Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #63 ~ the appeal~

Status
Not open for further replies.
.....another element to take into consideration is if there was an intruder in the toilet would it of been surprising if they had made a noise..........normally that would of been expected.......
1. He'd had people staying over before.
2. Those same people would have made the usual night-time noises (toilet, getting a drink etc)
3. When Sam Taylor stayed over, OP checked any noises with her first.
4. It was only with Reeva that he changed his pattern. Hmmm.
5. Why didn't he tell Reeva what she was supposed to say to the police when she called? "Oh hello. My boyfriend asked me to call you, but he didn't say why..."
 
1. He'd had people staying over before.
2. Those same people would have made the usual night-time noises (toilet, getting a drink etc)
3. When Sam Taylor stayed over, OP checked any noises with her first.
4. It was only with Reeva that he changed his pattern. Hmmm.
5. Why didn't he tell Reeva what she was supposed to say to the police when she called? "Oh hello. My boyfriend asked me to call you, but he didn't say why..."
.....what i can't see is if he knew someone was in the toilet why did he react to a noise, even if it sounded like they were coming out.......the jump is too great, between hearing a noise and being threatened....if anything it was the intruder who was threatened after his shouting of "get out"......according to Pistorius the intruder said nothing only a noise as if he/she was coming out....surely if that was true it was a sign of resignation on the behalf of the intruder..........not an attack....the intruder was conforming to what was asked .....put that then into the context of firing four shots, this is why his version just does not make any sense at all ....
 
<Respectfully snipped>

BIB2 - Yes, but it does follow, as you agree, that if you are interested in the truth, you have to engage, scrutinise the Defence's case genuinely. Anything else is simply paying "lip-service". And typical replies of: well the Defence "won", the Defence don't need to prove that, insert the next - are irrelevant if you (again you plural) are actually interested in finding truths.

PS. An incidental but one of the most frequent mainstream journalists specialising in the OP case, who has been quoted on here many many times is a friend of the OP family and is acknowledged as favourable by Pistorians themselves. Now normally I would provide some links and name but........

Would this be the person you have in mind? There's plenty of other tweets, not to mention the exclusive interview she had with Carl and Aimee on the eve of sentencing.
 

Attachments

  • CP tweet.JPG
    CP tweet.JPG
    47.1 KB · Views: 20
.....what i can't see is if he knew someone was in the toilet why did he react to a noise, even if it sounded like they were coming out.......the jump is too great, between hearing a noise and being threatened....if anything it was the intruder who was threatened after his shouting of "get out"......according to Pistorius the intruder said nothing only a noise as if he/she was coming out....surely if that was true it was a sign of resignation on the behalf of the intruder..........not an attack....the intruder was conforming to what was asked .....put that then into the context of firing four shots, this is why his version just does not make any sense at all ....

On pistorius's version, he shouted 'get out' on the way up the passage. When he got to the bathroom he described pausing-looking from window to door (presumably a few times). He then says he heard the wood moving noise, panicked and fired. It is different from saying he ordered the intruder to get out, heard the noise and started firing. The intruder could have been getting out as demanded, but equally, the intruder could have been preparing to open fire or to come out and attack both a man with a significant disability and his girlfriend. Plenty of people have commented on the stupidity of his decision to go towards the danger. At that moment when the wood noise was heard, the consequences of his decision were about to become apparent; he was about to come face to face with a (probably armed) intruder. On his stumps, with limited mobility, with a girlfriend also in danger from an attack, (often sexual, often violent, sometimes fatal), it isn't so surprising, IMO, that this caused him to panic and therefore to open fire.
 
On pistorius's version, he shouted 'get out' on the way up the passage. When he got to the bathroom he described pausing-looking from window to door (presumably a few times). He then says he heard the wood moving noise, panicked and fired. It is different from saying he ordered the intruder to get out, heard the noise and started firing. The intruder could have been getting out as demanded, but equally, the intruder could have been preparing to open fire or to come out and attack both a man with a significant disability and his girlfriend. Plenty of people have commented on the stupidity of his decision to go towards the danger. At that moment when the wood noise was heard, the consequences of his decision were about to become apparent; he was about to come face to face with a (probably armed) intruder. On his stumps, with limited mobility, with a girlfriend also in danger from an attack, (often sexual, often violent, sometimes fatal), it isn't so surprising, IMO, that this caused him to panic and therefore to open fire.

.....i am fully agreed to the idea that once hearing the noise he could of become frightnened but having only just shouted for them to "get out" becoming panicked because they were doing just that is too great a jump to believe........remember he was armed...
 
On pistorius's version, he shouted 'get out' on the way up the passage. When he got to the bathroom he described pausing-looking from window to door (presumably a few times). He then says he heard the wood moving noise, panicked and fired. It is different from saying he ordered the intruder to get out, heard the noise and started firing. The intruder could have been getting out as demanded, but equally, the intruder could have been preparing to open fire or to come out and attack both a man with a significant disability and his girlfriend. Plenty of people have commented on the stupidity of his decision to go towards the danger. At that moment when the wood noise was heard, the consequences of his decision were about to become apparent; he was about to come face to face with a (probably armed) intruder. On his stumps, with limited mobility, with a girlfriend also in danger from an attack, (often sexual, often violent, sometimes fatal), it isn't so surprising, IMO, that this caused him to panic and therefore to open fire.
BIB - but the invisible intruder wasn't about to come out or about to fire, as OP well knew when he got to the toilet door. And he wasn't about to come face to face with anyone, as he had the option to shoot as soon as the door opened before anyone made an appearance... except he didn't wait. He just shot and killed.

What he actually claimed to have shouted was "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" before inexplicably deciding to keep quiet in case he gave his position away - like screaming "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" hadn't already given away his position?

You're implying he made the right decision to go towards the noise - but what if the invisible intruder had already come out of the toilet and was armed and approaching OP in the 'dark'? How would OP have protected himself and Reeva then? He wouldn't. Fortunately for OP, his invisible intruder was safely locked behind the door of a small toilet where he was under absolutely no threat whatsoever. None. Nada. Zilch. He killed Reeva for no reason, other than the imagined (made up) threat which existed only in his own head, and which did not give him the legal right to shoot and kill.
 
.....i am fully agreed to the idea that once hearing the noise he could of become frightnened but having only just shouted for them to "get out" becoming panicked because they were doing just that is too great a jump to believe........remember he was armed...

I would have to have another look at his testimony, but I had the impression that there was a gap between saying it and firing. Also- the fight-flight response can distort perception of time, so a small gap in time could have felt a lot longer to the person experiencing the panic.
 
BIB - but the invisible intruder wasn't about to come out or about to fire, as OP well knew when he got to the toilet door. And he wasn't about to come face to face with anyone, as he had the option to shoot as soon as the door opened before anyone made an appearance... except he didn't wait. He just shot and killed.

What he actually claimed to have shouted was "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" before inexplicably deciding to keep quiet in case he gave his position away - like screaming "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" hadn't already given away his position?

You're implying he made the right decision to go towards the noise - but what if the invisible intruder had already come out of the toilet and was armed and approaching OP in the 'dark'? How would OP have protected himself and Reeva then? He wouldn't. Fortunately for OP, his invisible intruder was safely locked behind the door of a small toilet where he was under absolutely no threat whatsoever. None. Nada. Zilch. He killed Reeva for no reason, other than the imagined (made up) threat which existed only in his own head, and which did not give him the legal right to shoot and kill.
very good....you've got a real point there.....when he ventured down the hallway he coudn't of known the intruder was in the toilet......the risk was at it's highest point at that moment.....and to top it off he went down the hall shouting...!
 
<Respectfully snipped>

We used to have some posters with media analysis background on WS....
Anyway, my point is, now I come to think of it , if we really scrutinised this "media bias" argument ( and I'm not suggesting that time is spent doing that) I'm not sure that it would actually hold water - like so many other assertions.

Marfa - I will come back to dolus e- but after thread 61 I am temporarily dolused out!

Media bias can cut both ways. When OP was the superstar before becoming the shooting star and now the fallen star, it was the very same South African media that chose not to publish his wrongdoings because he was the second biggest hero after Mandela and they didn't want to tarnish his image. It all got swept under the carpet.

"dolus" - (Latin) a will or intention to do wrong
 
I would have to have another look at his testimony, but I had the impression that there was a gap between saying it and firing. Also- the fight-flight response can distort perception of time, so a small gap in time could have felt a lot longer to the person experiencing the panic.

....he never panicked.....he fired with precision......in the dark...
 
BIB - but the invisible intruder wasn't about to come out or about to fire, as OP well knew when he got to the toilet door.
How can you be so sure of this?

And he wasn't about to come face to face with anyone, as he had the option to shoot as soon as the door opened before anyone made an appearance... except he didn't wait. He just shot and killed.
Hence culp hom for acting pre-emptively and in haste

What he actually claimed to have shouted was "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" before inexplicably deciding to keep quiet in case he gave his position away - like screaming "Get the *advertiser censored** out of my house" hadn't already given away his position?
So he wasn't acting logically - shouting out then worrying about keeping quiet. Suggests panic and confusion. Might even have added to why he panicked: intruder heard me shouting, intruder now knows where I am, intruder is coming...

You're implying he made the right decision to go towards the noise - Absolutely not. I am not implying this at all.
but what if the invisible intruder had already come out of the toilet and was armed and approaching OP in the 'dark'?
Who knows? Pistorius would probably have been attacked if an armed intruder was advancing towards him... I am unsure of what exactly you are asking me to consider here
How would OP have protected himself and Reeva then? He wouldn't. Fortunately for OP, his invisible intruder was safely locked behind the door of a small toilet where he was under absolutely no threat whatsoever. None. Nada. Zilch.
because no one could shoot through that door from the cubicle side? Why would pistorius assume the intruder had locked the door ? We know here's under no threat. The question is did he genuinely believe he was.
He killed Reeva for no reason, other than the imagined (made up) threat which existed only in his own head, and which did not give him the legal right to shoot and kill.Hence the culp hom conviction for unlawfully killing Reeva

My comments in bold above
 
My comments in bold above

....we know for sure that the intruder wasn't about to come out...the other remarkable exception whilst all this was going on is any verbal declaration either from the intruder or from Reeva....
 
At an unsighted target? I think you are giving him far too much credit as some kind of highly -trained Swat team figure

....now you're being silly again.......i'm not giving him any credit at all i'm simply saying he's a liar......it's not quite the same thing.....
 
On pistorius's version, he shouted 'get out' on the way up the passage. When he got to the bathroom he described pausing-looking from window to door (presumably a few times). He then says he heard the wood moving noise, panicked and fired. It is different from saying he ordered the intruder to get out, heard the noise and started firing. The intruder could have been getting out as demanded, but equally, the intruder could have been preparing to open fire or to come out and attack both a man with a significant disability and his girlfriend. Plenty of people have commented on the stupidity of his decision to go towards the danger. At that moment when the wood noise was heard, the consequences of his decision were about to become apparent; he was about to come face to face with a (probably armed) intruder. On his stumps, with limited mobility, with a girlfriend also in danger from an attack, (often sexual, often violent, sometimes fatal), it isn't so surprising, IMO, that this caused him to panic and therefore to open fire.

Through a closed door, just like OP did?

Re 2nd BIB - so he was thinking then?
 
At an unsighted target? I think you are giving him far too much credit as some kind of highly -trained Swat team figure
And you are not giving him enough. He wasn't some child playing with a gun. He was an experienced shooter, and he was firing into a very small space.
 
And you are not giving him enough. He wasn't some child playing with a gun. He was an experienced shooter, and he was firing into a very small space.

....in a place that he knew by heart .........with or without the lights.....
 
Re the Mandy Weiner article you posted yesterday aftermath where it said that Reeva`s mother had forgiven him I pointed out that Weiner neglected to mention her view that 10 months wasn`t enough. This is apparently what she said:

June Steenkamp, the mother of law graduate and model Reeva, has remained dignified throughout the difficult trial and post-trial purpose, only making this comment on Oscar&#8217;s early release:

&#8216;I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a good idea to let him back into society so quickly&#8230; he shot my daughter through the door where she had no space to move of defend herself&#8217;

&#8216;One of the bullets blew her brains out, it is disgusting what he did to her - 10 months is just not enough.&#8217;

&#8216;Justice must be done, otherwise there will be chaos.&#8217;

http://www.closeronline.co.uk/2015/...scene-photographer-still-haunted-two-years-on
 
I would have to have another look at his testimony, but I had the impression that there was a gap between saying it and firing. Also- the fight-flight response can distort perception of time, so a small gap in time could have felt a lot longer to the person experiencing the panic.


Don't forget fight and flight are not the only options - there is also "freeze"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
1,394
Total visitors
1,504

Forum statistics

Threads
589,162
Messages
17,915,052
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top