Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Oscar Pistorius Bail Hearing Begins


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-02-2013, 00:24
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
Yes but the stressful situation he was acting on was an argument with his girlfriend, who is now dead.
You forget, there was no intruder. He's made that up to get himself off the hook.
Well we shall have to wait and see. [LIST][*]I believe he woke in the night and was perhaps aware of his girlfriend next to him in the bed.

[*]He got up, opened the balcony doors, and went out to get the fan (we don't know at the moment why he went to get the fan).

[*]The action of getting up awoke his girlfriend who, while Oscar was padding around on the balcony, went into the bathroom to use the toilet.

[*]In Oscar's mind she is still in bed.

[*]On returning to the dark bedroom he hears something in the bathroom and goes to get his gun. He probably isn't sure what is making the noise at this point, and (fatally) he doesn't believe it is his girlfriend because he thinks she's still in bed.

[*]He doesn't put a light on as i) he's scared and ii) he probably realises that putting a light on would give an intruder the advantage and alert them to the fact that they've been caught.

[*]He goes into the bathroom without his prosthetic legs and sees the bathroom window is open. I suspect that this is the moment when he panics.

[*]The bedroom door is locked, the bathroom is empty and the only place an intruder could be is inside the toilet.

[*]Imagine being in your own house, at night, in the dark, in South Africa of all places, already paranoid about security, and thinking that a potentially violent intruder is in the toilet.

[*]Oscar then called back to his girlfriend to get police and shouted at the intruder to get out.

[*]Then he decides that, having shouted out and revealed himself, the 'intruder' could suddenly open the toilet door and start shooting.

[*]He pre-empts this by shooting first through the bathroom door.[/LIST]
I'm not saying there aren't issues with his story, the main one being 'why didn't he check that his girlfriend was in bed when he went to retrieve the gun?', but I think the sequence of events outlined above is at least plausible.
Kapellmeister is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-02-2013, 00:24
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 8,499
Yes, it causes violent erections.
If it really is homeopathic rather than herbal, i find it hard to believe that it causes anything at all (apart from a feeling of being duped, possibly).

The only way a homeopathic medicine could cause the symptoms you describe is with a frightening degree of psychosomatic/placebo effects or if it was adulterated with some actual, real medicinal compounds.
mazzy50 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:28
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
The thing about the 'testosterone' is odd. The defence said that the police had actually misidentified a homeopathic remedy that all the papers have reported as 'testocompostium'.

I can't find any such substance, but there is a homeopathic treatment called 'Testis Compositum', which is widely sold. Its purpose is 'For the temporary relief of symptoms associated with male sexual weakness such as; Lack of stamina, nocturnal emissions, and male hormone imbalance'.
I think this is another example of the bungling South African police. If it was, as seems likely, 'Testis Compositum', then it is not an illegal steroid as the police tried to make everyone believe. Another example of them trying to twist so-called evidence.

http://thinksteroids.com/news/oscar-...nk+Steroids%29
Kapellmeister is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:29
pinkyponk34
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,190
I think Oscar went down to the bathroom with the gun, and it was the sight of the bathroom window being open that convinced him that a (potentially armed) intruder had got into the house and was hiding in the toilet.
What , and completely forgetting the more obvious occupant of the toilet might be the person he shared the house with ?

Come on, see sense.
pinkyponk34 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:30
cath99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: yorkshire
Posts: 6,596
I think this is another example of the bungling South African police. If it was, as seems likely, 'Testis Compositum', then it is not an illegal steroid as the police tried to make everyone believe. Another example of them trying to twist so-called evidence.
I think that was actually a genuine mistake. 2 boxes of drugs and syringes, pretty easy to jump to conclusions IMO.

I actually think injecting any supplement/drug/herbal remedy is dodgy anyway.
cath99 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:31
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
What , and completely forgetting the more obvious occupant of the toilet might be the person he shared the house with ?

Come on, see sense.
He probably thought she was in bed. I expect he was aware of her next to him when he went to get the fan. I don't see that as such as massive leap.
Kapellmeister is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:31
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
I think that was actually a genuine mistake. 2 boxes of drugs and syringes, pretty easy to jump to conclusions IMO.

I actually think injecting any supplement/drug/herbal remedy is dodgy anyway.
Yes, but it should never have been made public until the police were absolutely sure what it was. Instead they told everyone and spread the rumour that it was an illegal steroid. Disgraceful.
Kapellmeister is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:31
saralund
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 951
The issue with the medication - whatever its effectiveness - is surely that it suggests a physical problem that might generate frustration in a young man.

That's assuming that the medicine is indeed 'Testis Compositum'.
saralund is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:35
cath99
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: yorkshire
Posts: 6,596
The issue with the medication - whatever its effectiveness - is surely that it suggests a physical problem that might generate frustration in a young man.

That's assuming that the medicine is indeed 'Testis Compositum'.
I think you're reading into it wrong to be honest. It suggests a legal form of increasing male hormones - which is what testosterone does illegally.
cath99 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:37
Pootmatoot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,438
Well we shall have to wait and see. [LIST][*]I believe he woke in the night and was perhaps aware of his girlfriend next to him in the bed.

[*]He got up, opened the balcony doors, and went out to get the fan (we don't know at the moment why he went to get the fan).

[*]The action of getting up awoke his girlfriend who, while Oscar was padding around on the balcony, went into the bathroom to use the toilet.

[*]In Oscar's mind she is still in bed.

[*]On returning to the dark bedroom he hears something in the bathroom and goes to get his gun. He probably isn't sure what is making the noise at this point, and (fatally) he doesn't believe it is his girlfriend because he thinks she's still in bed.

[*]He doesn't put a light on as i) he's scared and ii) he probably realises that putting a light on would give an intruder the advantage and alert them to the fact that they've been caught.

[*]He goes into the bathroom without his prosthetic legs and sees the bathroom window is open. I suspect that this is the moment when he panics.

[*]The bedroom door is locked, the bathroom is empty and the only place an intruder could be is inside the toilet.

[*]Imagine being in your own house, at night, in the dark, in South Africa of all places, already paranoid about security, and thinking that a potentially violent intruder is in the toilet.

[*]Oscar then called back to his girlfriend to get police and shouted at the intruder to get out.

[*]Then he decides that, having shouted out and revealed himself, the 'intruder' could suddenly open the toilet door and start shooting.

[*]He pre-empts this by shooting first through the bathroom door.[/LIST]
I'm not saying there aren't issues with his story, the main one being 'why didn't he check that his girlfriend was in bed when he went to retrieve the gun?', but I think the sequence of events outlined above is at least plausible.


Your version of events is possible, but it's a very odd thing to "believe" as people outside the case.

It's utterly improbable..
Pootmatoot is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:38
Pootmatoot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,438
I think you're reading into it wrong to be honest. It suggests a legal form of increasing male hormones - which is what testosterone does illegally.

It suggests more one of the few non-doping (in Olympic terms) methods for impotent men tor achieve an erection.
Pootmatoot is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:40
calico_pie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,522
Your version of events is possible, but it's a very odd thing to "believe" as people outside the case.

It's utterly improbable..
Of the 12 points above, which would you say were the five most improbable ones?
calico_pie is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:41
saralund
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 951
I think you're reading into it wrong to be honest. It suggests a legal form of increasing male hormones - which is what testosterone does illegally.
You're probably right. However, it seems to be sold to assist with impotence.

If I were on the prosecution team, I'd make use of that fact. If he killed her knowingly, he had to be very angry about something.
saralund is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:41
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 8,499
I think this is another example of the bungling South African police. If it was, as seems likely, 'Testis Compositum', then it is not an illegal steroid as the police tried to make everyone believe. Another example of them trying to twist so-called evidence.
I don't think they were trying to twist things - I think they got it wrong and misinterpreted the name of the product.

They should have checked - I will be interested to see what the analysis reports say when they come back. It isn't unknown for seemingly innocuous herbal and homeopathic remedies to be adulterated.

I am surprised at the ease with which some FMs believe that the police are twisting evidence and making things up (even with sworn statements from witnesses in their possession) whilst taking everything that OP has said more or less at face value and as gospel, even though a good part of it doesn't make sense.

So if OP says they went to bed at 10pm, that's what happened. Therefore as Reeva's bladder was empty she must have got out of bed to go to the loo and this means his account is 100% true. The fact that there is nothing to corroborate that account and there are actually statements indicating that both Reeva and OP were up long before the shootings is discounted.

Reeva could have gone to the loo at any time before or even during the heated argument which neighbours heard. But suddenly, because the policeman was vague about how far away the neighbours were, they are unreliable witnesses and we can completely discount the fact that what they say is directly contrary to the claims OP has made - I don't think that follows at all.

Frankly, the only individual who really stands to gain from not being truthful is OP - there is no reason for his neighbours to make things up.
mazzy50 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:44
calico_pie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,522
You're probably right. However, it seems to be sold to assist with impotence.

If I were on the prosecution team, I'd make use of that fact. If he killed her knowingly, he had to be very angry about something.
But is also something that athletes might use, without it needing to suggest they were impotent.
calico_pie is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:45
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
Frankly, the only individual who really stands to gain from not being truthful is OP - there is no reason for his neighbours to make things up.
True, but multiple studies have shown that people's recollections can be drastically different from what actually happened. So a witness hears 'shouting' and then, with hindsight, that 'shouting' becomes 'an argument'. And as I said, until we hear from the witnesses we've no idea exactly what they did hear. We've got Oscar's statement but we've had nothing concrete about what the witnesses believed they heard.
Kapellmeister is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:47
Ada Rabble
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,884
I don't think they were trying to twist things - I think they got it wrong and misinterpreted the name of the product.

They should have checked - I will be interested to see what the analysis reports say when they come back. It isn't unknown for seemingly innocuous herbal and homeopathic remedies to be adulterated.

I am surprised at the ease with which some FMs believe that the police are twisting evidence and making things up (even with sworn statements from witnesses in their possession) whilst taking everything that OP has said more or less at face value and as gospel, even though a good part of it doesn't make sense.

So if OP says they went to bed at 10pm, that's what happened. Therefore as Reeva's bladder was empty she must have got out of bed to go to the loo and this means his account is 100% true. The fact that there is nothing to corroborate that account and there are actually statements indicating that both Reeva and OP were up long before the shootings is discounted.

Reeva could have gone to the loo at any time before or even during the heated argument which neighbours heard. But suddenly, because the policeman was vague about how far away the neighbours were, they are unreliable witnesses and we can completely discount the fact that what they say is directly contrary to the claims OP has made - I don't think that follows at all.

Frankly, the only individual who really stands to gain from not being truthful is OP - there is no reason for his neighbours to make things up.
Very pertinent post
Ada Rabble is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:47
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 8,499
True, but multiple studies have shown that people's recollections can be drastically different from what actually happened. So a witness hears 'shouting' and then, with hindsight, that 'shouting' becomes 'an argument'. And as I said, until we hear from the witnesses we've no idea exactly what they did hear. We've got Oscar's statement but we've had nothing concrete about what the witnesses believed they heard.
That works both ways - you seem terribly keen to believe everything Oscar Pistorius says (or at least that is the impression I am getting), but surely he is going to be just as prone to faulty memory.
mazzy50 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:48
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,601
I think you're reading into it wrong to be honest. It suggests a legal form of increasing male hormones - which is what testosterone does illegally.
I wonder if it's legal under WADA rules.
End-Em-All is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:51
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 8,499
I wonder if it's legal under WADA rules.
Good question - also, just because it is labelled as testis whatever doesn't necessarily guarantee that the contents are actually what is on the label.

If it is homeopathic though (and the genuine article), I can't imagine it would be banned by anyone as it is basically some ampoules filled with water!
mazzy50 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:52
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
That works both ways - you seem terribly keen to believe everything Oscar Pistorius says, but surely he is going to be just as prone to faulty memory.
Perhaps but at least we know what his version of events actually is. We've just had vagueness about the witness statements from the police.

Another thing we've not heard anything about is a motive. You would think, with so much social media around, iPhones, etc. and with his girlfriend having a wide circle of friends, that someone would come forward to indicate what the motive might've been if he did indeed shoot her as the result of an argument. As I've said before, without a motive I don't see how the prosecution can possibly find him guilty. To say 'he did it in a rage' just doesn't wash without some reason.
Kapellmeister is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:52
End-Em-All
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,601
True, but multiple studies have shown that people's recollections can be drastically different from what actually happened. So a witness hears 'shouting' and then, with hindsight, that 'shouting' becomes 'an argument'. And as I said, until we hear from the witnesses we've no idea exactly what they did hear. We've got Oscar's statement but we've had nothing concrete about what the witnesses believed they heard.
Is Oscar exempt from these findings?
End-Em-All is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:57
saralund
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 951
But is also something that athletes might use, without it needing to suggest they were impotent.
No, he may have been taking it for purely athletic reasons, or not taking it at all. But it seems to be widely marketed for erectile problems.

I have a clear and shocking memory of being angrily blamed by a man for his failure to rise to the occasion. He was my husband, and I'd just had our second child. It never happened again, but the memory of his anger with me is still sharp.

I can't be the only woman to whom this has happened.
saralund is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:57
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 8,499
Perhaps but at least we know what his version of events actually is. We've just had vagueness about the witness statements from the police.

Another thing we've not heard anything about is a motive. You would think, with so much social media around, iPhones, etc. and with his girlfriend having a wide circle of friends, that someone would come forward to indicate what the motive might've been if he did indeed shoot her as the result of an argument. As I've said before, without a motive I don't see how the prosecution can possibly find him guilty. To say 'he did it in a rage' just doesn't wash without some reason.
There has been at least one account of him being jealous after his ex girlfriend went off with someone else. Didn't he threaten to break someone's legs? The guy who shared his room at the Olympics asked to be moved because OPs overly aggressive shouting down the 'phone was so disturbing. He spent a night in police cells on suspicion of assaulting a female.Whilst these are just three things, they certainly do not paint a picture of the chilled 'peace maker' which OP's family want people to believe. If you are moody,somewhat aggressive and you have loaded guns in your house, shit sometimes happens.
mazzy50 is offline  
Old 22-02-2013, 00:58
Kapellmeister
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 32,652
Is Oscar exempt from these findings?
Well, as I don't believe he shoot her deliberately, I obviously believe the general thrust of his story. He might've got some details wrong, but I suspect the events will remain vivid for the rest of his life. A witness, who would have no reason to recall an 'argument' without the benefit of hindsight, probably wouldn't remember things in the same way.
Kapellmeister is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:54.