Oscar Pistorius Trial (Merged)

11920222425547

Comments

  • josjos Posts: 9,992
    Forum Member
    Part of the reasoning for the Magistrate concluding that he wasn't a flight risk was that he had family and substantial assets in South Africa.

    Selling his assets and asking for his passport back looks to me like an escape plan.
  • LH1LH1 Posts: 2,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I read he wants to sell his house. What's the rush? And who would want to live in it? He's going to be on the next flight out of SA. I hear Italy's nice this time of year seeing as they have no extradition agreement with SA.
  • GinaHGinaH Posts: 853
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    This from ABC news

    As part of the amendments to his bail conditions, Pistorius, 26, wants access to his home as soon as the investigation is complete because he plans to sell the property to raise funds for his upcoming trial. His family has confirmed he also plans to sell his shares in one of his two race horses to cover his mounting legal bills. Pistorius’ finances were dealt a severe blow when his lucrative sponsorship deals with Nike and Oakley were suspended.

    Although the South African Police Service would not confirm this, ABC News has learned that the house might become an exhibit during the trial as crime scene clean up operators have been told they will only be allowed onto the premises after the hearing has been concluded.

    Magistrate Desmond Nair, who granted Pistorius bail, has to file an answering affidavit with the registrar of the Pretoria High Court before the appeal will be heard. Pistorius does not have to attend this hearing. He’ll be back in the lower court June 4, but it is unlikely that the trial will start before the last quarter of the year.
  • LH1LH1 Posts: 2,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    GinaH wrote: »
    This from ABC news

    As part of the amendments to his bail conditions, Pistorius, 26, wants access to his home as soon as the investigation is complete because he plans to sell the property to raise funds for his upcoming trial. His family has confirmed he also plans to sell his shares in one of his two race horses to cover his mounting legal bills. Pistorius’ finances were dealt a severe blow when his lucrative sponsorship deals with Nike and Oakley were suspended.

    Although the South African Police Service would not confirm this, ABC News has learned that the house might become an exhibit during the trial as crime scene clean up operators have been told they will only be allowed onto the premises after the hearing has been concluded.

    Magistrate Desmond Nair, who granted Pistorius bail, has to file an answering affidavit with the registrar of the Pretoria High Court before the appeal will be heard. Pistorius does not have to attend this hearing. He’ll be back in the lower court June 4, but it is unlikely that the trial will start before the last quarter of the year.

    Well that explains why he wants to sell his house. I thought he was richer than he appears to be. He must be missing his sponsorship deals. :rolleyes:
  • cath99cath99 Posts: 6,826
    Forum Member
    Apparently the house has been on and off the market for months. More spin. It makes you sick
  • 1fab1fab Posts: 20,052
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The programme starts in 5 mins on BBC3. Should be interesting.
  • LH1LH1 Posts: 2,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yep I'm just waiting for it to start.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Defence expert says Reeva "voluntarily emptied her bladder". No urine on the scene.
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Which scene? The toilet, where her body eventually lay or the space between the two?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    He didn't specify.
  • End-Em-AllEnd-Em-All Posts: 23,629
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Precisely!

    He's a member of Oscar's defence team.
  • LH1LH1 Posts: 2,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    He's worked for the defence and seemed evasive to me regarding the door - bit convenient that the door was missing so he couldn't talk about it.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I really feel for Gina Myers, Reeva's best friend. How beautiful
    Gina herself is !
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What a silly programme from the beeb. Heat magazine, tattoo artists and other weird, random sources. Some people surprisingly close to Oscar/Reeva in there though. I also found the whole 'did he REALLY threaten to break someones legs' angle very cringeworthy. As if that would be ground enough to rationally believe that Oscar was capable of cold blooded premeditated murder? For me, the two most insightful comments came from Gok Wan lookalike dude from Heat who said something along the lines of it's not right to try digging up his past, nitpick on small things to try and find signs to prove his guilt.. also one of the SA law students pointed out that no matter what another human being is dead because of him, regardless of his story.. he shot 4 bullets so his intention was to kill.
  • benjaminibenjamini Posts: 32,066
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Nothing new, very disappointing documentary. The presenter was the most disturbing aspect.
  • LH1LH1 Posts: 2,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    There was something new for me because I didn't know she was also shot in the fingers of the left hand.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 68
    Forum Member
    kind wrote: »
    Recap 1-10:

    1) If medical experts determine that Reeva would have continued to produce urine if alive after she had been shot, then on the basis she had an empty bladder, either

    a) she discharged all urine on death (experts may be able to investigate if there was urine on Reeva's shorts) or
    b) Oscar Pistorius' account is incorrect and Reeva died very soon after being shot.

    2) If Reeva had used the toilet, but no urine was present in it, then the toilet must have been flushed. If Reeva had flushed while Oscar was on his way to the bathroom, then Oscar would likely have heard. Assuming Reeva flushed out of earshot of Oscar, then by the time Oscar made his way to the bathroom and shouted, Reeva would likely have been in the bathroom. Therefore in the time between Oscar shouting and arriving at the bathroom, Reeva would have had to go into the toilet shut the door and lock it without Oscar seeing her.

    3) Any CCTV camera (or other recording) either near Oscar Pistorius' residence or far away but facing Oscar Pistorius' residence could confirm whether or not the light was on, as some witnesses claim. This would apply to the bedroom light, bathroom light or toilet light.

    4) Mobile phone records may determine if Reeva or Oscar's mobile phones were turned on or off, which might, amongst other things, indicate when they were awake.

    5) A sewer investigation could indicate if anything was flushed down the toilet.

    6) If more than one bullet impact mark was found in the bathroom or toilet or there were more than three wounds to Reeva, this would suggest more than four bullets were fired (short of ricochets or bullets passing through the door, one part of Reeva's body and into another).

    7) Per Oscar Pistorius' account, after breaking the toilet door panels, he found the key to the locked toilet door on the floor. This suggests Reeva removed the toilet door key from the lock and may have had it in her hand.

    8) What was Oscar wearing when he got out of bed? There is no mention of him getting dressed.

    9) Reeva's lack of scream when shot, despite being alive. Does it indicate which bullet hit first?

    10) The location of the mobile phones.

    Based on the information from the defence forensic expert, we learned that either Reeva or Oscar flushed the toilet. A sewer investigation could indicate if anything was flushed down the toilet.

    Also we were informed that Reeva was hit four times - three on her right side - head, arm, hip, and one hit to her left fingers (interesting, even more so as it appears Reeva is right-handed).

    It was also confirmed that Reeva had less than 1ml of urine in her bladder.

    If medical experts determine that Reeva would have kept producing urine after being shot, and, if as indicated Reeva did not void her bladder involuntarily, then this would suggest that Oscar Pistorius' account of Reeva being alive for some time after being shot is incorrect.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What I think happened is that the first shot was from the furthest distance and was a lucky hit on Reeva's hip. She then slumped onto the door and he shot 3 times then at closer range, 1.5 metres from the door. With her body and head slumped against the other side of the door, the 3 remaining shots could not miss. The head shot may have been fatal quite quickly, or the total lack of urine is a puzzle.
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jzee wrote: »
    So precious he thought he could get away with murder by relying on his family/hangers on to get him out of it?

    Exactly! don't get forget his PR team.
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    benjamini wrote: »
    Nothing new, very disappointing documentary. The presenter was the most disturbing aspect.

    I had a very early night last night so didn't watch it but sounds as though I didn't miss a thing.
  • aggsaggs Posts: 29,461
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    francie wrote: »
    I had a very early night last night so didn't watch it but sounds as though I didn't miss a thing.

    It was a hastily put together tele programme which isn't going to be able - or probably even allowed - to go into the defence in any great detail and certainly not the prosecution.

    Who were the company behind the programme, because we have seen similar before in other cases?
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21739320

    Sounds like it's the money he's mourning :rolleyes:

    The sponsorship deals (which appear to have been withdrawn) make up the bulk of his income from what I can gather. Maybe he was reliant on all these deals to pay for his lifestyle

    "The accumulative total of Pistorius' earnings from sponsors, which accounts for much of his income, was reportedly $4.7 million (3.5 million euros), according to the Financial Times newspaper" http://sg.sports.yahoo.com/news/nike-suspends-contract-oscar-pistorius-103439243--spt.html

    No money, or very little by comparison, coming in calls for desperate action I suppose. That's a serious amount of money.
  • Top Gun 001Top Gun 001 Posts: 382
    Forum Member
    His statement reported him shouting to the imaginary invaders and the girl but there was no mention of anyone replying. Not even a "what the hell are you doing" from the girl.
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    aggs wrote: »
    It was a hastily put together tele programme which isn't going to be able - or probably even allowed - to go into the defence in any great detail and certainly not the prosecution.

    Who were the company behind the programme, because we have seen similar before in other cases?

    I don't know what I was expecting, perhaps some unreported revelations. I don't think I'll bother watching the tv re-runs then in that case.

    Can't help with your second para sorry, maybe someone will be able to answer that for you.
  • franciefrancie Posts: 31,089
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'm not sure I can face listening to all that stuff again. He should have a quick hearing, refuse the appeal, and stick him straight back into custody.

    He is likely to breach any of the conditions, and if he is a suicide risk too, then he can be remanded for his own safety.

    I'm curious as to the reasons the Defence want the passport, in particular, restriction lifted... As much as I "dread" the possible long drawn out episode with the Judge I shall probably end up watching/listening (if it is available).
This discussion has been closed.