I was just wondering about why Mr. Pistorious found it necessary to cover his head and face with a jacket all the way from his arrest at the house up until the hearing, five days later.
Funny, the very first photo posted after he was released on bail showed what may be a scratches on the side of his face, in front of his ear:
Mr. Pistorious is such a well known celebrity, a hero in SA. Why did he need to cover his face those five days? Any thoughts? I don't understand that move...
That is interesting. Apparently, there is a picture of Reeva at a firing range handling the same type of pistol she was actually and ironically shot with. She had learnt to handle a gun and was comfortable around Oscar despite his gun obsession. The possibility that it was just an accident, because they were a bit drunk and messing with the pistol. That would mean though that the head shot happened first, which is possible, but why shoot her again twice afterwards if she is already dead, and why invent the intruder story if it was a genuine accident ? He would have a much better chance to have the story accepted that it went off whilst they were messing around with the pistol if Reeva had only received one fatal bullet wound.
I disagree. It is Plausible that you truly meant wiggle room when you typed wiggle room and did not type scope for interpretation. I believe in you very strongly on this subject.
If its all the same, I'm pretty sure I knew what I meant.
I was just wondering about why Mr. Pistorious found it necessary to cover his head and face with a jacket all the way from his arrest at the house up until the hearing, five days later.
Funny, the very first photo posted after he was released on bail showed what may be a scratches on the side of his face, in front of his ear:
Mr. Pistorious is such a well known celebrity, a hero in SA. Why did he need to cover his face those five days? Any thoughts? I don't understand that move...
It looks like it could be a flush or rash too.
I did wonder why he had to hide his face, and why if true, there had to be off shore account information taken from the house. You would think the first thought would be, how are we going to tell her family, not self protection.
I mentioned in an earlier post that the physical effects of the 'fight-or-flight' response could possibly go some way to explaining some of OP's actions, (if we are to accept his claim that he was scared of what he believed to be an intruder). Could that same response also offer another explanation for the number of shots fired? I found this article exploring the impact of the fight-flight response in a gunfight situation and not only does it comment on the loss of peripheral vision, but also on how 'fight-flight' can affect hearing and possibly lead the shooter to fire repeatedly.
That is interesting. Apparently, there is a picture of Reeva at a firing range handling the same type of pistol she was actually and ironically shot with. She had learnt to handle a gun and was comfortable around Oscar despite his gun obsession. The possibility that it was just an accident, because they were a bit drunk and messing with the pistol. That would mean though that the head shot happened first, which is possible, but why shoot her again twice afterwards if she is already dead, and why invent the intruder story if it was a genuine accident ? He would have a much better chance to have the story accepted that it went off whilst they were messing around with the pistol if Reeva had only received one fatal bullet wound.
If that had happened, they would know that the 2 wounds were obtained after death. Wounds applied after death don't bleed.
It is reasonable to assume, then, that the head shot was the fatal shot and the last one to be administered, even if her cause of death was actually due to blood loss, that is, the head shot was not immediately fatal, but the one that did the most damage.
I mentioned in an earlier post that the physical effects of the 'fight-or-flight' response could possibly go some way to explaining some of OP's actions, (if we are to accept his claim that he was scared of what he believed to be an intruder). Could that same response also offer another explanation for the number of shots fired? I found this article exploring the impact of the fight-flight response in a gunfight situation and not only does it comment on the loss of peripheral vision, but also on how 'fight-flight' can affect hearing and possibly lead the shooter to fire repeatedly.
Very interesting. I hope Oscar uses something like this is his defence (although I'm sure the defence team will include people who are expert on such things anyway).
If that had happened, they would know that the 2 wounds were obtained after death. Wounds applied after death don't bleed.
She was alive until after the paramedics arrived.
Long before they got there, a host of family / friends that Oscar had called first were all there, watching her die. Sorry, watching her die "in Mr. Pistorious' loving arms."
Long before they got there, a host of family / friends that Oscar had called first were all there, watching her die. Sorry, watching her die "in Mr. Pistorious' loving arms."
We don't know if she was alive when the paramedics arrived. Pistorius said she was, but I don't believe a word out of that man's mouth. For all we know she could've been killed outright when he shot her.
But how long was it from the time of the shooting until she was pronounced dead ? Half an hour ? Could she have been saved with immediate medical attention ?
I too thank you for the excellent post of information.
We are all going to be thinking about this, but Reeva took a long time to die - there was a great amount of blood in the bathroom and hallway upstairs, as well as around her body downstairs. She was alive with her heart pumping for a long time. I would really enjoy getting your thoughts...
Yes, per Oscar Pistorius' account, Reeva was alive for some time after being shot. Medical experts would need to look into whether or not this is consistent with Reeva having no urine in her bladder.
Very interesting. I hope Oscar uses something like this is his defence (although I'm sure the defence team will include people who are expert on such things anyway).
So his defence to indiscrinate blasting to death of innocent people is 'I was scarred of some imaginary stuff in my head'. If this is any defence at all any crook can blast away willy nilly claiming 'I was a bit scared'. The article refers to a gunfight situation, OP wasn't in one.
I was just wondering about why Mr. Pistorious found it necessary to cover his head and face with a jacket all the way from his arrest at the house up until the hearing, five days later.
Funny, the very first photo posted after he was released on bail showed what may be a scratches on the side of his face, in front of his ear:
Mr. Pistorious is such a well known celebrity, a hero in SA. Why did he need to cover his face those five days? Any thoughts? I don't understand that move...
Very, very well spotted. That looks more than a rash to me, it looks like quite a deep scratch from a fingernail, with possibly a slightly lighter scratch or scratches above it.
Yes, per Oscar Pistorius' account, Reeva was alive for some time after being shot. Medical experts would need to look into whether or not this is consistent with Reeva having no urine in her bladder.
I was really intrigued by that post the Gentleman (expert) put up about the volume of urine in the bladder at death; very informative.
But with Reeva surviving the gunshots for so long, being carried about - the hall was very bloody, and the downstairs was very bloody - it ruins the usefulness of the information / conclusions that could be drawn from the empty bladder and time of death. The one thing that it did clarify was that Reeva absolutely did not have to have emptied her bladder before Pistorious shot her, because she stayed alive and continued to produce urine at whatever the specific human volume per minute is - that was brilliant!
That "flight or fight" stuff is to provide an explanation as to why someone in that situation might shoot a number of bullets instead of just one. If one bullet had been shot, OP's defence would have an easier time. But the type of gun was a semi-automatic, which means if his hand had not released the trigger it would continue firing.
That is interesting. Apparently, there is a picture of Reeva at a firing range handling the same type of pistol she was actually and ironically shot with. She had learnt to handle a gun and was comfortable around Oscar despite his gun obsession. The possibility that it was just an accident, because they were a bit drunk and messing with the pistol. That would mean though that the head shot happened first, which is possible, but why shoot her again twice afterwards if she is already dead, and why invent the intruder story if it was a genuine accident ? He would have a much better chance to have the story accepted that it went off whilst they were messing around with the pistol if Reeva had only received one fatal bullet wound.
Oh for goodness sake :rolleyes: I really have heard it all. This thread is beyond stupid now. I think people need to wait until the trial and the facts before making up their own silly scenarios.
Very, very well spotted. That looks more than a rash to me, it looks like quite a deep scratch from a fingernail, with possibly a slightly lighter scratch or scratches above it.
I agree, I magnified it many times over. Many here would likely say that it was self inflicted while he was in jail, but...
Mr. Pistorious was such a celebrity figure and he was used to cameras - just hours earlier, I don't think anyone would argue over that. I really don't get why he would cover himself all of those days. It just makes him look really bad, hiding.
Very, very well spotted. That looks more than a rash to me, it looks like quite a deep scratch from a fingernail, with possibly a slightly lighter scratch or scratches above it.
Oh my goodness me. I've heard it all now. If Oscar's face had scratches on it when he was arrested then I am quite sure that the police i) noticed and ii) took photographic evidence.
I agree, I magnified it many times over. Many here would likely say that it was self inflicted while he was in jail, but...
Mr. Pistorious was such a celebrity figure and he was used to cameras - just hours earlier, I don't think anyone would argue over that. I really don't get why he would cover himself all of those days. It just makes him look really bad, hiding.
People accused of a crime nearly ALWAYS cover themselves so they can't be photographed! Why the devil are people making this fantasy 'scratch' into a story??
That "flight or fight" stuff is to provide an explanation as to why someone in that situation might shoot a number of bullets instead of just one. If one bullet had been shot, OP's defence would have an easier time. But the type of gun was a semi-automatic, which means if his hand had not released the trigger it would continue firing.
Sorry, but no. "Automatic" is the variety that can fire multiple rounds by simply holding the trigger down. With a semi-automatic pistol (or rifle) you must pull and release the trigger for each shot.
Oh my goodness me. I've heard it all now. If Oscar's face had scratches on it when he was arrested then I am quite sure that the police i) noticed and ii) took photographic evidence.
Your faith in the SA police is clearly greater than mine.
Oh my goodness me. I've heard it all now. If Oscar's face had scratches on it when he was arrested then I am quite sure that the police i) noticed and ii) took photographic evidence.
Comments
Funny, the very first photo posted after he was released on bail showed what may be a scratches on the side of his face, in front of his ear:
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02489/oscar-pistorius-gr_2489705b.jpg
Mr. Pistorious is such a well known celebrity, a hero in SA. Why did he need to cover his face those five days? Any thoughts? I don't understand that move...
If its all the same, I'm pretty sure I knew what I meant.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/africaandindianocean/southafrica/9874246/Reeva-Steenkamp-Pistorius-girlfriend-was-previously-in-abusive-relationship.html
It looks like it could be a flush or rash too.
I did wonder why he had to hide his face, and why if true, there had to be off shore account information taken from the house. You would think the first thought would be, how are we going to tell her family, not self protection.
Apologies for pedantry. Spelling matters to me.
http://www.crimescenejournal.com/content.php?id=0005
(ducking for cover now...)
If that had happened, they would know that the 2 wounds were obtained after death. Wounds applied after death don't bleed.
Very interesting. I hope Oscar uses something like this is his defence (although I'm sure the defence team will include people who are expert on such things anyway).
She was alive until after the paramedics arrived.
Long before they got there, a host of family / friends that Oscar had called first were all there, watching her die. Sorry, watching her die "in Mr. Pistorious' loving arms."
We don't know if she was alive when the paramedics arrived. Pistorius said she was, but I don't believe a word out of that man's mouth. For all we know she could've been killed outright when he shot her.
Yes, per Oscar Pistorius' account, Reeva was alive for some time after being shot. Medical experts would need to look into whether or not this is consistent with Reeva having no urine in her bladder.
So his defence to indiscrinate blasting to death of innocent people is 'I was scarred of some imaginary stuff in my head'. If this is any defence at all any crook can blast away willy nilly claiming 'I was a bit scared'. The article refers to a gunfight situation, OP wasn't in one.
I was really intrigued by that post the Gentleman (expert) put up about the volume of urine in the bladder at death; very informative.
But with Reeva surviving the gunshots for so long, being carried about - the hall was very bloody, and the downstairs was very bloody - it ruins the usefulness of the information / conclusions that could be drawn from the empty bladder and time of death. The one thing that it did clarify was that Reeva absolutely did not have to have emptied her bladder before Pistorious shot her, because she stayed alive and continued to produce urine at whatever the specific human volume per minute is - that was brilliant!
Oh for goodness sake :rolleyes: I really have heard it all. This thread is beyond stupid now. I think people need to wait until the trial and the facts before making up their own silly scenarios.
I agree, I magnified it many times over. Many here would likely say that it was self inflicted while he was in jail, but...
Mr. Pistorious was such a celebrity figure and he was used to cameras - just hours earlier, I don't think anyone would argue over that. I really don't get why he would cover himself all of those days. It just makes him look really bad, hiding.
Oh my goodness me. I've heard it all now. If Oscar's face had scratches on it when he was arrested then I am quite sure that the police i) noticed and ii) took photographic evidence.
People accused of a crime nearly ALWAYS cover themselves so they can't be photographed! Why the devil are people making this fantasy 'scratch' into a story??
Sorry, but no. "Automatic" is the variety that can fire multiple rounds by simply holding the trigger down. With a semi-automatic pistol (or rifle) you must pull and release the trigger for each shot.
Agreed! Can't wait to see them!