Surely the origin of the blood on the duvet and carpet is far less important than the fact it means he could not have placed the fans there prior to the shooting (which was his reason for not knowing her whereabouts) and he could not have ran to the balcony after the shooting if the duvet was there.
Couldn't he have just run over it though? It's hardly an obstacle. What if he threw the duvet off the bed when he was 'searching' the bed for Steenkamp? But, if he did that, then why not testify to it...
I'm not convinced by the duvet. It is too tainted by the dabbling of plod. It was one of the first things that I did have doubts about ever since we saw a photo with it spread out and the explanation was that it was just "spread out for the photo"
From the watch and gun debacle onward it was difficult to trust any of the investigating team at the scene.
the trail of the blood on the duvet and the carpet means that the duvet was in position prior to the shooting. This means there's no way the duvet could have been repositioned y the police. OP cannot claim this was police tampering-impossible!
I agree with you… but being accused of stealing other people's posts is very insulting IMO
Don't worry AJ... I would guess that the majority on here see you as an articulate, informative, poster.... you always give constructive arguments .... always respectful.. and that nice bit of humour at times.....
and as I posted the other day... I really do love your posts and I am sure most of this thread do too..... and I feel sure no one else has any issue with your posts...
Disregard it and keep posting!! ;-)
(I am just catching up on the thread so this was concerned with a few pages back!)
Browsing old news....
What sparked the shooting remained unclear, but police said they had received calls in the past about domestic altercations at the home of the 26-year-old athlete, who has spoken publicly about his love of firearms.
A police spokeswoman, Brigadier Denise Beukes, said the incidents included "allegations of a domestic nature."
"I'm not going to elaborate on it, but there have been incidents," Beukes said. She said Pistorius was home at the time of Steenkamp's death and "there is no other suspect involved."
Surely the origin of the blood on the duvet and carpet is far less important than the fact it means he could not have placed the fans there prior to the shooting (which was his reason for not knowing her whereabouts) and he could not have ran to the balcony after the shooting if the duvet was there.
Duvet on the floor also indicates she was out of bed
Edit: he wouldn't have wanted it placed there, in his version
Thats right, planned is worse than just with intent but unplanned
I find the whole premeditated area a bit grey, a quick google resulted in, "In some states, premeditation may be construed as taking place mere seconds before the murder" albeit this is in the USA but it does highlight the perception of what premeditated could be viewed as. Am going to have to research further or ask a legal bod!
the trail of the blood on the duvet and the carpet means that the duvet was in position prior to the shooting. This means there's no way the duvet could have been repositioned y the police. OP cannot claim this was police tampering-impossible!
Unless the police dribbled a little bit of blood over it in order to incriminate.. ;-)
The duvet with the blood drops on the carpet is almost as compelling as the bathroom light being on and the ambient light in the toilet. Taken together they're pretty convincing and could easily sway me to a guilty verdict. How to explain it. Dunno. I just wish there was something more...concrete.
I think one of the problems facing the SAPD is that their forensic work doesn't seem to be anywhere near as advanced as is the UK. In the UK the blood drops on the duvet and carpet would've been analysed to death. Nel just showed a photo and used a mouse to pinpoint where they were. The same goes for the flex of the fans. Much was made of that by Nel but it was never backed up with further evidence. It's frustrating.
I was thinking the same....especially the blood splatter across the duvet and carpet....and I could't quite believe it when no evidence was brought forward to back up Nels claim about the fan position and cord length.....and I shook my head in disbelief when Nel and OP started arguing about wether the Hifi / DVD was switched on or not....ffs why had't someone tested the on/off switch before Nel brought this up in court....it gave the impression of amateurism......And the one thing which has bugged me throughout the whole trial is why was't a test done with volunteers of the same age as OP to ascertain what can and can't be seen in OP's blacked out bedroom after the eyes have become accommodated to the darkness.....because even at the age of 50 I can see a hell of a lot of detail in my blacked out bedroom....and that includes the person next to me
Couldn't he have just run over it though? It's hardly an obstacle. What if he threw the duvet off the bed when he was 'searching' the bed for Steenkamp? But, if he did that, then why not testify to it...
running over a bunched up duvet on his stumps is unlikely given his claimed instability...if he stumbled you'd think he'd have recalled doing so.
The trail of blood on the duvet and carpet indicate that the duvet was on the floor.
Oscar couldn't remember how anything was left in that bedroom - he didn't even notice anything wrong when shown the photo of the duvet on the floor when first asked about it, when Nel asked him if anything was out of place - then later the next day , he said the duvet had been moved !.
That's what I mean (perhaps I didn't phrase it correctly, it's late for me really). If it had all been done as it should have been then Nel could categorically say this is it and the defence would not have any opportunity to cast doubt. As it is the State is under scrutiny re "tampering" with evidence, something I feel they don't need.
Let's hope they learn from it, as they have been made to look either incompetent or corrupt not only to South Africa, but to the whole world.
I feel it is more incompetence than corruption, although I couldn't be sure, particularly in the case of Botha.
I get the impression that there is not much investment in the police and if OP is anything to go by, being armed and taking the law into you own hands is preferred.
Unless the police dribbled a little bit of blood over it in order to incriminate.. ;-)
with the amount of blood in that toilet and to and from the bottom of his stairs, and only one person involved in the crime, why would they do that exactly, or need to ?
Why would he aim at the magazine rack? He didn't even cite this as the sound he heard at the time, only in hindsight. But if by that you mean he was aiming at the noise then I can only assume he was aiming at whoever caused that noise.
Let's hope they learn from it, as they have been made to look either incompetent or corrupt not only to South Africa, but to the whole world.
I feel it is more incompetence than corruption, although I couldn't be sure, particularly in the case of Botha.
I get the impression that there is not much investment in the police and if OP is anything to go by, being armed and taking the law into you own hands is preferred.
I do wonder, assuming his story is true, if that isn't one reason why he acted like he did. Steenkamp could've called the police, as he allegedly told her to, but who knows when they would've turned up. Perhaps Pistorius felt he had to deal with it himself. It was him or no-one. Over here (in the UK) you'd call the police and expect some response in a reasonable time. Maybe it's different over there.
It's a disaster for the prosecution but perhaps not fatal. Either way, how would you explain the blood trail on both the duvet and the carpet?
I haven't ever given it a thought as I saw it as an evidence cul-de-sac. Never really had much interest in the blood trail either as I didn't think it was ever going to prove anything
The one thing to me that is in no doubt is that he is guilty of murder. Whether you believe that he was firing at Reeva or you believe that he was firing at a supposed intruder, either way he knowingly shot four times at someone in an enclosed space with lethal bullets, giving them no chance to escape. He was not threatened by anyone and has no reasonable justification for taking this action other than an over active imagination, which isn't an acceptable excuse for killing someone. He did not warn whoever was in the toilet that he was armed nor did he choose any course of reasonable action to find out who was in there or alternatively to escape the threat. If he had tried to warn whoever he imagined was there (and she wasn't his intended target) then he would have known it was Reeva.
What really concerns me here if the verdict is not guilty, other than a murderer walking away scott free which would already be bad enough, is the wider implications of such a verdict. It would send out a message of shoot first, think later to other gun wielding individuals in SA and the world over.
We are only hearing about this case because of it's celebrity status, but if after all this OP is still not found guilty then why should any other individual in a similar situation be found guilty? What would stop them from citing the OP case as part as their defence and winning on that basis? Basically a not guilty verdict would mean if you can claim you thought it might be someone else that you shot and killed then you could literally get away with murder.
I don't think that is right any way you choose to look at it.
A very good post, raising some very pertinent points that seem to get glossed over a lot.
I agree that even if hypothetically an intruder was (for some reason known only to them), hiding in the toilet, nothing excuses his actions. Nothing.
If hypothetically this situation HAD happened, then OP is guilty still of firing 4 hollow point shots at very close range towards someone he has only imagined is there to threaten him.
Tony Martin should be watching with interest.
Is it much of a stretch to wonder if OP's celebrity and the fact he overcame adversity re his disability, may go some way to explaining some people's apparent empathy with him, and ease at accepting what is perhaps one of the most implausible defences/ excuses I have heard in a court of law.
1 - South Africa - a 1 in 3 chance of being murdered but 325 days off a year ;-).
2 - Roux and Nel are a right pair of charmers when they want a favour from M'lady, aren't they? Practically dulcet tones were used. I bet they both brought her in a Terry's Chocolate Orange today.
3 - When the emo lady assessor spoke up it made me wish they had asked more questions throughout the trial.
4 - So Oscar thinks Reeva had a wee after she opened the bathroom window. That was one super speedy wee. Are we meant to believe that as Oscar was walking towards that bathroom, shouting in terror at burglars and begging her to call the police, she was weeing away and not bothering to call the police.
5 - If Reeva had her phone why didn't she call the police like Oscar asked?
6 - What's more believable; Oscar hitting the toilet door with the cricket bat and screaming 'Lord, help me' or Reeva screaming 'Help me, help me' as Oscar scared the life out of her?
7 - Oscar said twice his allegations of tampering were based on the police photos, rather than his recollections. He also brought up Hilton Botha for the millionth time. He is obviously hoping experts and smearing the police will get him off on technicalities.
8 - I don't believe Oscar slept on the sofa side of the bed, so I don't believe the bloodstains above the headboard got there when he was retrieving his phones from the bedroom. I believe Reeva was sleeping on that side of the bed and the bloodstains got there when he was retrieving her phone, to plant it in the bathroom.
9 - So, heartbroken and devastated Oscar was in the kitchen as the police first arrived, totally beside himself ............. as he charged up his mobile phone . Seriously unbelievable! This guy is cold.
10 - The fact he is willing to state he is not to blame for Reeva's death is pretty disgusting and I'm glad her mother wasn't in court to hear it.
11 - Yes, Oscar, we know Reeva put a lot of effort into the relationship and thought all the time about your feelings (or she faced the consequences), but what did your Valentine's card to her say?
12 - Reeva went to that house on the verge of telling Oscar she loved him. Valentine's Day clearly was a big, big thing for her that year. She was going to use Valentine's Day to tell Oscar something huge, he hadn't even bothered to get her a card yet. If she found this out and/or he was unpleasant or dismissive or belittling that night, maybe the truth of their relationship finally hit home.
13 - I couldn't watch the trial live today and had to watch later via YouTube. The video was entitled 'Geologist testifies in Oscar Pistorius Trial'. 'Shit', I thought. 'They're going to try to claim a localised earthquake made him pull the trigger by accident.'
14 - If, as Dr Rocks testified, the bedroom was that dark, how did Oscar see to move the fans? How did he see Reeva's jeans? How did he find his gun? How did he fail to see Reeva's phone-light? Dr Rocks can see that the room is dark with the lights off, but he can't prove that the lights were off in the bedroom that night.
15 - The photo that seemed to show Reeva's jeans the right side out was one of the police 'after' photos, showing the scene after the police had moved things. The duvet had been unfolded by the photographer. Did the police fiddle with the jeans? Only the 'before' photo matters.
16 - The geologist's evidence is convincing me, even more, that Oscar was on his prostheses. Not only because of Dr Stipp's testimony, but because of Oscar's socks. I found it odd yesterday when Oscar said he put his socks on when he was rushing to put on his prostheses. It seemed an odd priority under the circumstances. Is this because he needed his socks to stop slipping (which seems counter-intuitive), or were his socks on because they had not gone to bed and his prostheses were still on throughout the entire thing?
17 - It's nice that now Bob Carolgees is getting on he has found a second career as Roux's IT assistant.
Perhaps (and I am not normally into second guessing) he took her Jeans when she wanted to leave, she then ran into the bathroom and found his shorts on the bathroom floor and grabbed them and put them on?
I'm not good at speculating either . There is a question mark over the jeans. I have no doubt about that. There is also a question mark over why she was wearing his clothes. I doubt these questions will ever be answered so we need to disregard them.
I haven't ever given it a thought as I saw it as an evidence cul-de-sac. Never really had much interest in the blood trail either as I didn't think it was ever going to prove anything
It proves, IMO, that Pistorius told a massive porky about the duvet being on the bed and refutes his claim that he didn't put it on the floor. Someone did!
Comments
Couldn't he have just run over it though? It's hardly an obstacle. What if he threw the duvet off the bed when he was 'searching' the bed for Steenkamp? But, if he did that, then why not testify to it...
the trail of the blood on the duvet and the carpet means that the duvet was in position prior to the shooting. This means there's no way the duvet could have been repositioned y the police. OP cannot claim this was police tampering-impossible!
Don't worry AJ... I would guess that the majority on here see you as an articulate, informative, poster.... you always give constructive arguments .... always respectful.. and that nice bit of humour at times.....
and as I posted the other day... I really do love your posts and I am sure most of this thread do too..... and I feel sure no one else has any issue with your posts...
Disregard it and keep posting!! ;-)
(I am just catching up on the thread so this was concerned with a few pages back!)
What sparked the shooting remained unclear, but police said they had received calls in the past about domestic altercations at the home of the 26-year-old athlete, who has spoken publicly about his love of firearms.
A police spokeswoman, Brigadier Denise Beukes, said the incidents included "allegations of a domestic nature."
"I'm not going to elaborate on it, but there have been incidents," Beukes said. She said Pistorius was home at the time of Steenkamp's death and "there is no other suspect involved."
Duvet on the floor also indicates she was out of bed
Edit: he wouldn't have wanted it placed there, in his version
I find the whole premeditated area a bit grey, a quick google resulted in, "In some states, premeditation may be construed as taking place mere seconds before the murder" albeit this is in the USA but it does highlight the perception of what premeditated could be viewed as. Am going to have to research further or ask a legal bod!
Unless the police dribbled a little bit of blood over it in order to incriminate.. ;-)
I was thinking the same....especially the blood splatter across the duvet and carpet....and I could't quite believe it when no evidence was brought forward to back up Nels claim about the fan position and cord length.....and I shook my head in disbelief when Nel and OP started arguing about wether the Hifi / DVD was switched on or not....ffs why had't someone tested the on/off switch before Nel brought this up in court....it gave the impression of amateurism......And the one thing which has bugged me throughout the whole trial is why was't a test done with volunteers of the same age as OP to ascertain what can and can't be seen in OP's blacked out bedroom after the eyes have become accommodated to the darkness.....because even at the age of 50 I can see a hell of a lot of detail in my blacked out bedroom....and that includes the person next to me
running over a bunched up duvet on his stumps is unlikely given his claimed instability...if he stumbled you'd think he'd have recalled doing so.
Let's hope they learn from it, as they have been made to look either incompetent or corrupt not only to South Africa, but to the whole world.
I feel it is more incompetence than corruption, although I couldn't be sure, particularly in the case of Botha.
I get the impression that there is not much investment in the police and if OP is anything to go by, being armed and taking the law into you own hands is preferred.
they had no idea what his version of events was at that stage!!!
Did they know what his defence was going to be at that point?
Why would he aim at the magazine rack? He didn't even cite this as the sound he heard at the time, only in hindsight. But if by that you mean he was aiming at the noise then I can only assume he was aiming at whoever caused that noise.
You may be right.
I do wonder, assuming his story is true, if that isn't one reason why he acted like he did. Steenkamp could've called the police, as he allegedly told her to, but who knows when they would've turned up. Perhaps Pistorius felt he had to deal with it himself. It was him or no-one. Over here (in the UK) you'd call the police and expect some response in a reasonable time. Maybe it's different over there.
I haven't ever given it a thought as I saw it as an evidence cul-de-sac. Never really had much interest in the blood trail either as I didn't think it was ever going to prove anything
I was being flippant, I apologise
Naughty.
A very good post, raising some very pertinent points that seem to get glossed over a lot.
I agree that even if hypothetically an intruder was (for some reason known only to them), hiding in the toilet, nothing excuses his actions. Nothing.
If hypothetically this situation HAD happened, then OP is guilty still of firing 4 hollow point shots at very close range towards someone he has only imagined is there to threaten him.
Tony Martin should be watching with interest.
Is it much of a stretch to wonder if OP's celebrity and the fact he overcame adversity re his disability, may go some way to explaining some people's apparent empathy with him, and ease at accepting what is perhaps one of the most implausible defences/ excuses I have heard in a court of law.
1 - South Africa - a 1 in 3 chance of being murdered but 325 days off a year ;-).
2 - Roux and Nel are a right pair of charmers when they want a favour from M'lady, aren't they? Practically dulcet tones were used. I bet they both brought her in a Terry's Chocolate Orange today.
3 - When the emo lady assessor spoke up it made me wish they had asked more questions throughout the trial.
4 - So Oscar thinks Reeva had a wee after she opened the bathroom window. That was one super speedy wee. Are we meant to believe that as Oscar was walking towards that bathroom, shouting in terror at burglars and begging her to call the police, she was weeing away and not bothering to call the police.
5 - If Reeva had her phone why didn't she call the police like Oscar asked?
6 - What's more believable; Oscar hitting the toilet door with the cricket bat and screaming 'Lord, help me' or Reeva screaming 'Help me, help me' as Oscar scared the life out of her?
7 - Oscar said twice his allegations of tampering were based on the police photos, rather than his recollections. He also brought up Hilton Botha for the millionth time. He is obviously hoping experts and smearing the police will get him off on technicalities.
8 - I don't believe Oscar slept on the sofa side of the bed, so I don't believe the bloodstains above the headboard got there when he was retrieving his phones from the bedroom. I believe Reeva was sleeping on that side of the bed and the bloodstains got there when he was retrieving her phone, to plant it in the bathroom.
9 - So, heartbroken and devastated Oscar was in the kitchen as the police first arrived, totally beside himself ............. as he charged up his mobile phone
10 - The fact he is willing to state he is not to blame for Reeva's death is pretty disgusting and I'm glad her mother wasn't in court to hear it.
11 - Yes, Oscar, we know Reeva put a lot of effort into the relationship and thought all the time about your feelings (or she faced the consequences), but what did your Valentine's card to her say?
12 - Reeva went to that house on the verge of telling Oscar she loved him. Valentine's Day clearly was a big, big thing for her that year. She was going to use Valentine's Day to tell Oscar something huge, he hadn't even bothered to get her a card yet. If she found this out and/or he was unpleasant or dismissive or belittling that night, maybe the truth of their relationship finally hit home.
13 - I couldn't watch the trial live today and had to watch later via YouTube. The video was entitled 'Geologist testifies in Oscar Pistorius Trial'. 'Shit', I thought. 'They're going to try to claim a localised earthquake made him pull the trigger by accident.'
14 - If, as Dr Rocks testified, the bedroom was that dark, how did Oscar see to move the fans? How did he see Reeva's jeans? How did he find his gun? How did he fail to see Reeva's phone-light? Dr Rocks can see that the room is dark with the lights off, but he can't prove that the lights were off in the bedroom that night.
15 - The photo that seemed to show Reeva's jeans the right side out was one of the police 'after' photos, showing the scene after the police had moved things. The duvet had been unfolded by the photographer. Did the police fiddle with the jeans? Only the 'before' photo matters.
16 - The geologist's evidence is convincing me, even more, that Oscar was on his prostheses. Not only because of Dr Stipp's testimony, but because of Oscar's socks. I found it odd yesterday when Oscar said he put his socks on when he was rushing to put on his prostheses. It seemed an odd priority under the circumstances. Is this because he needed his socks to stop slipping (which seems counter-intuitive), or were his socks on because they had not gone to bed and his prostheses were still on throughout the entire thing?
17 - It's nice that now Bob Carolgees is getting on he has found a second career as Roux's IT assistant.
I'm not good at speculating either . There is a question mark over the jeans. I have no doubt about that. There is also a question mark over why she was wearing his clothes. I doubt these questions will ever be answered so we need to disregard them.
LoooooooL!!
Funny and desperate
out of here
>>>>
It proves, IMO, that Pistorius told a massive porky about the duvet being on the bed and refutes his claim that he didn't put it on the floor. Someone did!