I still reserve my sympathy for thr family of the poor young woman, who is seemingly being forgotten in this, rather than a gun toting, hot headed vigilante.

For me to be successful with a dark side to ones personality I would guess you have to be pretty good at hiding it.

Did Huntley not also come out with the line 'he was the last person to have seen them alive'.

[lord bunberry]

Im sure i read somewhere that its common for psychopathic personalities to want to be involved in the investigation of their own murder, hence Huntly et al. turning up at press conferences or launching appeals for info etc. Brings the thrill of the actual crime back to them.

I've seen that as well I think it was when I was watching columbo

[Scouse Hibee]

I've seen that as well I think it was when I was watching columbo


Just one more thing.......................

[hibsbollah]

I've seen that as well I think it was when I was watching columbo

Ive never seen Columbo. But that doesnt mean it wasnt on it.

[Pretty Boy]

I'm surely not the only one who thinks Pistorius' family cheering and whooping when he was granted bail was just a tad inappropriate.

[Beefster]

I'm surely not the only one who thinks Pistorius' family cheering and whooping when he was granted bail was just a tad inappropriate.

Nope, incredibly crass.

[Hibbyradge]

I'm surely not the only one who thinks Pistorius' family cheering and whooping when he was granted bail was just a tad inappropriate.

Really? I thought it was perfectly understandable.

The judge built it up and built it up, Chris Tarrant style, leaving the actual decision to the very end to ensure he milked the publicity. He even hesitated before speedily spitting out the "bail granted" sentence for maximum effect. At one point, I actually thought he was going to adjourn for a commercial break!

Then, when he finally deigned to let us in on his cherished secret, someone shouted "Yes". There was no whooping apart from that.

I'm fairly certain that if I'd sat through days of evidence involving a loved one and was subjected to such manufactured tension at the end, I'd exclaim when the decision was finally given in our favour too. It's a perfectly natural human reaction.

If the judge didn't want to raise emotions he could have said that bail was granted at the outset then explained his reasons, but this was too good an opportunity to show off.

[Hibbyradge]

Im sure i read somewhere that its common for psychopathic personalities to want to be involved in the investigation of their own murder, hence Huntly et al. turning up at press conferences or launching appeals for info etc. Brings the thrill of the actual crime back to them.

That would be a good trick! :hilarious

[heretoday]

Now the brother's up for culpable homicide. Not a good month for la famille Pistorius.

[lapsedhibee]

Now the brother's up for culpable homicide. Not a good month for la famille Pistorius.

From SkyNews:

Lawyer Kenny Oldwage said in a statement from the family that "there is no doubt that Carl is innocent and the charge will be challenged in court."

"Blood tests conducted by the police at the time proved that he had not been under the influence of alcohol, confirming that it was a tragic road accident after the deceased collided with Carl's car," the statement said.

The argument there seeming to be that he wasn't drunk therefore he couldn't have been at fault. :crazy:

[heretoday]

S. Africa has slipped down the list of countries I intend to visit before senility sets in. It's currently just beneath Colombia.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

That would be a good trick! :hilarious

Must've meant psychic!

[Jonnyboy]

So, he shot the lassie and killed her. All that needs to be determined is whether he meant it or not. Meantime he sees no reason why he shouldn't go on competing at athletics meeting and the SA courts agree by returning his passport to him.

You couldnae make it up. He's clearly so traumatised by accidentally killing the love of his life that it's taken him several weeks to get over it and make plans to resume his life

[lord bunberry]

So, he shot the lassie and killed her. All that needs to be determined is whether he meant it or not. Meantime he sees no reason why he shouldn't go on competing at athletics meeting and the SA courts agree by returning his passport to him.

You couldnae make it up. He's clearly so traumatised by accidentally killing the love of his life that it's taken him several weeks to get over it and make plans to resume his life

The IAAF have given him the all clear to compete at the world championships as well

[Andy74]

So, he shot the lassie and killed her. All that needs to be determined is whether he meant it or not. Meantime he sees no reason why he shouldn't go on competing at athletics meeting and the SA courts agree by returning his passport to him.

You couldnae make it up. He's clearly so traumatised by accidentally killing the love of his life that it's taken him several weeks to get over it and make plans to resume his life

I think it's clear the prosecution and the cops that turned up at the scene first have made such a mess of this that he is going to get away with it in terms of proving it was pre meditated.

Even so, meant or not it was grossly unreasonable and reckless to shoot into an en suite toilet knowing your girlfriend is staying over and not checking the bed!

[JimBHibees]

I think it's clear the prosecution and the cops that turned up at the scene first have made such a mess of this that he is going to get away with it in terms of proving it was pre meditated.

Even so, meant or not it was grossly unreasonable and reckless to shoot into an en suite toilet knowing your girlfriend is staying over and not checking the bed!

Or he was able to get rid or clear up much of the evidence prior to them getting there.

[--------]

It's the same the whole world over,
It's the poor what gets the blame,
It's the rich what gets the pleasure,
Isn't it a blooming shame?