Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

For the third time across the last 20 posts - IMO, the prosecution was not going to be able to prove DD- insufficient evidence.

That's the deal - basis of evidence .
Nonetheless people like Roux* can still feel deep down OP shot RS knowingly, with intent, in rage.

*any advocate can still hold their own, private opinion.

One of the first posts i made back in 2014 was a cartoon drawn at outset of the trial which illustrated the deficiencies in resources, expertise of the NPA - they are notorious for it. This is common knowledge to anyone who has really followed this case and looked at both sides.

cottonweaver said:

For the third time across the last 20 posts - IMO, the prosecution was not going to be able to prove DD- insufficient evidence.

That's the deal - basis of evidence .
Nonetheless people like Roux* can still feel deep down OP shot RS knowingly, with intent, in rage.

*any advocate can still hold their own, private opinion.

One of the first posts i made back in 2014 was a cartoon drawn at outset of the trial which illustrated the deficiencies in resources, expertise of the NPA - they are notorious for it. This is common knowledge to anyone who has really followed this case and looked at both sides.

Click to expand...

I agree that there was never sufficient evidence to prove DD

Here is the cartoon link

http://www.zapiro.com/cartoon/1681131-130606tt#.VaevtCpViko

It may be deemed to be offensive to the NPA, so if any of the NPA are currently posting and you find that's true, you know what to do

aftermath said:

This is true. The facts are that the professional opinions of the experts who assessed him were accepted by both state and defence.

But all that is being offered in posts about pistorius acting/becoming a raving lunatic/ being sexually frustrated etc is unsubstantiated opinion -

Click to expand...

....in reference to the last phrase, i do agree that it is opinion but nonetheless based on a certain degree of substantiated evidence, such as selective crying, shooting guns off in public, reading pornographic magazines etc....but i do agree partially with your statement, having said that an opinion isn't a crime......just as you yourself are entitled to one, albeit wrong.......

aftermath said:

1) ?? It was valentines night the next night.

2)but photographic evidence of muscle tape for injury in police photos gives support to this claim

3) yes a coincidence. But makes sense given that he was locking up/ closing curtains for bed: they were about to go to sleep, so she nips off to the toilet first.

4) no- he heard the noise after he brought the fan (s) in. If she went to the bathroom when he was getting the fans in (as in 3) above) and she opened the window - that is what he would have heard...the coincidence here is that she opened the window as he moved away from the fans, meaning he could hear the noise.

5) no. There was no ladder against the wall. The coincidence is that earlier in the week he says he spoke to the contractor about securing the ladders.

If pistorius is telling the truth about thinking there was an intruder then the whole thing is a catastrophic coming together of coincidence, context, ill-judgement and fear.

Click to expand...

They went to bed about five hours before this, around ten remember. Don`t you find it at all odd that Reeva made not a sound other than saying `Can`t you sleep baba` when he was bringing in the fans? No words, no noises as she either walked around the bed or slid across it and made her way down the dark hallway. Not a little odd that she didn`t turn on a light to ease her way and help him flaffing about with fans in the dark? Or that after he heard the noise and grabbed his gun (again in the dark) that he couldn`t sense that she was no longer there. He never even mentioned her speaking in the bail affidavit. Why? IMO it was because none of this happened but he later had to claim that she was awake and so could have slipped off to the toilet, quiet as a cat. Below is the relevant part of the bail app. Why did he immediately assume it was an intruder and not her? He knew she was awake. If we are going to talk about logic, wouldn't it be at least as logical that it was the person sharing his bed and bath rooms that had gone into the toilet. Why not call out `Is that you baba?`. After all he was about to go screaming down the hallway so it is not as if he thought silence was important.

"After Reeva finished her yoga exercises she got into bed and we both fell asleep. I am acutely aware of violent crime being committed by intruders entering homes with a view to commit crime, including violent crime. I have received death threats before. I have also been a victim of violence and of burglaries before. For that reason I kept my firearm, a 9mm Parabellum, underneath my bed when I went to bed at night.

"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains. I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom.

"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps. I believed that someone had entered my house. I was too scared to switch a light on.

Colin de France said:

....in reference to the last phrase, i do agree that it is opinion but nonetheless based on a certain degree of substantiated evidence, such as selective crying, shooting guns off in public, reading pornographic magazines etc....but i do agree partially with your statement, having said that an opinion isn't a crime......just as you yourself are entitled to one, albeit wrong.......

Click to expand...

Of course having an opinion is not a crime.

But where is the basis for the opinion that the crying was selective, that the shooting of guns in public makes him violent, or that looking at *advertiser censored* means he is/was sexually frustrated?

aftermath said:

Of course having an opinion is not a crime.

But where is the basis for the opinion that the crying was selective, that the shooting of guns in public makes him violent, or that looking at *advertiser censored* means he is/was sexually frustrated?

Click to expand...

....the basis for my opinion dear Aftermath is in my mind having studied the case...............i think it's best to stick to the subject instead of my good self......to avoid another warning....

lithgow1 said:

They went to bed about five hours before this, around ten remember. Don`t you find it at all odd that Reeva made not a sound other than saying `Can`t you sleep baba` when he was bringing in the fans? No words, no noises as she either walked around the bed or slid across it and made her way down the dark hallway. Not a little odd that she didn`t turn on a light to ease her way and help him flaffing about with fans in the dark? Or that after he heard the noise and grabbed his gun (again in the dark) that he couldn`t sense that she was no longer there. He never even mentioned her speaking in the bail affidavit. Why? IMO it was because none of this happened but he later had to claim that she was awake and so could have slipped off to the toilet, quiet as a cat. Below is the relevant part of the bail app. Why did he immediately assume it was an intruder and not her? He knew she was awake. If we are going to talk about logic, wouldn't it be at least as logical that it was the person sharing his bed and bath rooms that had gone into the toilet. Why not call out `Is that you baba?`. After all he was about to go screaming down the hallway so it is not as if he thought silence was important.

"After Reeva finished her yoga exercises she got into bed and we both fell asleep. I am acutely aware of violent crime being committed by intruders entering homes with a view to commit crime, including violent crime. I have received death threats before. I have also been a victim of violence and of burglaries before. For that reason I kept my firearm, a 9mm Parabellum, underneath my bed when I went to bed at night.

"During the early morning hours of 14 February 2013, I woke up, went onto the balcony to bring the fan in and closed the sliding doors, the blinds and the curtains. I heard a noise in the bathroom and realised that someone was in the bathroom.

"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps. I believed that someone had entered my house. I was too scared to switch a light on.

Click to expand...

It is unlikely that she could have left without him realising and part of the reason he got a 5 year prison sentence is because he should have checked before setting off with the gun. I don't think that you are going to find anyone who is going to say that he should not have checked.

Colin de France said:

....the basis for my opinion dear Aftermath is in my mind having studied the case...............i think it's best to stick to the subject instead of my good self......to avoid another warning....

Click to expand...

I agree- it's always better to stick to the subject. My post was about the subject.

Snipped from your post:

But makes sense given that he was locking up/ closing curtains for bed: they were about to go to sleep, so she nips off to the toilet first.

Yes that makes sense but he claims that he had been asleep for five hours. Does it make sense that someone who is so paranoid about crime that he hears a noise and immediately leaps to the conclusion that it is an intruder would go to sleep with the balcony doors open in the knowledge that there are ladders lying about the property. It doesn`t prove it was murder no, but it also does not make sense does it.

Trotterly said:

It is unlikely that she could have left without him realising and part of the reason he got a 5 year prison sentence is because he should have checked before setting off with the gun. I don't think that you are going to find anyone who is going to say that he should not have checked.

Click to expand...

.....i just wonder how she could have said "Can`t you sleep baba" when she was in the WC ..............or was that on the way down the hall ?

Trotterly said:

It is unlikely that she could have left without him realising and part of the reason he got a 5 year prison sentence is because he should have checked before setting off with the gun. I don't think that you are going to find anyone who is going to say that he should not have checked.

Click to expand...

So are you saying that it is unlikely that she could have left without him realising but it happened? Guess you must be.

Colin de France said:

.....i just wonder how she could have said "Can`t you sleep baba" when she was in the WC ..............or was that on the way down the hall ?

Click to expand...

The "Can't you sleep baba" was in the bed before she went to the WC.

lithgow1 said:

So are you saying that it is unlikely that she could have left without him realising but it happened? Guess you must be.

Click to expand...

Yes. I'm sure OP thought the same, but he should have checked.

Trotterly said:

The "Can't you sleep baba" was in the bed before she went to the WC.

Click to expand...

....so for her to of said that she must of seen him get up or was it before he got up ? ....

cottonweaver said:

I was wondering FG, how many years does it take to get to the Court of Appeal in Germany? Some of those UK appeal judges I linked to were barristers for 40 years pre appointment to Appeal Court.

Click to expand...

Don't know for sure but I think, that may be right:

Can only be selected, who is a German national and the 35th years of age (§ 125 para. 2 GVG). The relevant Supreme Court is by its Presidential Council an opinion on the personal and professional competence of the proposed which do not, however, binding on the judicial selection committee. The judicial selection committee will decide by secret ballot by a majority of the votes cast (§ 12 RiWG). After their election, the judges are appointed by the Federal President.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesrichter_(Deutschland)


Several judges are around 40/50 years old, when elected.

Colin de France said:

....so for her to of said that she must of seen him get up or was it before he got up ? ....

Click to expand...

The sequence was that OP sat up. Reeva said "Can't you sleep", OP got out of bed.

lithgow1 said:

Snipped from your post:

But makes sense given that he was locking up/ closing curtains for bed: they were about to go to sleep, so she nips off to the toilet first.

Yes that makes sense but he claims that he had been asleep for five hours. Does it make sense that someone who is so paranoid about crime that he hears a noise and immediately leaps to the conclusion that it is an intruder would go to sleep with the balcony doors open in the knowledge that there are ladders lying about the property. It doesn`t prove it was murder no, but it also does not make sense does it.

Click to expand...

It makes sense in as much as on his version he asked reeva to bring in the fans and close the curtains before she went to sleep. The female psychologist Dr Vorster testified that people with anxiety like pistorius would still be able to trust their partner to close windows and doors.

However she also said that she would have expected a homeowner to lock up ladders outside his home.

aftermath said:

Of course having an opinion is not a crime.

But where is the basis for the opinion that the crying was selective, that the shooting of guns in public makes him violent, or that looking at *advertiser censored* means he is/was sexually frustrated?

Click to expand...

I would have the same (bad) picture of a man with these characteristics if it had been another guy. If another perp had been more uggly, with less well-built body and with less charming skills, then my opinion would be even more negative, I admit.

Merryl Vorster's psych assessment, paid for the Defence was GAD.

GAD was not found after the full assessment by the forensic psychs panel.

MV's view carried no weight.


And to pre-empt the same refrain - yes, personally I do accept the psych panel's view. (It's a full panel. One psych view - no I would treat with caution.) So , if I was him and had killed my GF in a rage, faced long stretch in Kgosi, lost my income, career and reputation I would be having flashbacks, hallmarks of PTSD (very common ) and depressed- You betcha!

Of course pre-crime, I guess that if OP had seen a professional - yes they may have found something wrong with him. Borderline case - yes. Personality disorder - maybe? PD is not a mental defect though - criminally sane & culpable either way.