Oscar Pistorius Bail Hearing Begins

17879818384279

Comments

  • streetwisestreetwise Posts: 787
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    calico_pie wrote: »
    I'm still not sure what justice you think they should be demanding, that isn't already happening.

    Are you saying he should be locked up, without the due diligence of a trial?

    It's just a bail hearing, not the trial.

    I doubt they really want to see him at this point.

    Understandable, but surely they wouldn't want him to be granted bail either. I just feel that the real victim in all of this has been pushed to the background, and it would remind the magistrate, who doesn't seem to think he's a flight risk, that it isn't all about what Oscar Pistorius and his family want. He should be locked up until the trial. The same as anyone else would.
  • jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    calico_pie wrote: »
    Because you were a reckless hothead acting without due care in the heat of the moment, in the dark of night, in genuine fear and uncertainty.

    As has been said several times, we all like to think how we would react in a situation when thinking about it calmly and rationally in the cold light of day.

    But I'd bet you anything that in reality we wouldn't all act how we might like to think we would.
    Sorry but I think even a reckless hothead would know they would have to be damn sure it was not a loved one behind a closed door before shooting multiple times into it, Pistorius' story is simply that.
  • jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    saralund wrote: »
    Shooting four times into the toilet door was almost certainly going to kill anyone who was in there, or at the very least wound them severely. No matter how you look at it, he intended to murder. In the UK, he'd have no defence.

    However, fear of violent, armed intruders is widespread and justified in South Africa
    But even the idea an intruder would hide in that small toilet enclosure, making themselves vulnerable, where they could not see the owner to attack them makes no sense whatsoever. His version of events does not stand up to the simplest scrutiny.
  • Aspen123Aspen123 Posts: 238
    Forum Member
    While not impossible, I find it surprising that it was only after he returned to the bedroom that it occurred to him that it might have been Reeva in the toilet.

    Wouldn't she have made some kind of noise that identified her, at the very least as a woman, and at the very latest when the first bullet was fired?
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It all sounds like a domestic gone horribly wrong. Row over the text messages she received from ex. He becomes aggresive, she hides with phone in toilet and I think its possible he fired to frighten her or get her to open the door and inadvertantly shot her.
    I cannot quite believe in the intruder scenario.
    I know this is pure speculation.
  • calico_piecalico_pie Posts: 10,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jzee wrote: »
    Sorry but I think even a reckless hothead would know they would have to be damn sure it was not a loved one behind a closed door before shooting multiple times into it, Pistorius' story is simply that.

    I'd like to think so too.

    But unfortunately that goes against the grain and definition of what it means to be a reckless hothead, let alone a reckless hothead acting in the heat of the moment in the middle of the night, in the dark, and feeling under threat.

    For the record, none of this is to suggest that he isn't guilty as the prosecution charge. Just that his story isn't beyond the realms of possibility.
  • GlowbotGlowbot Posts: 14,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jzee wrote: »
    But even the idea an intruder would hide in that small toilet enclosure, making themselves vulnerable, where they could not see the owner to attack them makes no sense whatsoever. His version of events does not stand up to the simplest scrutiny.

    That's true but if you look at most things you do in a day they would seem weird. They could lock me up right now if I had to explain why I went in and out of certain rooms in a day.
  • calico_piecalico_pie Posts: 10,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jzee wrote: »
    But even the idea an intruder would hide in that small toilet enclosure, making themselves vulnerable, where they could not see the owner to attack them makes no sense whatsoever. His version of events does not stand up to the simplest scrutiny.

    This was discussed earlier.

    The idea that the intruder would hide in that small toilet only makes no sense to you, because you have seen the floor plan of the house, and know that that corner of the room was a dead end.

    If there had been an intruder they wouldn't have known that, and could have been looking for an alternative exit to flee the scene.
  • PinkPetuniaPinkPetunia Posts: 5,479
    Forum Member
    calico_pie wrote: »
    This was discussed earlier.

    The idea that the intruder would hide in that small toilet only makes no sense to you, because you have seen the floor plan of the house, and know that that corner of the room was a dead end.

    If there had been an intruder they wouldn't have known that, and could have been looking for an alternative exit to flee the scene.

    There was no intruder to think anything at all .
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Her bladder was empty. So, she must have emptied it. That would mean flushing the toilet. This would have made an audible amount of noise. OP does not appear to mention any flushing sound. That would mean she emptied her bladder before the incident occurred. The empty bladder is not so good for OP as it first might have seemed.
  • JakobjoeJakobjoe Posts: 8,235
    Forum Member
    petertard wrote: »
    Her bladder was empty. So, she must have emptied it. That would mean flushing the toilet. This would have made an audible amount of noise. OP does not appear to mention any flushing sound. That would mean she emptied her bladder before the incident occurred. The empty bladder is not so good for OP as it first might have seemed.

    Thats an interesting point.
    Maybe the toilet flushing was the noise that set the events off.
    Intruder needs a toilet break.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    petertard wrote: »
    Her bladder was empty. So, she must have emptied it. That would mean flushing the toilet. This would have made an audible amount of noise. OP does not appear to mention any flushing sound. That would mean she emptied her bladder before the incident occurred. The empty bladder is not so good for OP as it first might have seemed.

    What if she didn't flush the toilet?
  • Ella NutElla Nut Posts: 8,891
    Forum Member
    Mrstim wrote: »
    Really???? where has that been stated?

    I'm shocked that hasn't been brought up at the bail trial. If that's true then curtains for him I think.

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/olympian_oscar_pistorius_weeps_during_LzugUeskPyuK58ZmXbuxAM
  • pearljpearlj Posts: 1,934
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tourista wrote: »
    Unless he knew by the sound of her voice where she was, and fired in the direction of the sound?.

    Also, arent we all taking it as gospel that the lights werent on?.

    But didn't he say he shouted at her to call the police, that there was an intruder, surely she would have answered him back that she was in the loo.
  • Ada RabbleAda Rabble Posts: 3,317
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    calico_pie wrote: »
    Because you were a reckless hothead acting without due care in the heat of the moment, in the dark of night, in genuine fear and uncertainty.

    As has been said several times, we all like to think how we would react in a situation when thinking about it calmly and rationally in the cold light of day.

    But I'd bet you anything that in reality we wouldn't all act how we might like to think we would.

    I really don't buy that at all
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It would be usual to flush the toilet after using it. If the toilet was in an unflushed state with urine in the bottom of the bowl, this is something which you would expect the investigators to pick up on and mention.
  • calico_piecalico_pie Posts: 10,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    streetwise wrote: »
    Understandable, but surely they wouldn't want him to be granted bail either. I just feel that the real victim in all of this has been pushed to the background, and it would remind the magistrate, who doesn't seem to think he's a flight risk, that it isn't all about what Oscar Pistorius and his family want. He should be locked up until the trial. The same as anyone else would.

    You seem very presumptuous about what her family may or may not want.

    I think right now they will be most concerned with grieving and supporting one another.

    They have not been pushed anywhere - they are where they want to be, and probably want a bit of privacy at this time.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    petertard wrote: »
    It would be usual to flush the toilet after using it. If the toilet was in an unflushed state with urine in the bottom of the bowl, this is something which you would expect the investigators to pick up on and mention.

    You mean the investigators who missed the bullet in the toilet?
  • calico_piecalico_pie Posts: 10,060
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Ada Rabble wrote: »
    I really don't buy that at all

    Really?

    What's the alternative then?

    That you believe that each and every one of us, in an actual, real life stressful situation, would act exactly as we like to think we would act when just thinking about how we would act?

    I really don't buy that at all.

    What people say and what people do are often entirely different things.

    How people like to think they would react in particular circumstances, and how they actually would react are often entirely different things.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,852
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ella Nut wrote: »

    Oh I thought you meant it was breaking news!

    Still think if the police were called out a few hours before that it is odd that this information wasn't used by the prosecution.
  • Ella NutElla Nut Posts: 8,891
    Forum Member
    Mrstim wrote: »
    Oh I thought you meant it was breaking news!

    Still think if the police were called out a few hours before that it is odd that this information wasn't used by the prosecution.

    I know, it is odd, which is why I said make of it what you will.
  • Ada RabbleAda Rabble Posts: 3,317
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Aspen123 wrote: »
    While not impossible, I find it surprising that it was only after he returned to the bedroom that it occurred to him that it might have been Reeva in the toilet.

    Wouldn't she have made some kind of noise that identified her, at the very least as a woman, and at the very latest when the first bullet was fired?

    Quite, I think she would have screamed when the first bullet came through the door, there was a thought that the bullet in her hand was from trying to shield herself, if she had that forethought, I'd have thought she'd have the instinct to scream
  • streetwisestreetwise Posts: 787
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    calico_pie wrote: »
    You seem very presumptuous about what her family may or may not want.

    I'm just offering my thoughts, like you are.
  • Ada RabbleAda Rabble Posts: 3,317
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    calico_pie wrote: »
    Really?

    What's the alternative then?

    That you believe that each and every one of us, in an actual, real life stressful situation, would act exactly as we like to think we would act when just thinking about how we would act?

    I really don't buy that at all.

    What people say and what people do are often entirely different things.

    How people like to think they would react in particular circumstances, and how they actually would react are often entirely different things.

    You really believe that he'd grab a gun from the same room as his sleeping girlfriend, from the floor under the bed she was sleeping in, to trot off to shoot into a toilet door.
    Not at all plausible
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,852
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ada Rabble wrote: »
    Quite, I think she would have screamed when the first bullet came through the door, there was a thought that the bullet in her hand was from trying to shield herself, if she had that forethought, I'd have thought she'd have the instinct to scream

    Too shocked maybe? do they know what order the bullets hit her, if it was the one to the head first then perhaps she couldn't scream.
This discussion has been closed.