Which begs the question, why did he think there was an armed intruder in the toilet in the first place?
Because he heard something he didn't expect to hear, in the middle of the night, and lives in a part of the world where violent crime is prevalent.
Whilst I agree it seems odd that he didn't stop to think it would be Reeva, under the circumstances in the dead of night, I don't put it beyond the realms of possibility.
Because he heard something he didn't expect to hear, in the middle of the night, and lives in a part of the world where violent crime is prevalent.
Whilst I agree it seems odd that he didn't stop to think it would be Reeva, under the circumstances in the dead of night, I don't put it beyond the realms of possibility.
Why didn't he just phone the police/security? Most people have phones nearby their beds or you would wake the other person to have them phone while you make sure the intruder stays in the house by aiming a gun at them (if so inclined).
Anyone have a clue as to when/if the state have said when the phone records will be back?
As soon as the bail hearing is over tomorrow, you won't hear anything for months, then there will be an explosion of all this info once the trail starts.
As soon as the bail hearing is over tomorrow, you won't hear anything for months, then there will be an explosion of all this info once the trail starts.
That's what i thought.
The reporter on the news just said don't be surprised if the judge waits over the weekend to make a decision and then, depending on that an appeal from Pistorius regarding bail.
Yes, but that's what's complicating matters here - no-one else was there to be murdered, and I'm sure the defence will argue that he did not intend to kill, he was reacting instinctively (like the highly trained animal that he is :cool:).
Don't get me wrong, I think that whatever his intentions, he should have the book thrown at him, but it's an interesting exercise to argue from both points of view!
It shouldn't be a complication. He knows someone is in an enclosed space, and he blindly fires four shots into that space.
Any reasonable person would think there is a high chance of death. That would be murder here, whoever he thought was in there.
This is what I don't get. He is guilty of murdering someone. He isn't innocent.
His guilt or innocence is for a judge to decide when in possession of the full facts regarding the shooting. Anything else is just rumour and speculation based on various press and police reports of variable debatable accuracy.
Yes. His natural height is measured from head to his stumps, which end in the calf area. His prosthetics are designed to fit his thin, long stumps in calf-area caps.
Edit: I've discovered my finding was wrong:
His everyday legs doesn't mean his stumps but his natural legs plus his everyday prostheses.
I'm guessing Pistorius' medical came back clear of drugs, alcohol or steroids or the prosecution would have said?
I know we've heard from both sides, and their versions of what happened, but have the prosecution said why they believe he killed her, or will that be kept for trial?
I'm guessing Pistorius' medical came back clear of drugs, alcohol or steroids or the prosecution would have said?
I know we've heard from both sides, and their versions of what happened, but have the prosecution said why they believe he killed her, or will that be kept for trial?
Domestic rage. Plenty of forensic to still come which is not really necessary here.
Whilst with hindsight, and a bit of time to think about it all (which you obviously have), that's all very easy to think.
But at the time its entirely plausible that OP (or anyone for that matter) would necessarily pause to consider all of that.
With the second list, a big part of that would be down to the individual's temperament - and we now know OP to be fairly hotheaded, which would lend credence to such actions, however foolhardy and reckless they may appear to us.
Sorry but while during that would you NOT check on your bed partner?
I'm guessing Pistorius' medical came back clear of drugs, alcohol or steroids or the prosecution would have said?
I know we've heard from both sides, and their versions of what happened, but have the prosecution said why they believe he killed her, or will that be kept for trial?
We haven't heard two versions of what happened.
We've had one version of what happened from one person present.
And an alternative, hypothetical version from people who were not there.
I think had Reeva survived, and was giving her side of the story that implicated OP, that would be a whole different kettle of fish.
Sorry but while during that would you NOT check on your bed partner?
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.
Anyone else puzzled why Reeva's family isn't front and centre in court demanding justice for this poor woman?
Not entirely. They are being there for each other at this point, grieving together.
Only 6 days ago one of the most important people in their lives, was with someone they would have expected her to be safe with, only to wake up to the fact he'd accidentally or otherwise killed her.
I think it's probably too raw for them still don't you?
Comments
Because he heard something he didn't expect to hear, in the middle of the night, and lives in a part of the world where violent crime is prevalent.
Whilst I agree it seems odd that he didn't stop to think it would be Reeva, under the circumstances in the dead of night, I don't put it beyond the realms of possibility.
Odd doesn't quite cover it.
Raw grief?
I am guessing it is all a bit too raw for them right now and perhaps they will be at the actual trial, he isn't being sentenced at the moment.
Indeed.
Why didn't he just phone the police/security? Most people have phones nearby their beds or you would wake the other person to have them phone while you make sure the intruder stays in the house by aiming a gun at them (if so inclined).
What sort of justice do you think they should be demanding?
Given that the authorities know who did it, and have already commenced legal proceedings.
As soon as the bail hearing is over tomorrow, you won't hear anything for months, then there will be an explosion of all this info once the trail starts.
His family is there supporting him, so why shouldn't Reeva's be there? He should be locked up, and they should demand it.
I imagine they have been preoccupied with the shock and grief of losing a member of their family, not to mention organising a funeral.
Sorry, I edited my post afterwards - what sort of justice do you think they should be demanding?
That's what i thought.
The reporter on the news just said don't be surprised if the judge waits over the weekend to make a decision and then, depending on that an appeal from Pistorius regarding bail.
Ha Ha, sorry, so did I.
It shouldn't be a complication. He knows someone is in an enclosed space, and he blindly fires four shots into that space.
Any reasonable person would think there is a high chance of death. That would be murder here, whoever he thought was in there.
His guilt or innocence is for a judge to decide when in possession of the full facts regarding the shooting. Anything else is just rumour and speculation based on various press and police reports of variable debatable accuracy.
It's just a bail hearing, not the trial.
I doubt they really want to see him at this point.
His everyday legs doesn't mean his stumps but his natural legs plus his everyday prostheses.
I know we've heard from both sides, and their versions of what happened, but have the prosecution said why they believe he killed her, or will that be kept for trial?
Domestic rage. Plenty of forensic to still come which is not really necessary here.
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?
Sorry but while during that would you NOT check on your bed partner?
We haven't heard two versions of what happened.
We've had one version of what happened from one person present.
And an alternative, hypothetical version from people who were not there.
I think had Reeva survived, and was giving her side of the story that implicated OP, that would be a whole different kettle of fish.
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.
Not entirely. They are being there for each other at this point, grieving together.
Only 6 days ago one of the most important people in their lives, was with someone they would have expected her to be safe with, only to wake up to the fact he'd accidentally or otherwise killed her.
I think it's probably too raw for them still don't you?