What will be the outcome of the Oscar Pistorius Trial?

[Interested Bystander]

You are right Estelle in all that you post. I am playing devil's advocate here and thinking of the possible excuses that could arise. SA law is weak and for the wealthy and poor Reeva suffered the fate of many women in SA. OP has a well documented history of anger, frustration and poor judgement.

 

[Estelle]

You are right Estelle in all that you post. I am playing devil's advocate here and thinking of the possible excuses that could arise. SA law is weak and for the wealthy and poor Reeva suffered the fate of many women in SA. OP has a well documented history of anger, frustration and poor judgement.

I am being positive because I believe in justice. IMO if the law is applied and the Prosecution does not make mistakes, I believe that OP will be put away for many years. I have no idea of what they will argue about the jail conditions for him. Will OP be treated like everyone else?

My main worry has been if he leaves the country and cannot be extradited back like Shrien Dewani.

 

[rob]

I think he should be guilty of murder, BUT it's hard to put your countries hero in prison. Easier to act like it never happened.

 

[Estelle]

The charges that Pistorius will be facing in March, 2014

1. Premeditated murder

2. Possession of illegal ammunition

3. Using a firearm in a public place - he shot wildly into the air while travelling in an open-top car while his ex-girlfriend was driving it in 2012.

4. Using a firearm in a public place - in restaurant in January 2013

Possible additional charges:

5. Moving the body

6. Perjury if he lied on his affidavit

7. Tampering with the crime scene

 

[Estelle]

9 November, 2013

About 75% of Websleuthers expect that OP will face jail time.

 

[Estelle]

Full indictment - 4 counts - plus 107 witnesses.

http://www.scribd.com/embeds/185695...=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

 

[Deleted member 102539]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ount-oscar-pistorius-trial-killing-girlfriend

IF that is really true, what CandiceL 31.12.13 commented, then OP will get a much lesser penalty I think.

:facepalm:

 

[Estelle]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ount-oscar-pistorius-trial-killing-girlfriend

IF that is really true, what CandiceL 31.12.13 commented, then OP will get a much lesser penalty I think.

:facepalm:

I really wonder what evidence they have of this and who His witnesses will be. Will they release his list before the trial to the media like the Defence had to do?

 

[Estelle]

The state has charged Oscar Pistorius with a number of counts. So they all form part of the trial. Of course the main charge is that he committed pre-meditated murder. Alternatively that he specifically intended to kill Reeva Steenkamp. The burden of proof is on the state to prove that. Depending on the circumstances and evidence that will be led, that is extremely difficult to prove. If the state fails to prove their claims he could be acquitted on the murder charge but be found guilty on the lesser charges.

However, it is not as simple as that. There is still the question of culpable homicide. So if he is found not guilty of pre-meditated murder he is still liable for her death. He has already admitted that he fired the fatal shots that killed Reeva Steenkamp. He did so in his affidavit during his first appearance. But, he has a defence in which he claims that his life was in danger. If he can successfully show that he was in danger then it becomes a case of self defence. In that case one is justified in shooting the assailant even if it results in that persons death. If he succeeds then he could even be found not guilty and walk away a free man.

The problem now arises in which he will have to satisfy the court that he was in danger and what steps he took to avert it. And what his state of mind was during those fateful moments.

There are two general forms of homicide. Culpa and Dolus. Culpa implies the accidental or unintentional death of another person.

Even though it may not have been intentional there could still be some degree of liability depending on the level of negligence. Road accidents are good examples.

Dolus on the other hand has various forms. Depending on the degree it could be escalated to the level of murder. Shooting at somebody behind a closed door (when you do not know who it is) can still be classified as murder. It could be escalated to Dolus Indirectus in which one reconciles oneself with the intended outcome. For example, the intention is to kill that person behind the closed door (even if it is a perceived intruder). He pumped four shots into that door so there was intent. In his defence he will have to show how and why he believed his life was in danger. And he will have to show what that level of danger was. He will also have to show what steps he took to avert the perceived danger. It's not enough to simply claim that that one believes they are in danger and use that as some justification for shooting someone.

The court will have to determine what his state of mind was in those moments, in conjunction with the evidence, and come to a conclusion on his culpability, if any.

 

[Lyra500]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ount-oscar-pistorius-trial-killing-girlfriend

IF that is really true, what CandiceL 31.12.13 commented, then OP will get a much lesser penalty I think.

:facepalm:

I find it really bad that people keep repeating this comment from someone who none of us knows. I am sorry but i don't think putting 'IF' in bold exonerates you from repeating totally unfounded and very negative comments about a murder victim. Do you know this Candice woman? Why do you think what she says is worth drawing people's attention to? Have you seen ANY other reports from reputable sources even hinting at anything like this to do with the victim's personality?

I am sorry but this smacks of yet another attempt by an OP 'fan' to try to excuse his totally inexcusable behaviour. A really nasty and distasteful attempt as well.

And actually, if OP's stated sworn testimony version of the events is true and he thought he was shooting an intruder, what on earth would Reeva's 'violent' personality have to do with anything? He claims he thought she was asleep in bed when the shooting occured.

If this does come up in the trial it will just confirm my view that OP and his camp are willing to lie, lie and lie again if they think it will get him off. Vile. If they do use it though, he will out himself as a point blank lier in his first sworn version of events. Also, unless she was attacking him with a meat cleaver and then popped off to powder her nose, a moody personality is not grounds for shooting someone three times whilst they are in the toilet.

As for the poll. I think he is guilty of murder, but i am not confident that he will be convicted because of his money and celebrity status.He has been allowed access to his neighbours which seems very odd when some of them made statements which did not fit with his version of events. I wonder what good could possibly come of that - from a justice point of view.

As always, just my personal opinion.

 

[Estelle]

I agree with you, Lyra. There is nothing worse than another woman trying to tarnish an innocent victim's reputation. But I do not think we need to worry if you read the following allegations. I cannot see how Roux could possibly defend him against these.

The security team at OP' private Pretoria housing estate reportedly telephoned his home after they heard of gunfire coming from the house.
But rather than report Reeva's death - which the disabled athlete claims was an accident - OP allegedly told the guards that everything was 'fine'.
He reportedly never asked for their help and did not report the Valentine's Day shooting to them.

The claims are made in a prosecution information document given to Pistorius' defence team but leaked to South African news television channel eNCA. More details from the document have been revealed by the South African radio news service EyeWitness News.

THE 13 ALLEGATIONS PROSECUTORS WILL PRESENT AT MURDER TRIAL

1. Witnesses heard 'talking like fighting' and a woman constantly speaking in a tone that suggested an argument, which stopped after the shots were fired.

2. Two witnesses heard a woman scream before shots were fired.

3. Two other witnesses heard shots and then a woman scream, followed by more shots.

4. Pistorius's online activity at home undermines the picture of a loving couple spending time together. On Valentine's Day.

5. The number of shots, their grouping and their trajectory indicate Pistoritus intended to kill the person behind the closed bathroom door.

6. The position and condition of the gun in the bathroom.

7. Pistorius got a gun and shot through the closed door without finding out who was behind it or whether or not he was in danger.

8. Steenkamp was clothed when she was shot (in OP's T-shirt and shorts).

9. Steenkamp was standing upright facing the door when she was shot.

10. Steenkamp had something to eat hours before she was killed.

11. The presence of the cellphones in the bathroom militates against a version that Steenkamp innocently went to the toilet at the time.

12. The fact and the way in which Pistorius broke down the toilet door.

13. Pistorius's version 'is not reasonably possibly true and it is our case that if rejected by the court the objective facts will prove the murder with direct intent of the deceased'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-prostheses-time-shooting.html#ixzz2u0yftZin

 

[Public_Hysteria]

I believe he will be charged with culpable homicide, but I think that he SHOULD be charged with premeditated murder. Sadly, I think this will be a case where the punishment does not match the crime, due to his standing in society.

 

[Melanie]

If they manage to prove there was a fight between the two of them (as I believe) then I still think he'll only get a light sentence .. I have no faith in the justice system there, or anywhere, when it comes to people of his status.

Wouldn't Dominick Dunne have loved this one?

I've been watching the trial, and think (at this point) he would be given a charge of gross negligence. So far they haven't presented witnesses to prove they were fighting. Though I did find it interesting that he shot that poor boxer in the foot and didn't take the blame for it.

I do believe "mi lady" is going to go easy on him....unless they can prove there was a fight and he hunted her down. But I don't see that happening.

Just my opinion.

Mel

ETA: Yes, I do believe he's guilty of murder, and would probably be sentenced so in the US. But he has a very expensive defense team who seem to have no problem trying to twist the words of the witnesses.

 

[Peekaboo10]

I sure as heck hope he's charged with Murder!

 

[Estelle]

IMO OP is guilty of premeditated murder as his Affidavit stand does not stand up to scrutiny and IMO he knew it was Reeva behind that door. It would be interesting to know his motivation.

 

[fruity]

I voted when this poll was first started and after watching the first bit of the trial my vote hasn't changed. I still believe he knew it was Reeva and that he killed her in a rage. But I still think he will be found guilty of culpable homicide. I have no faith in the South African legal system.

 

[LinasK]

I saw a Dateline episode recently on this case, which suggested his motive- jealousy. He discovered that a day or two beforehand she had gone for coffee with her ex-boyfriend, whom she was still close friends with. I strongly think he premeditated it. Who shoots first without finding out who it is???:banghead::banghead::banghead: Also, the angle of the bullets suggests he shot at a different angle than he claims.

 

[Suthrnqt]

I believe they were arguing, but I'm not sure what the argument concerned. Some suggested that on the reality show (Tropika of ???) Reeva had kissed one of the other participants. I do agree he was in a jealous rage and that he trapped her in the bedroom, then the toilet. He was fully aware of who he was shooting, IMO. Does anyone here know what OP got Reeva for Valentine's Day, if anything????

 

[Estelle]

I believe they were arguing, but I'm not sure what the argument concerned. Some suggested that on the reality show (Tropika of ???) Reeva had kissed one of the other participants. I do agree he was in a jealous rage and that he trapped her in the bedroom, then the toilet. He was fully aware of who he was shooting, IMO. Does anyone here know what OP got Reeva for Valentine's Day, if anything????

Yes that theory has been in the media lately that RS kissed a guy on Tropika and she did not know whether to tell him or not. Maybe she did that night.

My theory is that the argument began downstairs because there is a photo of the downstairs lounge with two armchairs and what looks like flowers strewn all over the floor. I think RS ran upstairs to get her things to depart or to hide from him and firstly locked herself into the bedroom.

The main bedroom door was damaged but we do not know the details yet but there was a hole in it. Then somehow he got access, came in and locked the door again so RS cold not escape, they argued and then she ran into the toilet and locked that door and the rest is history.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

If OP gets off or is given a "slap on the wrist" (aka a light sentence), it will set a bad social president. It will send a resounding message to all of SA that killing your girlfriend will get you very little time, especially if you're a "somebody". If you're a "somebody", you'll get special treatment. And perhaps the message will be that women are disposable.

Common sense dictates that no strange intruder was dying (figuratively and literally) to go to the bathroom in OP's house. It is absurd.

And if OP gets off or is given a "slap on the wrist" sentence, you think SA is violent now? Wait.....just wait.....