A few pages back, there were links give to artilces that said that living in a gated community increased the level of worry about attacks not lessened it.
You have all these people worried about the same thing all living together and, in effect, winding themselves up more - and the conspicuous security was a constant reminder of what they were nervous of.
I read that post but I am cautious about believing it as an excuse.
I moved into a flat where the front door had a ridiculous number of locks and big metal bar because the previous owner seems to have been mentally ill (although the flat was in a crime ridden area!).
The effect of the locks was to make me feel safer even when I had a stalker (yes lol).
I don't think this case can be resolved by proving how scared he may have been. The fact that his girlfriend wasn't in his bed goes against the fear theory. Like I said in a previous post..that is evidence against an intruder. You would have to be extra paranoid to rule out the person in your home as the source of any disturbance/noise.
"The police have insinuated that Pistorius killed Miss Steenkamp after physically attacking her.
But Mr Roux said that a post mortem examination found no evidence of defensive injuries on the model’s body ......
.... Is there anything you found that is inconsistent with Pistorius’s version of events?” Mr Roux asked the detective. W/O Botha conceded that he had not done so."
"The police have insinuated that Pistorius killed Miss Steenkamp after physically attacking her.
But Mr Roux said that a post mortem examination found no evidence of defensive injuries on the model’s body ......
.... Is there anything you found that is inconsistent with Pistorius’s version of events?” Mr Roux asked the detective. W/O Botha conceded that he had not done so."
The SA police have 'insinuated' a lot of things, e.g. that Oscar had illegal steroids in his house, which was total BS.
Edit - and on that link there's a graphic showing Oscar's story of events, except it shows him having to drag himself along the carpet using his hands. How ridiculous, especially as his own statement said he has some mobility just using the stumps and without using the prostheses. The journalism covering this story has been really very poor.
I wonder how long it takes him to put his prosthetic legs on? If it's only a few seconds, it's more likely he would have put them on, even in a danger situation. If longer, maybe not.
I doubt he can balance on his thin stumps though, he probably walks on his knees.
Some articles today have quotes from Reeva's uncle saying they received flowers and a card from the Pistorius family after he'd received bail. The uncle felt the timing inappropriate.
There's a also quote from Reeva's mother saying the flowers mean nothing to her.
Sounds as though it was locked for security to prevent intruders getting in. It must have been locked from the inside, ie by Pistorius himself, so I don't understand why he says he felt "trapped". He must have had a key in the room.
The same locked door he went through to open the front door for the medics etc..
OP's brother is charged in connection with a womans death in a car crash in 2010 according to Sky News. He is to stand trial. Two brothers in court for the death of two women.
The other thing that would make me doubt this story is that her father said in the last couple of days that if OP is lying then he must suffer but that if he is telling the truth that someday he would forgive him. Surely he wouldnt come out with a statement like that if he already knows that OP hit her with a cricket bat before he shot her.
Actually he didn't say that one day he would forgive him, he said that perhaps one day he would be able to forgive him. Not so clear cut then.
If you're confused then you have a very short memory.
It was this one:
Do you accept there's likely to be a difference between how people think they would act, and how they likely would act (in the sort of situation that OP felt he was in)?
The forensics isn't about changing his account.
Of course there is a difference. Usually on this topic, we have people saying how they would batter burglars etc, but in real life I suspect things would be different.
However, the real situation has to be looked at, and in this case, his actions follow no logical pattern, yet the opportunity was there to deal very differently.
Again, this assumes you believe what he said, rather than it being a story to fit circumstances.
I dont believe him, and plenty more dont. Even if I did believe him, it still would be murder though.
You have spoken throughout in a way that says you believe every word he says.
I haven't read whole thread either so these points will have probably been said already but I don't believe the intruder story because of the following:
Why wouldn't his first instinct be to wake Reeva in the event of hearing someone in the house?
Why would he not have realised immediately on shooting that it was Reeva as I would be surprised if she did not shout, scream or cry?
The locked bathroom door could be because she wanted privacy on going to the toilet, however, I did read that firstly there was a bullet fired in the bedroom and also she had bullet wounds on her arm and hand/finger which led police to believe she had been protecting her head, which in turn leads me to believe she had been shot at first in the bedroom and then ran in there and locked the door to get away from Oscar
1. Because by all accounts he sounds like he is highly strung, and prone to act recklessly.
2. It would have all happened incredibly quickly. If the shots were fired in under two seconds, for her sake hopefully there wasn't much time for screaming and shouting.
3. I think this came up in the very early report, and has since been confirmed was not the case.
But if he's telling the truth, then he fired four shots through a closed door because he thought there was an intruder in there. Is it perfectly OK in South Africa to shoot an intruder who's presenting no threat to you?
That's certainly the inference from all the reports.
In SA home invasions like this are likely to be by armed invaders.
If there was an armed intruder in your bathroom, and you stood between them and their escape, would you not feel threatened?
At no point does he say he went back into the bedroom. My understanding is that he went from the balcony throught the bedroom to the bathroom collecting his gun on the way.
You need to read his statement .. this is an couple of paragraphs from it ......
"I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eyes on the bathroom entrance. Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding. When I reached the bed, I realised that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her name. I tried to open the toilet door but it was locked. I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door exiting onto the balcony and screamed for help.
"I put on my prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to kick the toilet door open. I think I must then have turned on the lights. I went back into the bedroom and grabbed my cricket bat to bash open the toilet door. A panel or panels broke off and I found the key on the floor and unlocked and opened the door. Reeva was slumped over but alive.
Google OP statement and the full statement is there.
Anyone know which video he is alleged to have the black eye in? Or link?
It has also emerged that the athlete sported a mysterious black eye in a video filmed a month ago for a charity campaign.
The Paralympian lent his support to a South African *campaign for gay and lesbian youth. But charity bosses were surprised when he turned up for filming with a black eye.
In the video message recorded to raise awareness for the It Gets Better campaign in South Africa, Oscar instructed young people who were being bullied about their sexuality to 'not retaliate'.
An It Gets Better charity source told the Sunday Mirror: 'Oscar turned up on the day of filming with a very angry *looking black eye.
'Oscar was keen for the filming to still go ahead and didn’t seem to mind too much. Although eyebrows were raised, Oscar wasn’t forthcoming on how he managed to get the injury.'
Oscar Pistorius claims he shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp dead by accident believing her to be an intruder at his home
Oscar Pistorius, meanwhile, spent Saturday at his uncle's home in an affluent suburb of Pretoria, the South African capital, after a judge released him on bail on Friday.
While on bail, he is expected to take delivery of a £200,000 supercar. He ordered the 204mph 3.8-liter McLaren MP4-12C Spider last month as a treat to reward himself for a successful year, The Sun reported today.
Except there was no intruder and he never even saw anyone, he just heard a noise (if he is to be believed). So he then adopted a Rambo stance and set out to kill the 'intruder'. No matter how you look at it, he decided to kill that night. Either his girlfriend or an 'intruder'.
That there was no intruder isn't really the point.
Of course we all know now there was no intruder.
The point is that, for whatever reason, he apparently did think there was an intruder.
"The police have insinuated that Pistorius killed Miss Steenkamp after physically attacking her.
But Mr Roux said that a post mortem examination found no evidence of defensive injuries on the model’s body ......
.... Is there anything you found that is inconsistent with Pistorius’s version of events?” Mr Roux asked the detective. W/O Botha conceded that he had not done so."
While listening to Nair commenting about everything. he stated that the bullets came from above yet those diagrams shows the bullets would have been much lower
Cannot believe that he would not put his legs on if he felt that threatened. It would make more sense.
It still doesn't excuse shooting blindly through a door into a tiny cubicle fully aware that anyone behind that door will probably be killed. If that turns out to be the truth (which I doubt), he should go to prison, because his intention was to kill whomever was behind that door.
There is a recurring problem in this discussion where people seem to think there are two options here.
1. He shot Reeva in cold blood, fully aware of what he was doing.
2. People are excusing him completely.
These are not the only two options - there is a whole bunch of grey in between.
Comments
I read that post but I am cautious about believing it as an excuse.
I moved into a flat where the front door had a ridiculous number of locks and big metal bar because the previous owner seems to have been mentally ill (although the flat was in a crime ridden area!).
The effect of the locks was to make me feel safer even when I had a stalker (yes lol).
I don't think this case can be resolved by proving how scared he may have been. The fact that his girlfriend wasn't in his bed goes against the fear theory. Like I said in a previous post..that is evidence against an intruder. You would have to be extra paranoid to rule out the person in your home as the source of any disturbance/noise.
It's disgraceful that they can print that. Wasn't it said in court that the autopsy showed no sign of assault or defence injuries?
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/02/20/oscar-pistorius/
"The police have insinuated that Pistorius killed Miss Steenkamp after physically attacking her.
But Mr Roux said that a post mortem examination found no evidence of defensive injuries on the model’s body ......
.... Is there anything you found that is inconsistent with Pistorius’s version of events?” Mr Roux asked the detective. W/O Botha conceded that he had not done so."
The SA police have 'insinuated' a lot of things, e.g. that Oscar had illegal steroids in his house, which was total BS.
Edit - and on that link there's a graphic showing Oscar's story of events, except it shows him having to drag himself along the carpet using his hands. How ridiculous, especially as his own statement said he has some mobility just using the stumps and without using the prostheses. The journalism covering this story has been really very poor.
I doubt he can balance on his thin stumps though, he probably walks on his knees.
There's a also quote from Reeva's mother saying the flowers mean nothing to her.
The same locked door he went through to open the front door for the medics etc..
With respect, a double amputee who seemed able bodied / confident enough, without his legs, to confront an "intruder".
Actually he didn't say that one day he would forgive him, he said that perhaps one day he would be able to forgive him. Not so clear cut then.
Of course there is a difference. Usually on this topic, we have people saying how they would batter burglars etc, but in real life I suspect things would be different.
However, the real situation has to be looked at, and in this case, his actions follow no logical pattern, yet the opportunity was there to deal very differently.
Again, this assumes you believe what he said, rather than it being a story to fit circumstances.
I dont believe him, and plenty more dont. Even if I did believe him, it still would be murder though.
You have spoken throughout in a way that says you believe every word he says.
That is the difference.
1. Because by all accounts he sounds like he is highly strung, and prone to act recklessly.
2. It would have all happened incredibly quickly. If the shots were fired in under two seconds, for her sake hopefully there wasn't much time for screaming and shouting.
3. I think this came up in the very early report, and has since been confirmed was not the case.
In SA home invasions like this are likely to be by armed invaders.
If there was an armed intruder in your bathroom, and you stood between them and their escape, would you not feel threatened?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10673156
You need to read his statement .. this is an couple of paragraphs from it ......
"I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eyes on the bathroom entrance. Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding. When I reached the bed, I realised that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet. I returned to the bathroom calling her name. I tried to open the toilet door but it was locked. I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door exiting onto the balcony and screamed for help.
"I put on my prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to kick the toilet door open. I think I must then have turned on the lights. I went back into the bedroom and grabbed my cricket bat to bash open the toilet door. A panel or panels broke off and I found the key on the floor and unlocked and opened the door. Reeva was slumped over but alive.
Google OP statement and the full statement is there.
Anyone know which video he is alleged to have the black eye in? Or link?
It has also emerged that the athlete sported a mysterious black eye in a video filmed a month ago for a charity campaign.
The Paralympian lent his support to a South African *campaign for gay and lesbian youth. But charity bosses were surprised when he turned up for filming with a black eye.
In the video message recorded to raise awareness for the It Gets Better campaign in South Africa, Oscar instructed young people who were being bullied about their sexuality to 'not retaliate'.
An It Gets Better charity source told the Sunday Mirror: 'Oscar turned up on the day of filming with a very angry *looking black eye.
'Oscar was keen for the filming to still go ahead and didn’t seem to mind too much. Although eyebrows were raised, Oscar wasn’t forthcoming on how he managed to get the injury.'
Oscar Pistorius claims he shot his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp dead by accident believing her to be an intruder at his home
Oscar Pistorius, meanwhile, spent Saturday at his uncle's home in an affluent suburb of Pretoria, the South African capital, after a judge released him on bail on Friday.
While on bail, he is expected to take delivery of a £200,000 supercar. He ordered the 204mph 3.8-liter McLaren MP4-12C Spider last month as a treat to reward himself for a successful year, The Sun reported today.
It means no such thing. It means exactly what it says - they'll take legal advice on what they should or shouldn't say.
Even if OPs side of the story is reported, why shouldn't it be?
And who says they'll do it for profit? Given the circumstances, its the sort of thing they could well do for good causes.
And sorry, I misread:
"Sounds like they're already totting up how much he can make from selling his story."
But no - it doesn't sound like they're doing anything of the sort.
They will have been approached, and will seek advice on the matter.
There have been other reports of this too, so it is not just the Mail making something up.
Someone has released this story, but we will have to wait until the trial to establish whether there is anything in it.
Seems it is one of many outstanding forensic test results pending.
That there was no intruder isn't really the point.
Of course we all know now there was no intruder.
The point is that, for whatever reason, he apparently did think there was an intruder.
And his actions are still unlawful killing.
While listening to Nair commenting about everything. he stated that the bullets came from above yet those diagrams shows the bullets would have been much lower
Cannot believe that he would not put his legs on if he felt that threatened. It would make more sense.
There is a recurring problem in this discussion where people seem to think there are two options here.
1. He shot Reeva in cold blood, fully aware of what he was doing.
2. People are excusing him completely.
These are not the only two options - there is a whole bunch of grey in between.