Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

[aftermath]

Thanks Aftermath for answering my GR Turner example for him. My point is that the 'suggestions' you refer to almost always take the form of excuses or justifications. It is very rare indeed that one of you are ever willing to say `That may have been the smarter option` or `yes, OP did act like an idiot for doing x,y or z'. Instead, with the example I used, we ended up with the suggestion of an armed gang that could have been spread throughout the house and about to launch themselves into an immediate attack on the bedroom, making escape for Reeva impossible (again, that is way, way beyond anything OP conjured up in his fevered imagination). I get the feeling that had he not turned around and changed his plea on the Tasha`s charge one or all of you would be saying that he says he didn`t pull the trigger because in his perception he didn`t or words to that effect.

Pretty sure I said I thought the smarter option would have been to stay in the bedroom and keep the hallway covered. But who said Pistorius is smart? That's the thing-you didn't ask if anyone thought his actions were stupid/rash/ill judged. You asked for reasons why he might have acted the way he did.

 

[Colin de France]

That's it? Really?
It's unfortunate if my posts give you the impression they haven't been thought through. Maybe don't waste your time responding to them if they are so farcical?

......this isn't a Facebook page ....you have to give points of view, back up idea's and theories.......that's the way it is...

 

[cottonweaver]

You clearly haven't been reading our posts properly then as no one has said they support op, whatever that means to you. I think we all pretty much think the state didn't prove their case and it's your lack of any doubt,about anything the state.said that's illogical. The state must prove their case while the defense don't need to. So it seems that you just accept every bit of states evidence and utterly refuse to acknowledge the significance of the conflicting evidence

So we are not in the same position.the defense need uncertainty and they succeeded. The state needed certainty and they failed. I don't see the basis for your certainty. It seems to be based on just ignoring problems with the states case. Can't see you see the difference?

What are you trying to imply? Why the BIB?

See you just illustrated my point. Think about it now.
My post to GR was abundantly clear.

 

[aftermath]

See you just illustrated my point. Think about it now.
My post to GR was abundantly clear.

I know what I think you were trying to imply, but was hoping that a) you could clarify and that b) I was wrong

 

[Trotterly]

I base calling you a supporter on the fact that every single time someone comes up with something `odd' shall we say about his story, even if it is a throwaway comment and not even directed towards you, you (or Trotterly or Aftermath) jump in with a response. It is like you cannot let anything `anti` OP slide by without providing a `pro` Oscar statement.

For example my query of yesterday as to why he didn`t tell Reeva to get out of the house if her safety was his first concern ended up with you suggesting a gang of marauders about to blitz attack the bedroom as a justification for why he acted as he did, way beyond anything OP alluded to himself. So even a fairly innocuous criticism of OP's behaviour on that night saw you straightaway posting a response to justify his actions. My initial post had nothing to do with evidence or whatever, it was just an observation. That sounds like a supporter to me rather than someone who truly wants to discuss the many aspects of the case.

I mentioned yesterday that the sensible thing for OP to do would be to tell Reeva to escape once he was covering the bathroom with the gun so there's another example.

I think much of the bias towards finding an alternate reasonably possible explanation for things is rooted in the power of reasonable doubt which operates in a trial. Be clear that reasonable doubt can come from anywhere, not just the defences version. The judge can even come up with her own version or part version. As long as that is reasonably possible and fits with the weight of evidence then it's enough to get OP off the murder charge.

 

[Colin de France]

I mentioned yesterday that the sensible thing for OP to do would be to tell Reeva to escape once he was covering the bathroom with the gun so there's another example.

I think much of the bias towards finding an alternate reasonably possible explanation for things is rooted in the power of reasonable doubt which operates in a trial. Be clear that reasonable doubt can come from anywhere, not just the defences version. The judge can even come up with her own version or part version. As long as that is reasonably possible and fits with the weight of evidence then it's enough to get OP off the murder charge.

....didn't Mrs aftermath say this ? .......about covering the bathroom that is ......

 

[aftermath]

....didn't Mrs aftermath say this ? .......about covering the bathroom that is ......

Isn't it possible we both did?!

 

[Trotterly]

....didn't Mrs aftermath say this ? .......about covering the bathroom that is ......

Yes I think so and why not, it's a logical move if you've picked up a gun ready to defend your home and loved ones.

 

[Marfa Lights]

Speaking for myself, the issue I have with the OP supporters here is that while on the one hand they question every piece of evidence and assertion that goes against Pistorius on the other they accept all the inconsistencies in his story along with its essentially far fetched nature without displaying any doubts or concerns. That and the fact that they think that 10 months in prison followed by house arrest in a mansion is a suitable punishment for what he did, whoever was behind that door.

Could not have said it better myself!

 

[Marfa Lights]

Look at the actual evidence. Repeating endlessly that the screams witnesses can't be wrong proves nothing based as it is on opinion only. The defense claims are backed up by evidence.

Oh, okay. If the defense claims something, it is actual evidence. If witnesses for the prosecution give evidence, it's acceptable to just make up any old horse***** and say that proves they must have been mistaken.

Of course, Oscar screams just like a woman... and you say you heard that yourself, did you?

 

[KateB]

New thread is open and ready for posting. This one will close in 15 minutes.

Thread #62