Pistorius seems to to want it both ways. For the purpose of supporting his version of events he wants to suggest crime is rife and there's a need to protect oneself with guns. At the same time he wants to play down any suggestion that he's obsessed with guns and might be inclined to take the law into his own hands.
Exactly. I'd imagine his defence will rely heavily on the idea of Oscar being a vulnerable amputee, that he has reason to be fearful of intruders, and therefore he shot through the door in the heat of the moment, to protect himself.
Pistorius seems to to want it both ways. For the purpose of supporting his version of events he wants to suggest crime is rife and there's a need to protect oneself with guns. At the same time he wants to play down any suggestion that he's obsessed with guns and might be inclined to take the law into his own hands.
yep...which is why the media statement immediately struck me as contradictory.
Exactly. I'd imagine his defence will rely heavily on the idea of Oscar being a vulnerable amputee
Yes. Rather like cancer sufferer Lance Armstriong and his charity foundation, this may prove to be his 'get out of jail free' card. I just hope the judge sees through all the spin and simply considers the evidence.
i don't think there's any contradiction here - as I read it the part the family are distancing themselves from is the political aspect of the comments, i.e. the laying of the blame on crime with the ANC.
So they presumably accept that crime is a serious problem, and that they have guns largely because of that.
But don't want to start being all political about who's fault the crime is.
i don't think there's any contradiction here - as I read it the part the family are distancing themselves from is the political aspect of the comments, i.e. the laying of the blame on crime with the ANC.
So they presumably accept that crime is a serious problem, and that they have guns largely because of that.
But don't want to start being all political about who's fault the crime is.
He's paying a large bucks to a risk management team, yet they make such a slip up? Next you'll be telling us they never read the statement before they issued it.
His team are playing games with the public, who asked Arnold the questions, who made his answers available....oh Oscar's risk management team...not that they would be prejudiced in any way.
Earlier I wondered how far friends of Oscar would go to defend him but how far would PR company go to protect a client for money?
Why keep a gun under your bed for sport and hunting purposes?
I don't know if firing bullets through a door at an umarmed person is classed as a sport but if the police story is accepted he was hunting down Reeva.
I agree, as with no new information and a trial that is probably at least a year away, if not longer, there is nothing left to discuss. I also found the tone of the thread had become somewhat tiresome - it was no longer possible to add the missing parts of an article or of a comment made in court, which had apparently been left out because they did not fit a certain agenda, without being accused of being 'a fan'.
The post you quote says it all really.
BIB 1 - I'm still waiting for you to post the link to Prosecutor Nel's apology for misspeaking about Mr. Pistorious, that you stated as fact. Can you post it today?
BIB 2 - No one ever asserted that you were a fan of Mr. Pistorious' celebrity. I have my thoughts, but...
Looks like Henke is trying too hard to make up for being an alleged absentee father and is putting his foot in it big style. His views may actually be closer to the truth regarding what the family really think than the PR message put out by uncle Arnold.
PS: Someone asked why sleep with a gun if it's for hunting and sporting purposes only. Perhaps, the Pistorius family view shooting burglars as a sport or perhaps the burglars themselves as hunting prey.
First paragraph - love the objectivity of your wording. [/sarcasm]
I agree that people were putting forward theories, but in the end there has been nothing which objectively disproves anything.
You're probably wrong about the last part though (not to mention just plain rude).
Its more likely that , in the absence of any new information, there isn't much new that anyone can add.
I agree that people were putting forward theories (nonsensical wiggle room arguments, anything, anything at all that might possibly make Mr. Pistorious' story seem the least bit plausible and sometimes folks just made stuff up), but in the end there has been nothing which objectively disproves anything (if you focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely).
Henke is the loose canon in the family. Allegedly, he and OP have a stormy relationship.
Henke was saying some weird stuff when the OP shooting story first broke, but for the life of me I cannot find the quotes anymore. He has now been coached and almost silenced (bar this one errant interview).
I agree that people were putting forward theories (nonsensical wiggle room arguments, anything, anything at all that might possibly make Mr. Pistorious' story seem the least bit plausible and sometimes folks just made stuff up), but in the end there has been nothing which objectively disproves anything (if you focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely).
Just my opinion...
God, are you still going on about whatever it is you think I meant by 'wiggle room'.
If you let me know what exactly it is you think I meant, I'll do my best to clear it up for you one and for all.
Up to you.
And no, you don't have to "focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely" to see that there isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
There actually isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
Let us know what has objectivley been disproven if you like though.
Henke is the loose canon in the family. Allegedly, he and OP have a stormy relationship.
Henke was saying some weird stuff when the OP shooting story first broke, but for the life of me I cannot find the quotes anymore. He has now been coached and almost silenced (bar this one errant interview).
Akin to having your dotty Aunt Annie at a dinner party to which your prospective in-laws have also been invited... (only more serious in this case I know).
God, are you still going on about whatever it is you think I meant by 'wiggle room'.
If you let me know what exactly it is you think I meant, I'll do my best to clear it up for you one and for all.
Up to you.
And no, you don't have to "focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely" to see that there isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
There actually isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
Let us know what has objectivley been disproven if you like though.
Again, up to you.
OK.
Botha, who has 24 years' experience as a police officer and 16 as a detective
"I believe that he knew that Reeva was in the bathroom and he shot four shots through the door," said Botha, adding that the angle at which the rounds were fired suggested they were aimed deliberately at somebody who was on the toilet.
One point of dispute is whether Pistorius was wearing his prosthetic legs when he shot through the bathroom door. In his statement on Tuesday, the athlete said he was on his stumps and feeling vulnerable when he opened fire.
But the prosecution has claimed the killing was premeditated because Pistorius took time to put on his prosthetic legs first. Botha supported this view, saying the trajectory of the bullets through the door showed the gun was fired from a height. "It seems to me it was fired down," he said.
Botha said the holster for the 9mm pistol was found under the side of the bed on which Steenkamp slept, also implying it would have been impossible for Pistorius to get the gun without realising that Steenkamp was not in the bed and could have been the person in the bathroom. Pistorius has claimed that the bedroom was pitch dark.
Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." YIKES! :eek:
This exercise is tiring, I could of course fill up several pages, but why? If the Authorities did not have probable cause and sufficient evidence, Mr. Pistorious would not be out on bail, he would be free - WITHOUT the charge of Premeditated Murder placed against him, and the Authorities would still be trying to prove up a case, or moving on to other matters. Please read about this case and consider all of the evidence in it's totality.
Henke is the loose canon in the family. Allegedly, he and OP have a stormy relationship.
Henke was saying some weird stuff when the OP shooting story first broke, but for the life of me I cannot find the quotes anymore. He has now been coached and almost silenced (bar this one errant interview).
I think Oscar was on the night in question. He couldn't have done much more harm if he'd had a cannon.
Henke is the loose canon in the family. Allegedly, he and OP have a stormy relationship.
Henke was saying some weird stuff when the OP shooting story first broke, but for the life of me I cannot find the quotes anymore. He has now been coached and almost silenced (bar this one errant interview).
Was it the one about waking up at night and hearing a noise but instead of thinking it's a loved one causing the noise, you completely rule that out and immediately think it's an intruder?
Botha, who has 24 years' experience as a police officer and 16 as a detective
Bolded, and yet not relevant.
"I believe that he knew that Reeva was in the bathroom and he shot four shots through the door," [/B]said Botha, adding that the angle at which the rounds were fired suggested they were aimed deliberately at somebody who was on the toilet.
First BIB - subjective opinion, not objective fact.
Second BIB - only suggests he was aiming of sorts, not who he was aiming at.
One point of dispute is whether Pistorius was wearing his prosthetic legs when he shot through the bathroom door. In his statement on Tuesday, the athlete said he was on his stumps and feeling vulnerable when he opened fire.
But the prosecution has claimed the killing was premeditated because Pistorius took time to put on his prosthetic legs first. Botha supported this view, saying the trajectory of the bullets through the door showed the gun was fired from a height. "It seems to me it was fired down," he said.
Firstly, this has not been confirmed, so remains speculative.
Secondly, even if it is the case, again it tells us nothing about who OP thought he was shooting.
Botha said the holster for the 9mm pistol was found under the side of the bed on which Steenkamp slept, also implying it would have been impossible for Pistorius to get the gun without realising that Steenkamp was not in the bed and could have been the person in the bathroom. Pistorius has claimed that the bedroom was pitch dark.
I don't think that has been confirmed either. The side of the bed the gun was on seems to chop and change all the time. Last I thought, was that it was on the side nearest the balcony, as was OP.
If you have anything confirming either possibility (other than early reports, from which much has turned out to be incorrect), then by all means post.
Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." YIKES! :eek:
Again, not confirmed. And I thought it was two separate witnesses? Maybe revisit this when forensics can back it up.
This exercise is tiring, I could of course fill up several pages, but why? If the Authorities did not have probable cause and sufficient evidence, Mr. Pistorious would not be out on bail, he would be free - WITHOUT the charge of Premeditated Murder placed against him, and the Authorities would still be trying to prove up a case, or moving on to other matters. Please read about this case and consider all of the evidence in it's totality.
I have no doubt you could fill several pages with unconfirmed speculation.
"Two to three" shots each time could mean 4, 5, or 6 shots in total.
You are not considering that Mr. Pistorious said he was kicking the bathroom door (maybe), and evidence confirms that he did in fact beat on the bathroom door with the cricket bat - in a tile/marble lined room (read loud sounds of bashing at the door). And Mr. Pistorious has stated that the balcony door was open when he did all of that, but he says it was only open after he fired the shots.
There really is no mystery here, just a good old fashioned Domestic Homicide, an Overkill at that, followed on by an expertly crafted Affidavit designed to explain it away!
I don't feel the need to smack you back point by point. What you just cannot or do not understand is that the things that WO Botha testified to, on the record in open court, are real things, evidence and findings of the Investigative Teams. That was a Bail Hearing, not a Trial. The prosecution was only obligated to show Cause, not present Forensics, Exhibits, Witnesses, etc... to prove guilt.
This one point (below) I will try to explain to you, slowly. The Prosecution has two (2), Sworn Under Oath Statements, from witnesses that heard and saw things; those Statements are Evidence, and you cannot brush them away in your petty style and pretend that they are not real or not relevant - They are! Geez, no wonder no one but your friends want to discuss the case with you. Moving on now.
Quote: Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." YIKES! :eek:
You are not considering that Mr. Pistorious said he was kicking the bathroom door (maybe), and evidence confirms that he did in fact beat on the bathroom door with the cricket bat - in a tile/marble lined room (read loud sounds of bashing at the door). And Mr. Pistorious has stated that the balcony door was open when he did all of that, but he says it was only open after he fired the shots.
There really is no mystery here, just a good old fashioned Domestic Homicide, an Overkill at that, followed on by an expertly crafted Affidavit designed to explain it away!
Is it so expertly crafted, though, considering that most people don't seem to believe a word of it?
Comments
Exactly. I'd imagine his defence will rely heavily on the idea of Oscar being a vulnerable amputee, that he has reason to be fearful of intruders, and therefore he shot through the door in the heat of the moment, to protect himself.
yep...which is why the media statement immediately struck me as contradictory.
cheers francie
Yes. Rather like cancer sufferer Lance Armstriong and his charity foundation, this may prove to be his 'get out of jail free' card. I just hope the judge sees through all the spin and simply considers the evidence.
Looks like his reputation team are doing their job.
So they presumably accept that crime is a serious problem, and that they have guns largely because of that.
But don't want to start being all political about who's fault the crime is.
He's paying a large bucks to a risk management team, yet they make such a slip up? Next you'll be telling us they never read the statement before they issued it.
His team are playing games with the public, who asked Arnold the questions, who made his answers available....oh Oscar's risk management team...not that they would be prejudiced in any way.
Earlier I wondered how far friends of Oscar would go to defend him but how far would PR company go to protect a client for money?
As long as he keeps paying them, the sky's the limit. Words such as integrity and scruples will not be found in the spin doctor's handbook.
:eek: ROTFL!!!
I don't know if firing bullets through a door at an umarmed person is classed as a sport but if the police story is accepted he was hunting down Reeva.
BIB 1 - I'm still waiting for you to post the link to Prosecutor Nel's apology for misspeaking about Mr. Pistorious, that you stated as fact. Can you post it today?
BIB 2 - No one ever asserted that you were a fan of Mr. Pistorious' celebrity. I have my thoughts, but...
PS: Someone asked why sleep with a gun if it's for hunting and sporting purposes only. Perhaps, the Pistorius family view shooting burglars as a sport or perhaps the burglars themselves as hunting prey.
I agree that people were putting forward theories (nonsensical wiggle room arguments, anything, anything at all that might possibly make Mr. Pistorious' story seem the least bit plausible and sometimes folks just made stuff up), but in the end there has been nothing which objectively disproves anything (if you focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely).
Just my opinion...
Henke was saying some weird stuff when the OP shooting story first broke, but for the life of me I cannot find the quotes anymore. He has now been coached and almost silenced (bar this one errant interview).
God, are you still going on about whatever it is you think I meant by 'wiggle room'.
If you let me know what exactly it is you think I meant, I'll do my best to clear it up for you one and for all.
Up to you.
And no, you don't have to "focus exclusively on what Mr. Pistorious says happened and believe every word of it as Gospel, and dismiss outright all of the findings of the Investigators - completely" to see that there isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
There actually isn't anything which objectively disproves anything.
Let us know what has objectivley been disproven if you like though.
Again, up to you.
Akin to having your dotty Aunt Annie at a dinner party to which your prospective in-laws have also been invited... (only more serious in this case I know).
OK.
Botha, who has 24 years' experience as a police officer and 16 as a detective
"I believe that he knew that Reeva was in the bathroom and he shot four shots through the door," said Botha, adding that the angle at which the rounds were fired suggested they were aimed deliberately at somebody who was on the toilet.
One point of dispute is whether Pistorius was wearing his prosthetic legs when he shot through the bathroom door. In his statement on Tuesday, the athlete said he was on his stumps and feeling vulnerable when he opened fire.
But the prosecution has claimed the killing was premeditated because Pistorius took time to put on his prosthetic legs first. Botha supported this view, saying the trajectory of the bullets through the door showed the gun was fired from a height. "It seems to me it was fired down," he said.
Botha said the holster for the 9mm pistol was found under the side of the bed on which Steenkamp slept, also implying it would have been impossible for Pistorius to get the gun without realising that Steenkamp was not in the bed and could have been the person in the bathroom. Pistorius has claimed that the bedroom was pitch dark.
Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." YIKES! :eek:
This exercise is tiring, I could of course fill up several pages, but why? If the Authorities did not have probable cause and sufficient evidence, Mr. Pistorious would not be out on bail, he would be free - WITHOUT the charge of Premeditated Murder placed against him, and the Authorities would still be trying to prove up a case, or moving on to other matters. Please read about this case and consider all of the evidence in it's totality.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/20/oscar-pistorius-case-police-blunders
I think Oscar was on the night in question. He couldn't have done much more harm if he'd had a cannon.
Was it the one about waking up at night and hearing a noise but instead of thinking it's a loved one causing the noise, you completely rule that out and immediately think it's an intruder?
Bolded, and yet not relevant.
First BIB - subjective opinion, not objective fact.
Second BIB - only suggests he was aiming of sorts, not who he was aiming at.
Firstly, this has not been confirmed, so remains speculative.
Secondly, even if it is the case, again it tells us nothing about who OP thought he was shooting.
I don't think that has been confirmed either. The side of the bed the gun was on seems to chop and change all the time. Last I thought, was that it was on the side nearest the balcony, as was OP.
If you have anything confirming either possibility (other than early reports, from which much has turned out to be incorrect), then by all means post.
Again, not confirmed. And I thought it was two separate witnesses? Maybe revisit this when forensics can back it up.
I have no doubt you could fill several pages with unconfirmed speculation.
But I was hoping more for some objective facts.
You are not considering that Mr. Pistorious said he was kicking the bathroom door (maybe), and evidence confirms that he did in fact beat on the bathroom door with the cricket bat - in a tile/marble lined room (read loud sounds of bashing at the door). And Mr. Pistorious has stated that the balcony door was open when he did all of that, but he says it was only open after he fired the shots.
There really is no mystery here, just a good old fashioned Domestic Homicide, an Overkill at that, followed on by an expertly crafted Affidavit designed to explain it away!
I don't feel the need to smack you back point by point. What you just cannot or do not understand is that the things that WO Botha testified to, on the record in open court, are real things, evidence and findings of the Investigative Teams. That was a Bail Hearing, not a Trial. The prosecution was only obligated to show Cause, not present Forensics, Exhibits, Witnesses, etc... to prove guilt.
This one point (below) I will try to explain to you, slowly. The Prosecution has two (2), Sworn Under Oath Statements, from witnesses that heard and saw things; those Statements are Evidence, and you cannot brush them away in your petty style and pretend that they are not real or not relevant - They are! Geez, no wonder no one but your friends want to discuss the case with you. Moving on now.
Quote:
Botha cited another witness who claimed to have heard "two-to-three shots", seen Pistorius's lights on, then 17 minutes later heard another "two-to-three shots." He said: "We have the statement of a person who said after he heard gunshots, he went to his balcony and saw the light was on. Then he heard a female screaming, then more gunshots." YIKES! :eek:
Is it so expertly crafted, though, considering that most people don't seem to believe a word of it?