Theory Thread - What happened at Pistorius' house on the night of Feb. 13, 2013?

Discussion in 'Oscar Pistorius' started by beach, Apr 14, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. beach

    beach Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    17,931
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    38
    How do you feel the events unfolded that night that ultimately resulted in the death of Reeva Steenkamp?

    Share your theories here.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. minor4th

    minor4th Verified Attorney

    Messages:
    8,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi beach, thanks for the thread.

    I have two theories. One is based on what the evidence has and has not shown, and the other is based on conjecture of what might have happened.

    Theory #1: Things happened essentially as OP has described. He believed there was an intruder in his bathroom and believed Reeva was in bed when he shot through the bathroom door. He may have embellished or polished his testimony to try to paint himself in what he thinks is a better light, legally, and he may be hiding some things but on the whole - this was not an intentional murder of Reeva and there was a mistake involved with his perceptions. This is what I think the evidence supports so far.

    Theory #2 - Something caused Oscar to be fed up with the relationship that night and he decided impetuously to end it - much like when he told Samantha Taylor it was over and she needs to take his car and her things and leave.

    I don't think it would have been a jealous rage, but more like OP just not being able to cope with the relationship and acting impetuous in the moment and telling Reeva to leave. Speculating, and trying to fit the evidence into this theory - perhaps Reeva disarmed the alarm and went down for a midnight snack and in the process woke OP up, which annoyed him. He might have thought Reeva was being inconsiderate of his need for sleep since he is a top athlete and must have the right food at the right time and the proper amount of sleep. We've seen this before from OP in the text messages - he expects that his needs will be accommodated.

    Reeva, being a more mature and self assertive woman than Oscar was accustomed to, might have retorted that there are two people in this relationship and that she has needs as well and it's unreasonable for him to get irritated at her getting a late night snack.

    Oscar would not be expecting such a response - in the past when he griped about something and put his foot down, Samantha Taylor begged his forgiveness and let him have his way. So perhaps Reeva's more rational and mature response threw OP into unfamiliar and uncomfortable territory that he was not emotionally or intellectually equipped to deal with. Given his impetuous nature and inability to cope with discord, he might have become overwhelmed and began to demand that Reeva just leave because he didn't want to deal with the relationship and could not just tolerate the tension for the remainder of the night.

    I could imagine that in response, Reeva may have laughed or told him he was being absurd and immature to react in such an over the top manner. This would only increase OP's anxiety and frustration - feeling increasingly helpless to control his environment and unable to bear the increasing tension of the situation. (Remember that he tends to just go away and not deal with things when there is discord - e.g., dropping Reeva at home when they were in a tiff instead of having her come to spend the night; telling ST to leave and go away when he was frustrated that she was defending the old guy who whisked her overseas, etc).

    With his frustration and anxiety rising to a pitch, he shouted at her to "GET THE F*CK OUT OF MY HOUSE!" and threatening in a loud voice "I'm calling the police if you don't get the f out of my house." At this point, Reeva became alarmed at his overreaction and ran to the toilet with her phone and his phone to keep him from calling the police and escalating the situation into a really bad situation for everyone. Perhaps she just wanted to give him a moment to calm down, but instead it had the opposite effect on him. He became more frustrated, more emotional, and more out of control of his emotions. He yelled again "Get the F out of my house" and when she didn't reply, it threw him over the top and he grabbed his gun and shot - basically out of frustration and impotence before really thinking of the consequences. Then he realized what he had done and freaked out and yelled and screamed and cried and so forth.

    There is not sufficient evidence to support this, but nevertheless it would be a possible scenario that would fit with the dynamics of OP's personality and his way of reacting to emotional events.
     
  4. Carmelita

    Carmelita Former Member

    Messages:
    613
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oscar has never wavered from the core of his story unless you count his turning the corner toward the bathroom and his mind going “blank” as changing the core of his story. A lot of the nuances of the night have changed during Oscars cross examination. I hardly think the distinction between a “low tone” and “whisper” has an ounce of value before the judge. Except perhaps to annoy her as to why Nel would waste her time on such a distinction. All the inconsistencies are not proof of a fight which ended in Oscar intentionally killing Reeva.

    If events took place similar in fashion in which Oscar portrayed them, then just possibly, I think he is trying to make sense of it under cross examination. He says things that are totally physically impossible and he either believes them or he recklessly thinks he can perpetuate a total fraud on the judge. I think he is dull but not imbecilic.

    Why would anyone that understands the basic concept of perjury, the law of physics and the charges against him deny that his finger was in the trigger of the gun involved in the restaurant incident? It makes no sense other than he is slightly delusional in order to preserve his own self-image and sanity or he is a total narcissist who cannot even fathom that his version of events would be questioned.

    He seems to have a rigid concept of self and expectations of perfection.

    In other words Oscar simply cannot mentally accept that he killed Reeva all because a noise sent him into a psychological paranoid frenzy. So he fills in the story to make him seem less culpable.

    Personally the more I see of Oscar under the stress of cross examination, the more I read about his inability to accept consequences for undeniable actions he has taken the more I think that he may have not known it was Reeva in the bathroom. He is a man of passion, he possessed world class athletic abilities, he is young, indulgent and hot tempered, he acts without thinking in the heat of the moment.
    I can see Oscars story having a seed of truth that he tried to form into a story that in his own mind did not make him a reactionary hot head that killed his girlfriend in a foolish panicked moment of paranoia.

    Reeva could have been yelling, “It’s me Oscar it’s me.” but Oscar could have crossed over the threshold of being able to discern anything other than an innocent trip to the bathroom into a life and death situation.

    Reality may have dawned on him may while he was firing the gun thus the 4 shots instead of emptying the clip.

    I do think that Oscar is dull enough that Nel confuses him easily. And I think Nel’s style of prosecuting is not aimed at getting to the truth but to creating Nel’s truth in the mouth of the witness, at least in Oscar’s case as it is the only time I have seen Nel.

    The whining, crying, retching, blubbering Oscar may be the real Oscar. He could feel terrible that he let his paranoia get the best of him and that he did kill Reeva in a panicked fear filled hysterical moment.

    Just a thought.
     
  5. Suthrnqt

    Suthrnqt Verified Luddite

    Messages:
    3,587
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Marking my spot...:cool:
     
  6. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reposted from earlier:

    OP's stories are just too full of holes to be true.

    In my view this means he has something to hide and is likely guilty of the murder of Reeva.

    However, the prosecution story still needs work.

    My theory is based on eliminating the impossible, so that anything remaining, no matter how improbable is likely the truth.

    Below is my working theory. I welcome any and all comments.

    13th Feb
    8:00 p.m. Dinner between Reeva and Oscar (true as per OP's testimony)

    9:00 p.m. Discussion re: Reeva's modelling contract (OP's testimony) resulted in a fight as OP wanted to control some aspects of her modelling (my presumption based on OP's jealousy and controlling nature).

    10:00 p.m - Argument is over but still simmering tempers. Reeva does do some Yoga (as per OP's testimony) and texts her family (I believe at 10:35 p.m) and OP looks at cars.

    14th Feb
    12:00 a.m. Both still awake and it has just ticked into Valentine's Day. Reeva still angry and depressed over her fight goes and gets food downstairs for comfort(disabling the alarm).

    1:00 a.m. Upon getting back upstairs, fight begins when OP asks why Reeva didn't get him any food. Its hot and humid with tempers frayed resulting in a fight escalating as Reeva has gotten him a gift but he hasn't gotten her one for Valentines. Reeva gets emotional and angry over the past issues from their earlier fight in the evening and they start fighting about finances including cars/houses/guns.

    2:00 a.m. The fight gets extremely heated (loud arguing heard by Van der Merwe for an hour from 1:56 a.m.).

    3:00 a.m. OP finally loses it and slams the bedroom door (breaking it as per evidence) and threatens Reeva.

    Reeva screams and gets scared and runs into the bathroom before running into the toilet slamming the door and locking it.

    OP comes in brandishing the cricket bat and hits the door (not enough to break the door panel). He threatens Reeva asking her to come out.

    Reeva threatens to tell the media and continues screaming for help.

    3:15 a.m.

    OP fires a warning shot through the door and hits her on the hip and tells her to 'get the f*** out'.

    Reeva then says she will call the police (he is paranoid about his reputation and the police).

    At that point he panics and shoots her 3 times.

    He spent two minutes breaking the panel and confirming Reeva was seriously hurt behind the door.

    He then called Stander (come help me with a problem), Netcare (out of immediate remose but vague description of injuries as he can't see through the door - results in them asking him to bring her in) and Baba (before hanging up).

    OP at that time decides to try to cover everything up.

    At 3:22 a.m. he opens the door and pulls her out (this explains why there is more blood in the toilet than bathroom).

    Baba calls back and OP says everything is fine.

    He then carries her partially downstairs (explaining arterial blood) when Stander and Baba arrive (3:26 a.m.)

    OP is hoping the Standers will help him cover this issue up but he has no option when Baba also appears.

    Sidenotes:
    I contend that he was already wearing his prosthetics at the time (was kneeling when he shot Reeva) and already had the cricket bat on hand.

    The continuing fights also explains why Reeva was in normal attire rather than night attire.

    The blood in the bedroom (duvet etc.) comes from OP going up a few times to try and clear up evidence of his earlier fight with Reeva after Dr. Stipp arrived.

    The fan remains blocking the balcony as he never had to move it and never went out anyway.

    Bladder empty as she goes to urinate around 1:00 a.m. after her midnight meal.

    The jeans thrown outside are a result of the earlier fight.

    The bangs heard by the Stipps were from the slamming doors or the cricket bat hitting the door initially.

    Reeva's phone was on the bathroom floor after OP tried to check whether she called police (but didn't know her PIN), so he threw the phone in anger and the cover came off
     
  7. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think your above passage is a key quote about Oscar's personality.

    I also believe he is a narcissist who refuses to take responsibility for everything.

    Thus his constant lies and blaming of others despite significant evidence to the contrary.

    Oscar's personality is that he has a reputation to protect and he would rather blatantly lie than accept the possibility he has done anything wrong.

    However, Oscar's biggest problem (like a lot of liars) is that he is not smart enough to fabricate a complete fiction regarding the killing of Reeva. Thus he has had to mix a lot of truth into his fiction, and he keeps tailoring his evidence to try and achieve complete freedom (despite the impossibility of it).
     
  8. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think the above are great working theories.

    I think Theory #2 is more likely (as per my summary above).

    The primary reason I think Theory #1 doesn't work is that it required the police to tamper extensively with a crime scene for no reason.

    There just hasn't been enough done by the Defence to discredit the initial photos for me to believe that has occurred.

    Also, OP's previous lies on other counts plus constant embellishments to his story just don't ring true.
     
  9. Rumpole

    Rumpole Formerly known as "Hercule Poirot"

    Messages:
    3,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nel has said several times that the State version is that shots were at time of second bangs heard by Stipps just after 3:17
    (3:17 Bangs have to be accounted for as shots or Cricket bat, or some other source of bangs)

    OP was on phone 3:19

    State expert testified to absolute certainty that Cricket bat was AFTER shots.

    There were bangs at 3:00 -3:10 that sounded like gunshots... these bangs have to be accounted for. If You go with State theory that the gunshots were at 3:17, and since cricket bat was after that (but not heard), you have to account for bangs at 3:00 (ish)


    Just a few hard FACTS that have to be accounted for in ANY version.... else the version is disproved.
     
  10. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not sure that is true.

    Judging by the phone records, Baba received calls around 3:15/3:16 after gunshots heard from two separate sources.

    Also, the evidence re: cricket bat was damage to the panel occurred after the gunshots. It does not preclude the cricket bat hitting the door elsewhere first but not causing significant damage.

    Edit to respond to your Edit: Any banging sounds at 3:00 a.m. were likely door bangs (and were only heard by 2/5 witnesses anyway (as softer than gunshots))
     
  11. Rumpole

    Rumpole Formerly known as "Hercule Poirot"

    Messages:
    3,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The only version that fits all of the State's ear witnesses testimony (adjusted to include just what they heard, and not what they imagine) and State expert testimony is OP's version.

    I will apply Occam's Razor and go with OP's version. :cool:
     
  12. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not sure Occam's Razor would apply.

    Because if you accept OP's version, you would also rely on the police significantly tampering with a crime scene for no reason.

    You would also need to ignore the pathology reports re: food in the stomach, together with why someone with an empty bladder would be going to the toilet.

    I think Occam's Razor is that a jealous possessive boyfriend shot a girl after a big fight (and didn't cover it up very well).

    Edit: See here for my analysis on the empty bladder
    Trial Discussion Thread #25 - 14.04.14, Day 24 - Page 26 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

    Do you have any rebuttal for the above?
     
  13. Rumpole

    Rumpole Formerly known as "Hercule Poirot"

    Messages:
    3,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is no DOUBT that cops did not preserve crime scene... they admitted it on the stand?
    Besides details of where items were does not refute OP's version...

    I think boyfriend shooting girlfriend intentionally at 3AM is so bizarre... it makes no sense? (and so is not true as Nel and Judge Judy would say)

    Occams Razor would imply a simpler explanation.

    A paranoid guy shooting at what he thinks is an intruder.

    Especially in SA where home invasion is common place, and especially a double amputee who may well have grown up feeling especially vulnerable...
     
  14. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OP has admitted on stand that if the items were as currently placed that it refutes his version.

    I also do not believe any of the police (particularly photographers) admitted changing the crime scene. The defence also did not cross examine them on the specific items such as duvet and fans.

    Why is a boyfriend shooting a girlfriend late at night a suspicious event? There are numerous examples of domestic violence everywhere worldwide.

    The only difference in this case is that there was a gun.
     
  15. Rumpole

    Rumpole Formerly known as "Hercule Poirot"

    Messages:
    3,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is ZERO evidence of domestic violence in this case... you do real cases a diservice by jumping to insert it as a reason...where there is no evidence.

    Cop photographer DID admit moving items.. he would claim not significant, but he misses the point. You CAN NOT rely on photos once even some are know to be suspect. And photographer was certainly NOT the first person to walk through... so who knows what was moved before he got there. I would say the fan for sure, and possibly the duvet was moved before the photo Nel is using.

    Maybe this discussion should not be in this thread

    I am sure people have a LOT of complicated theories to post in this thread.
     
  16. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Happy to abide by the judgment of a moderator but we are discussing theories.

    There is evidence of domestic violence.

    Reeva said in 'Whatsapp' she is scared of OP.

    Samantha Taylor testified that OP screamed at her and her friends.

    OP has threatened to break someone else's legs.

    OP does rash things in anger, such as shoot a gun through a car's sunroof.

    You need to establish a reason why the police would move 4 different items for no reason (as they did not know OP's testimony).

    I think there may have been some mention to moving the cricket bat, but it was simply the angle of the photo.

    Did you have any specific examples?
     
  17. anagrammy

    anagrammy Developing new uses for hindsight...

    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think OP's anecdote about them being on the bed and he being irritated that she kept trying to show him pictures when he wanted to sleep... I believe this is a big fat clue.

    Something happened in bed that set him off. My theory is that they had several fights that night and she wanted make-up sex because she has a conciliatory personality. He was still po'd because he carries a grudge and was angry with her for spoiling the evening. Which is what he would call her asserting her right to equal consideration in the relationship.

    I think he pushed her away, she persisted and he knocked her aside, giving her a bloody nose. She was horrified, of course, and leaped up thinking omg I have to speak tomorrow! She berated him loudly and we have the loud voices heard around 1:00 am.

    She is keeping him awake and now she is causing a disturbance in the neighborhood!!! The neighbors might call the police and then there will be bad publicity!!! He tells her to shut up or he will hit her with the cricket bat. She starts screaming and runs, grabbing the tank and shorts she just took off when she went to bed. She already has her phone and now they are both screaming.

    She locks herself in the toilet and hastily puts her clothes on, getting her shirt back-to-front. He bangs on the door with the cricket bat shouting for her to get the f*k out of his house. She won't stop screaming and so he runs for the gun, at that moment forming the idea of stopping the screaming by shooting her.

    He shoots her once through the door, then peeks in to see if she is still alive. She is wounded but alive, so he shoots three more times because he is already formulating "his version" and he shouts "Call the police".

    He breaks down the door and finds her with her head in the toilet full of gore. He flushes the toilet, creating the streaks that we saw. This is why there is so little blood in the toilet. The only bleeding is from the other wounds. While he is doing this, he is seen by Mr. Stipp.

    There is something that happens on the landing that causes him to pause there and there is arterial blood spray. I suspect he changed her position so he did not have to look in her face or hear her gurgling as she died. Sorry to be so graphic. It is making me feel ill just to describe this. I can't imagine how Mrs. Steenkamp is keeping it together.
     
  18. James50

    James50 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't see this. He took responsibility from the very beginning when he said to the first person on the scene: "I killed my baba." He took responsibility when he allowed himself to be cross-examined by Nel becuse actions speak louder than words. For Nel to have argued that he hadn't is simply disingenuous and so the mud just won't stick.

    As far as being narcissistic is concerned, again I disagree. His disability has made him needy of attention and so he has come to expect it, but that doesn't make him a narcissist. He saved a man's life once. Not sure if a narcissist would do that.

    When Nel read out his and Reeva's text exchanges and tried to say that it showed his relationship with her was "All about me," again this is disingenuous.

    Reeva's entire text was about how OP had been awful to her. So what's the difference? Was that not being concerned at that point only about herself and her feelings etc? Who gives someone the right to run another person down and then suggest that they have no right to do it back? Nel wouldn't see it like that, because he does it himself. He doesn't want OP to argue, but he keeps saying HE will argue x, y, z. Where is the justice in that?

    So it was more a case of two people venting on a bad day, exactly as OP said it was.
     
  19. James50

    James50 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with Carmelita. I believe the core of his story is true and he has not deviated from it even when it might have served him well to do so. The only thing I see that Oscar Pistorius is truly guilty of so far is poor and hasty judgement. I think events simply went too fast for him and this caused him to make mistakes. He is used to taking it slow on his stumps, and he panicked because he knew his slowness was a disadvatage in a situation in which there might have been an intruder in the house. And he overcompensated for this.

    Something he doesn't seem to have sufficiently well understood, however, is that against Nel, he's holding all the aces. Nel has no idea in reality what happenesd. He's just putting forward theories in such a way as to goad OP into speaking about the event, in the hope that he might slip up somewhere.

    I wish he would tell him: "I don't want to say too much, because I might remember it wrongly, and then you might accuse me of something based on a mere mistake, not what you would perceive as tailoring my story."

    This is why I don't like Nel's methods. He well knows that NO ONE can remember all the details of an event that happens in a flash over a year ago all that well, and that they may well in all innocence state things that never happened if you go into minutae, and so I find his arguments spurious and disingenuous. In the hands of a cunning prosecutor such as Nel, someone as young and relatively naive as OP can be made to look guilty when he really isn't, and it takes a good judge to see through all those theatrics.
     
  20. asanque

    asanque New Member

    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I hear what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree.

    My example is the shooting of the gun at Tasha's.

    OP asked for someone else to take the wrap.

    Then he lied in open court that he took responsibility for it to the manager despite:
    (a) all other witnesses disagreeing; and
    (b) his own Whatsapp message to Reeva telling her he asked someone else to take responsibility for it.

    He then followed this up by saying the gun went off 'accidentally' and he didn't pull the trigger.
     
  21. James50

    James50 New Member

    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You make a good point and I would like to agree with you, except for two things I humbly disagree. Firstly if he had outwardly taken responsibility, it would have caused a huge stink in the media because in SA he is a (in fact he is their no 1) celebrity, whereas his friend was unknown by comparison. As OP offered to pay for the damages and paid the bill itself, he effectively did take responsibility to put the matter right. As no one was hurt in the end, it wasn't a case and there was no question of taking responsibility for someone's life. Besides, there's a different between taking responsibility and not wanting to be all over the news. So I can see why he might have sought to have avoided the public glare while still privately making amends.

    On the other hand, he didn't seek to avoid responsibility for Reeva's death, so clearly not taking responsibility isn't his issue.

    Secondly, Kelly Phelps of CNN pointed out that the defense will not have finished with that issue yet. In OP claiming that he didn't have his finger on the trigger, the defense is merely setting up the skeleton of a future defense perhaps with expert witnesses who will counter Nel's claim that the gun could not have gone off by itself or do something along those lines.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice