1365 users online (265 members and 1100 guests)  


Websleuths News

View Poll Results: Do you think the prosecutor proved the case?

Voters
250. You may not vote on this poll
  • The case for murder was demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt

    76 30.40%
  • Murder directus -OP fired shots knowing it was RS and intended to kill her

    143 57.20%
  • Murder eventualis- OP believed it was a burglar, foresaw he would kill by shooting

    19 7.60%
  • The case for culpable homicide was proven

    33 13.20%
  • There are many holes in the case Ė too many unanswered questions

    20 8.00%
  • Prosecutorís evidence and witness testimony verify OPís version

    3 1.20%
  • The firearm charges were substantiated

    38 15.20%
  • None of the above

    1 0.40%
Multiple Choice Poll.

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 159
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by Carmelita View Post
    The prosecution has not argued this perspective. Perhaps they will in the closing argument but I would think that would be considered new evidence as it has not been argued as of yet that the state believes that Oscar could see Reeva while he was shooting her. It is my understanding that the state must produce all of their evidence and then only summate what they have presented in the closing argument, not bring in a totally new theory.
    There is no "theory" the prosecution needs to bring in.

    Dead body. Admitted killer. He walked to get a gun. Walked towards her. Said to leave the house. She went into the toilet and he killed her as she was retreating.

    That's not theory. That's stipulated by the defense.

    OP's burden of proof is to show how the sound of a woman using the bathroom is cause for him to reasonably fear his life was in imminent danger, and how shooting somebody behind a toilet door in the middle of the night when he knows he was sharing his room with a guest is a reasonable response to the sound of a woman using the bathroom.

    OP has the burden of proof. Not the PT. Why do you think he testified?

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by Carmelita View Post
    I have previously commented on this and it was horribly irresponsible. I have stated that I do not think that Oscar is particularly bright, I will even state that not knowing with 100% certainty where your mate is at, if you are going to fire a gun goes beyond stupid.

    All that said does not mean that when Oscar fired his gun he did not believe 100% that Reeva was in the bed phoning the police. He was wrong he was irresponsible not to know where she was, I have already stated this.

    His being stupid is still not his defense. The defense has replaced the word stupid with terrorized, it is up to the judge how much credence she will give to what she believes a reasonable person would have done and what she believes a reasonable terrified, double amputee on his stumps with a history of being paranoid about his own safety would do.
    Terrorized?

    Let's get real.

    A man on stumps holding a loaded 9 mm Parabellum is nowhere near vulnerable.

    Know who the person who was vulnerable?

    The person standing behind the toilet door who had the man aiming the gun at her.

    To paraphrase Nel, OP's excuse is so beyond stupid, so improbable, that it's impossible to believe it could be true. Nobody is that stupid. Seriously.

    Don't believe me? Have you seen any other stories about guys shooting their wives or girlfriends who got up to pee?

    Never happens. Why?

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    463
    Once all the evidence is out, we need a poll which adds to 100% please!

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,608
    Quote Originally Posted by BritsKate View Post
    The State has shown:

    Reeva could not have lived long enough to make OP's timeline plausible.

    Oscar's 'version' changed significantly from earlier statements.

    Oscar changed his angle after firing the first shot, which bolsters the testimony of Mangena who in turn strengthens Burger's testimony about a pause between the first two shots.

    Saayman testified it would be abnormal not to scream after being shot in the hip. Botha conceded this if there was a pause between shots. This furthers the suggestion it was Reeva screaming as there was a pause indicated by ballistics rods, Reeva's injuries, Burger and Mangena.

    The woman's screams became more distressed between the first and second bangs.

    Oscar has no history of being a victim of violent crime. Or any at all that can be independently verified.

    Previous suspicions of a possible intruder led to him either asking his prior girlfriend if she'd heard anything or going into 'combat mode' at white goods. Neither of which led to anyone or anything being shot, much less killed.

    Oscar lived in a highly secure gated community with an extremely low crime rate.

    Despite being fearful and paranoid over crime, he neglected to fix a broken window downstairs, left windows unsecured in unoccupied rooms, isn't certain Reeva could activate the alarm unless she had access to a remote, didn't secure ladders he knew were on his property, left his car in the driveway, and slept with balcony doors open.

    There is no history, much less a prolific one, to show a record of contacting security or police over perceived suspicious behaviour that would be consistent with someone paranoid over crime.

    That Reeva 'felt loved' by a man who got her birthday wrong on the witness stand and had no gift or card for her for Valentine's Day.

    He has a history of screaming at women, he mocked and ridiculed Reeva, had a heated argument with her witnessed by others, in public, and Reeva herself expressed fear of him.

    He has a history of reckless behaviour and threatening others.

    He has contempt for authority figures.

    Oscar has labelled or alluded all those who have testified against him as mistaken, liars, corrupt, inept, or vindictive.

    Oscar had access to several phones and a panic button (Baba's testimony) yet he decided to confront the intruder rather than reaching out for help from anyone.

    Oscar had to bypass the only exit in order to confront the intruder. He literally went out of his way.

    At no time did Oscar seek verbal acknowledgement from Reeva or question why she wasn't responding when he whispered, spoke softly, screamed and shouted to call the police.

    It's possible the first bangs were the result of the defendant kicking or hitting the toilet door.

    Phone a Friend trumps contacting emergency services.

    'Everything is fine' when one 'accidentally' shoots his girlfriend and is contacted by security.

    Oscar immediately fired at the 'intruder' after screaming - allowing no time for the intruder to escape.

    Shot at a closed door without visual or verbal assessment.

    No one heard gunshots (or bangs) at the time Oscar estimates he fired.

    Oscar saw no point in screaming upon finding Reeva on the floor, after screaming and shouting while breaking down the door.

    No witness heard him scream 'Reeva' despite clearly hearing a man yell for help, and a screaming woman, before the gunshots at 3:17.

    Oscar has a history of jealousy.

    While his direct was fluid and uninterrupted, Oscar's cross was plagued by emotional breakdowns, memory lapses, and inconsistency within his account.

    Oscar had the absolute gall to disparage the doctor who left his own home in the middle of the night, to go into a possibly dangerous situation, to save the very woman Oscar is responsible for killing.

    Five articulate, intelligent witnesses heard some variation of an altercation which quickly escalated, until the bangs at 3:17, when the woman's final scream fades with the last bang. Then there is silence.

    The majority of those witnesses heard both a man yelling and a woman screaming. The man yelling is described as flat and monotone. According to Oscar, this is him, yelling for help after 'accidentally' shooting the girlfriend he loved dead.

    Oscar has a history of an extremely reckless, negligent attitude towards firearms.

    Oscar testified he never intended to shoot therefore his claim for putative self-defence, which requires intent, may be nullified.

    Oscar was extremely concerned with his image and the media's portrayal of him.

    Oscar had a financial meeting that left him troubled the morning of February 13th.

    Oscar is willing to lie under oath. After stating he would 'try' to tell the truth.


    Picked apart, anyone could invent reasonable excuses for everything I've listed. A circumstantial case (and most are) is based on building blocks of evidence. It requires reasoning, inference and considering the culmination of evidence. This is one of the strongest circumstantial cases I've ever seen.

    MOO


    Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.
    Fantastic summary. Well done.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Greater Than View Post

    <Respectfully snipped>

    Premeditated
    Premeditation does not rely on a certain length of time. OP had sufficient time to reflect and think about what he was about to do before doing it. This was not a quick reaction... He bent down to get his 9mm pistol loaded with black talon bullets from under the bed, removed the holster, released the safety mechanism, slowly walked down the passage, entered the bathroom, and aimed at the door. Every step was under his control.
    And when asked why he didn't fire a warning shot he said "My Lady, if I shot into the shower, it might have ricocheted and possibly hit me", so he had time to think of this.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Miami
    Posts
    3,864
    Quote Originally Posted by toevlugsoord View Post
    BBM

    I read this a little while ago -- from Mike Azzi, friend of Pistorius:
    "Dexter was at the house two weeks before Christmas and recalled how he knocked over a fan and Pistorius became panic-stricken. The athlete immediately grabbed his gun for protection before shouting to check if Dexter was OK. He said: "I can believe Oscar's story is true. I know he was paranoid in that sense because of things that went on."

    So it does appear he's reacted/overreacted to noises in his house even when he knows someone is there BUT yes, never had shot anyone as a result until now (if we are to believe his story).
    That's irrelevant. His actions are being measured against those of any other reasonable person, not the previous unreasonable actions of Oscar Pistorius.

    If he's so paranoid, he should be in therapy and on anti-anxiety medication. It's hardly justification for murder.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Africa
    Posts
    451
    1. Oscar knew Reeva was in the house with him. He never asked her if she was behind the door. It was not reasonable to assume a noise in the toilet is an intruder and not your roommate.

    2. Oscar went to bed with open doors knowing there were ladders outside, not knowing if the alarm's outside censors worked. No burglar bars or security door. He did not live like a man afraid of intruders. He was trained to search the house for intruders and did so on two previous occasions. He did not live like a man who is afraid of an intruder.

    3. He does not explain why he was suddenly so terrified of a noise in the toilet.

    4. I believe the witnesses can distinguish between male and female voices. I believe that the witnesses could hear terror in the female voice. I believe the screams stopped after the last shots. Oscar must have heard the screams too.

    5. If he was so distraught and could not think or reason, why did he call Johan Stander and his lawyer daughter first?

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Carmelita View Post
    Why may I ask of those of you that believe that this was a cold blooded killing would Oscar fire from a somewhat protected position? Why would he not stand right in front of the door and shoot, do you think before he even fired the gun he had his defense planned?
    ~snipped~

    BIB - yes, absolutely .. if he had stood right in front of the door, he wouldn't have been able to use his 'intruder' version as his defence because it would've looked too obvious he was lying.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Carmelita View Post
    Could you point me to a time? I just watched the video and I don't remember that Oscar said those conflicting words. If you don't have time I plan on re watching the whole thing when I get a chance as it is very interesting dynamics and I will pay special attention to that part.

    Thanks, and thanks for the civil disagreement.
    Well, it's been mentioned on here so many times now, I didn't think I would need to post a link but I will try and find it tomorrow (it's v.late here in the UK now). But, I do feel that there is a problem with arriving at a conclusion without having seen all these things .. you ('one') really have to see it all in order to know that we are being spun a tale, and it's become clear that you haven't caught up with all the testimonies yet and don't yet realise some of the glaring inconsistences in his testimony (and affidavits, etc).

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by jay-jay View Post
    Well, it's been mentioned on here so many times now, I didn't think I would need to post a link but I will try and find it tomorrow (it's v.late here in the UK now). But, I do feel that there is a problem with arriving at a conclusion without having seen all these things .. you ('one') really have to see it all in order to know that we are being spun a tale, and it's become clear that you haven't caught up with all the testimonies yet and don't yet realise some of the glaring inconsistences in his testimony (and affidavits, etc).


    That could be but so far every damning bit of evidence that has been offered has not been damning in my eyes.

    As to arriving at a conclusion, I haven't done that, I have consistently said that the evidence I have seen and read so far does not indicate PM to me. No one has seen all the evidence yet, the defense has 12 witnesses yet to come.


  11. #56
    Excuse me while I interrupt for a sec with an off topic post.

    We have a new forum where we could use some super sleuthers: Sleuthing Vancouver Cold Cases - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
    Last edited by KateB; 05-17-2015 at 02:26 PM. Reason: repair url tag.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,906
    Quote Originally Posted by Harmony2 View Post
    List 5 facts or pieces of evidence that validate your opinion from the above...
    There are a ton of off topic posts and the thread has become a general discussion thread... get back on target about whether the prosecutor proved the case. Please adhere to the direction in the opening post.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    my cosy corner
    Posts
    602

    Oscar Pistorius and his Mistaken Identity excuse

    OP has not convinced many people with his mistaken identity excuse......going by the results of this poll......here's hoping the jury share our opinion. I cannot imagine what RS family and loved ones must be enduring.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    8,018
    I do not think the State has yet proved murder beyond a reasonable doubt for the following reasons:

    1. The initial crime scene photographs (between 5:55 a.m. - 6:21 a.m.) are not reliable as depictions of an untouched crime scene because of the presence of several SAPS personnel handling evidence during the time of the initial photographs

    2. The evidence and testimony suggests the gunshots happened at least 5 minutes before the cricket bat hit the door. If this is true, the screaming heard by ear witnesses could not have been Reeva

    3. Aside from the screams, the only other evidence that even suggests "intention" to kill Reeva is Van Der Merwe's hearing a loud female voice in the hour preceding the shooting. While this is some circumstantial evidence, by itself it's not enough to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

    4. There's no evidence that there was any kind of fight or acrimony between OP and RS on the night of the incident.

    5. The evidence suggests that OP and RS were very fond of each other and enjoyed each other's company. RS expressed that she loved OP and there were loving-type messages exchanged on that day.

    On the other hand, the state has gained some ground during the defense case - especially during OP's testimony. They have cast doubt on OP's version and his defense. I can't rule out the possibility that the state may still be able to prove their case by the time it's over. I am genuinely having trouble making any firm conclusions either way right now.

    I do believe the state has presented enough evidence for a conviction for culpable homicide for these reasons:

    1. Portions of Oscar's version seem improbable, and his testimony indicates to me that he has not told the complete truth - but I still believe it's reasonably possible that he thought there was an intruder in the bathroom who was going to attack him.

    2. His testimony indicated that he might have been able to safely get himself and Reeva away from the perceived threat by exiting the bedroom. Before his testimony, I considered his actions more reasonable because I thought it would have been difficult or impossible for him to navigate the stairs quickly on his stumps -- but he did not mention this in his testimony, so that was apparently not one of his considerations.

    3. His testimony was not real clear that he actually did shoot with the intention of lawfully defending himself. Although he was rehabilitated somewhat, he never made a conclusive statement that he was shooting to defend himself.

    4. He approached the perceived danger and he stated that it's not his personality to run away.

    Culpable homicide is going to be a judgment call for Masipa - I think there's evidence to support a conviction and there's also evidence to support an acquittal depending on how she interprets the evidence.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by minor4th View Post
    I do not think the State has yet proved murder beyond a reasonable doubt for the following reasons:

    1. The initial crime scene photographs (between 5:55 a.m. - 6:21 a.m.) are not reliable as depictions of an untouched crime scene because of the presence of several SAPS personnel handling evidence during the time of the initial photographs

    2. The evidence and testimony suggests the gunshots happened at least 5 minutes before the cricket bat hit the door. If this is true, the screaming heard by ear witnesses could not have been Reeva

    3. Aside from the screams, the only other evidence that even suggests "intention" to kill Reeva is Van Der Merwe's hearing a loud female voice in the hour preceding the shooting. While this is some circumstantial evidence, by itself it's not enough to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

    4. There's no evidence that there was any kind of fight or acrimony between OP and RS on the night of the incident.

    5. The evidence suggests that OP and RS were very fond of each other and enjoyed each other's company. RS expressed that she loved OP and there were loving-type messages exchanged on that day.

    On the other hand, the state has gained some ground during the defense case - especially during OP's testimony. They have cast doubt on OP's version and his defense. I can't rule out the possibility that the state may still be able to prove their case by the time it's over. I am genuinely having trouble making any firm conclusions either way right now.

    I do believe the state has presented enough evidence for a conviction for culpable homicide for these reasons:

    1. Portions of Oscar's version seem improbable, and his testimony indicates to me that he has not told the complete truth - but I still believe it's reasonably possible that he thought there was an intruder in the bathroom who was going to attack him.

    2. His testimony indicated that he might have been able to safely get himself and Reeva away from the perceived threat by exiting the bedroom. Before his testimony, I considered his actions more reasonable because I thought it would have been difficult or impossible for him to navigate the stairs quickly on his stumps -- but he did not mention this in his testimony, so that was apparently not one of his considerations.

    3. His testimony was not real clear that he actually did shoot with the intention of lawfully defending himself. Although he was rehabilitated somewhat, he never made a conclusive statement that he was shooting to defend himself.

    4. He approached the perceived danger and he stated that it's not his personality to run away.

    Culpable homicide is going to be a judgment call for Masipa - I think there's evidence to support a conviction and there's also evidence to support an acquittal depending on how she interprets the evidence.

    To respond on your first set of points:

    1. The police photographs at the scene have not been deemed inadmissible as a result of these inconsistencies. There is no evidence of tampering or falsification of evidence. The police would have no reason or even ability to tamper/falsify object positions to incriminate prior to OP's initial statement.

    2. Which specific evidence are you referring to? Even by OP's testimony, it didn't sound like it took more than a minute or two to return to the bathroom with the bat and break the door down. These times tally with the both the witness record of the shots at ~03:16 and OP's calls to Stander / Netcare at 03:20, and add credibility to the PT case IMO.

    3. In light of the evidence of both an argument between 02:00 and 03:00 and terrified female screams for ~15 mins thereafter, I would suggest the onus is on the DT to disprove this very strong evidence. Perhaps the other DT witnesses will help OP's case in this regard.

    4. Aside from the witness reports of arguing and screams, I'd broadly agree on physical evidence within the house. I'm still surprised more hasn't been made of the jeans below the bathroom window.

    5. There is also good evidence prior to the incident of arguments, jealousy and RS being scared of OP. I'm not sure either are conclusive.


    So much depends on the witness testimony. If these accounts are accepted, I don't see how OP's version can possibly stand up. I think there is ZERO chance of an acquittal.

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. FL - Casey Anthony prosecutor Jeff Ashton to defend son in DUI case
    By Reality Orlando in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-22-2012, 05:01 PM
  2. IL - Prosecutor buys alcohol for underage girl at center of case
    By peeples in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 09:41 AM
  3. Fmr. Prosecutor Robin Sax on the Anthony Case
    By Levi in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-29-2009, 01:57 PM
  4. Judge throws out rape case after prosecutor late to court
    By Paladin in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-26-2006, 03:13 PM