Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #64 ~ the appeal~

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Colin de France said:
...There wasn't enough time for that....you can always try it for yourself.....you just can't do it......the result is that the vest acts as a cushion unlike a metal object which leaves a mark.....not only that but Reeva was practically dead when she fell (if she fell) on the rack so the bruises didn't have time to form.......
Click to expand...

The heart only needs to remain beating for a bruise to form and Reeva's heart must have still been beating when she was carried downstairs as there was arterial bleeding on the stairs.
 
aftermath said:
I don't know... I think the lines look like the fabric lines from the vest material and the shape of the two bruises looked like the shape of bullet graze wounds (not that I have seen many! But I did have a quick look on some forensic pathology sites about graze wounds) The impact of whatever caused the graze wound (if that's what it is) could have caused the fabric markings (if that's what they are). But it will certainly be interesting to read Mr Fossil and Judge Judi's blog thoughts as they appear to have done a lot of research!
Click to expand...

.....so are you saying that the bullet hit the vest which left a bruise with the mark of the vest on her back ?
 
Colin de France said:
....the danger of ricochets was in retrospect......i see him firing on the door in a moment of extreme rage, it was an action not thought out, it may well have a mixture of anger because he could not get to her and to blow a hole in the door which could well of happened if for example the door was more solid and further away allowing the bullets to open out.....he is simply someone who can not control his anger it blinds him to reason, i don't think he shot her on purpose it doesn't feel right, not only that unless he had already thought up the intruder excuse beforehand it would of been obvious at that moment he would not get away with it......
Click to expand...

BiB

I really don't think so. It may have been what he wanted the court to believe but we know he had had training in gun use. It would have been second nature to know the risk of ricochets. He would also have known that it was safe to fire a warning shot into the ceiling but he chose not to. I think you have been hoodwinked into believing his lies. Masipa clearly indicated he was not honest. I cannot think why anyone believes anything he says. IMO virtually everything he uttered was in an attempt to evade justice. It is something we shall never agree on.
 
Interested Bystander said:
BiB

I really don't think so. It may have been what he wanted the court to believe but we know he had had training in gun use. It would have been second nature to know the risk of ricochets. He would also have known that it was safe to fire a warning shot into the ceiling but he chose not to. I think you have been hoodwinked into believing his lies. Masipa clearly indicated he was not honest. I cannot think why anyone believes anything he says. IMO virtually everything he uttered was in an attempt to evade justice. It is something we shall never agree on.
Click to expand...
...when he fired he didn't give anything a thought .......he just did it.....it certainly wasn't pre-meditated murder in my opinion...
 
Colin de France said:
...when he fired he didn't give anything a thought .......he just did it.....it certainly wasn't pre-meditated murder in my opinion...
Click to expand...

Did any witnesses hear Reeva screaming in your opinion?
I'm curious and interested in your reply...............yes or no would be fine.
I would also understand if you didn't want to reply...............no worries.
 
Ee
Colin de France said:
....the danger of ricochets was in retrospect......i see him firing on the door in a moment of extreme rage, it was an action not thought out, it may well have a mixture of anger because he could not get to her and to blow a hole in the door which could well of happened if for example the door was more solid and further away allowing the bullets to open out.....he is simply someone who can not control his anger it blinds him to reason, i don't think he shot her on purpose it doesn't feel right, not only that unless he had already thought up the intruder excuse beforehand it would of been obvious at that moment he would not get away with it......
Click to expand...

IMO it woukd never occur to him that he would not get way with it. He always got away with things and IMO immediately put his "story" into motion when he realized what he had really done.
 
kittychi said:
ee

imo it woukd never occur to him that he would not get way with it. He always got away with things and imo immediately put his "story" into motion when he realized what he had really done.
Click to expand...

this ^^^^^exactly!!!
 
44ALLAN said:
Did any witnesses hear Reeva screaming in your opinion?
I'm curious and interested in your reply...............yes or no would be fine.
I would also understand if you didn't want to reply...............no worries.
Click to expand...

......a strange post ! ......of course she screamed and there was a long dispute beforehand, she ran into the WC and he knew where she was located and shot anyway in a moment of rage.......i consider the marks of the gun handle in the bruises to be on the same level as that of the witnesses to screams.....i wonder what other evidence there is waiting to come out....
 
kittychi said:
Ee

IMO it woukd never occur to him that he would not get way with it. He always got away with things and IMO immediately put his "story" into motion when he realized what he had really done.
Click to expand...
....i'm not so sure, i think it's possible he got help in making up the intruder version.....
 
kittychi said:
Of course. Greatly assisted by his counsel, who, IMO wrote his initial bail affidavit.
Click to expand...

I think he alluded to this during his testimony OR maybe that was another untruth. I firmly believe Oldwage and Roux played more than the normal lawyer role in this trial.
 
Colin de France said:
...when he fired he didn't give anything a thought .......he just did it.....it certainly wasn't pre-meditated murder in my opinion...
Click to expand...

I have never thought premeditated murder was a starter. I actually have always thought he lost his temper and control after/during an argument. So not so different from your opinion. However, I do think he knowingly shot into the cubicle and directly at RS which is where will have to agree to differ.

I also think if he had been honest with the court he would probably have been given CH as the verdict but with a longer sentence. I have read that although there is not a Crime of Passion verdict per se, that SA judiciary look leniently on offenders who are honest with the court. However, IMO he chose to be dishonest with the court in an attempt to "get away with it" and, for me, that deserves a far greater sentence than he got. I think he shot once, and then chose to fire three more times. That has to be murder IMO.

The following is not the article I read but it came up quickly on a search and to save time I will post this. If you read the article you will see that the woman got away with a minimal sentence for the murder (reduced to CH). She was fined R2000 (or one year’s imprisonment) and sentenced to a further three years imprisonment , suspended for five years.

http://www.africacrime-mystery.co.za/books/fsac/chp26.htm

Only in France is a crime of passionnel, or crime of passion, a legally recognised defence. In South Africa, a murder committed in a moment of passion is seen as a mitigating circumstance and does not merit special treatment. If the court accepts the view that the crime was committed during a moment of passion, then this usually means that an act of murder is reduced to a lesser charge, such as culpable homicide.
 
Interested Bystander said:
I have never thought premeditated murder was a starter. I actually have always thought he lost his temper and control after/during an argument. So not so different from your opinion. However, I do think he knowingly shot into the cubicle and directly at RS which is where will have to agree to differ.

I also think if he had been honest with the court he would probably have been given CH as the verdict but with a longer sentence. I have read that although there is not a Crime of Passion verdict per se, that SA judiciary look leniently on offenders who are honest with the court. However, IMO he chose to be dishonest with the court in an attempt to "get away with it" and, for me, that deserves a far greater sentence than he got. I think he shot once, and then chose to fire three more times. That has to be murder IMO.

The following is not the article I read but it came up quickly on a search and to save time I will post this. If you read the article you will see that the woman got away with a minimal sentence for the murder (reduced to CH). She was fined R2000 (or one year’s imprisonment) and sentenced to a further three years imprisonment , suspended for five years.

http://www.africacrime-mystery.co.za/books/fsac/chp26.htm

Only in France is a crime of passionnel, or crime of passion, a legally recognised defence. In South Africa, a murder committed in a moment of passion is seen as a mitigating circumstance and does not merit special treatment. If the court accepts the view that the crime was committed during a moment of passion, then this usually means that an act of murder is reduced to a lesser charge, such as culpable homicide.
Click to expand...
...i can accept and respect all of that except it wasn't a crime of passion....he shot into the WC in a moment of rage because she had ran in there and wouldn't come out......he shot at the door knowing her position, he did try to avoid her but she had slightly turned into the line of fire....this was done in a moment of rage but that doesn't take anything away from it being reckless and that's why i would like to see a heavy sentence......it certainly wasn't a crime of passion, far from it........the difference between my opinion and the majority on here is that i don't think he shot at her with the intention to kill...
....add to that he has lied in court, i think that should be an additional sentence on top .......all my opinion of course...
 
Colin de France said:
...i can accept and respect all of that except it wasn't a crime of passion....he shot into the WC in a moment of rage because she had ran in there and wouldn't come out......he shot at the door knowing her position, he did try to avoid her but she had slightly turned into the line of fire....this was done in a moment of rage but that doesn't take anything away from it being reckless and that's why i would like to see a heavy sentence......it certainly wasn't a crime of passion, far from it........the difference between my opinion and the majority on here is that i don't think he shot at her with the intention to kill...
....add to that he has lied in court, i think that should be an additional sentence on top .......all my opinion of course...
Click to expand...

The following is my understanding of crime of passion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_passion
 
Interested Bystander said:
The following is my understanding of crime of passion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_passion
Click to expand...

....i can't see why you keep referring to "crime of passion"...in my opinion he fired on the door without the intention to kill anyone whilst in a rage, if you consider that to be a "crime of passion", so be it.....i prefer someone who can't control himself and in doing so killed an innocent and unarmed human being and needs to pay for it.......i think you're being just a little too kind to call it a "crime of passion" with all the excuses that go with that definition.........
 
Colin de France said:
....i can't see why you keep referring to "crime of passion"...in my opinion he fired on the door without the intention to kill anyone whilst in a rage, if you consider that to be a "crime of passion", so be it.....i prefer someone who can't control himself and in doing so killed an innocent and unarmed human being and needs to pay for it.......i think you're being just a little too kind to call it a "crime of passion" with all the excuses that go with that definition.........
Click to expand...

I don't for one moment think it was a crime of passion. I was attempting to explain that it has been thought by some legal eagles that if he had offered CoP as his plea he may well have been treated more leniently and possibly ended up with the same CH verdict BUT, given OP's propensity to not accept responsibility and his mendacious nature, this was never going to happen and he now finds himself facing the possibility of going down for murder which, as you know, is what I think he is guilty of.
 
Colin de France said:
......a strange post ! ......of course she screamed and there was a long dispute beforehand, she ran into the WC and he knew where she was located and shot anyway in a moment of rage.......i consider the marks of the gun handle in the bruises to be on the same level as that of the witnesses to screams.....i wonder what other evidence there is waiting to come out....
Click to expand...

Hi Colin.............it's only a strange post because you didn't answer my question in relation to your previous post..............and I quote:)

"...when he fired he didn't give anything a thought .......he just did it.....it certainly wasn't pre-meditated murder in my opinion...".

Why did he not give anything a thought in your opinion?
And.........Why did he just do it?

He already said under X examination that he didn't fire a warning shot into the shower because it might ricochet and hit him so he must have gave that a thought maybe ?.............did you miss that bit of the trial?

There was also a long dispute you say and she screamed and he knew it was her but it was not premeditated?

What other evidence is needed is the question :)

You've just described murder.....................................
 
FYI
http://www.news.com.au/world/africa...o-home-detention/story-fnh81gzi-1227580548021

The unanswered questions about the release of Oscar Pistorius from jail to home detention
OCTOBER 23, 2015

According to legal expert Dr Llewellyn Curlewis, a criminal barrister and former president of the South African Law Society, there is no case of “rock star” treatment for the one-time national sporting hero. In fact, his sentence is being served to the letter of the law...

... Dr Curlewis believes the appeal will fail.“The appeal judges have to rule that the decision was palpably wrong,” he said. “This is a very politically sensitive case and the appeal judges come from the same background as Judge Masipa. There is no new evidence produced. It is all done by going through the evidence presented in the trial. They will have already done their reading. The decision will only take a few hours, and I think they will give her the benefit of the doubt...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 228 more.
Total: 1,513 (members: 229, guests: 1,284)

Online statistics

Members online
229
Guests online
1,284
Total visitors
1,513
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
596,596
Messages
18,050,479
Members
230,036
Latest member
PeepingKat
Back
Top