No, I think it's possible. I don't believe he killed her when he said, but around 3.17, so there is a possibility that he was horrified and actually panicking at what he had done and clumsily tried to help.
I tend to think that he DID however, know she was dead, although recently dead, and hammed it up.
I found his accusatory tone at Dr Stipp deeply unpleasant. As if she could have been saved - when I think OP knew there wasn't a hope in hell, and that she was dead already. I think this suggests to me that his is TRYING to promote this idea that he 'was trying to save Reeva', and that in itself leads me to think it's part of a 'story', rather than the truth.
It's been spoken today about Oscar's slip of the tongue and I thought I'd add one that I think I noticed.
Oscar was describing what he did with his gun before he went to bed. He said words to the effect ....
"I put my gun on the table ummm I mean under the bed and ...."
It seemed like he realised what he said and corrected himself very quickly.
I think this was on the first day when he was going through his testimony with Roux or maybe first day with Nel. I won't say I'm definite about this but quite sure.
Anyway this isn't as big as the one highlighted earlier. Which might confirm what I've always thought that the thing that sent him over the edge to pulling the trigger was Reeva threatening to call the Police.
Thank you for your sensible post.
This only started because I mentioned that Dr Stipp's evidence had been, in part, helpful to OP. i.e. he testified that OP seemed genuine to him in his emotions and his desperation for Reeva to be saved.
That poster immediately launched into a diatribe about how wrong Dr Stipp was, yet refuted the idea that Dr Stipp had been mistaken in his perception. Madness.
crikey ,,,,,,,,,he's just shot his girlfriend after going AWOL on her.because she threatened to call the police on him.........she's dead , ,,he's in an absolute frenzy,,,,,,,,,,he wants her to live, even if it's impossible and he knows she's dead, he wants desperately for her not to be dead, I believe he was distraught as he knew he'd be up for murder and wouldn't be able to explain what he'd done, it must have crossed his mind the trouble he was now in , if she died - I believe Stipp that he was distraught as he was in fear for HIMSELF and what this would do to him, genuine emotions, consequences for him if she died.
She may be crying, but whenever I see pictures like that now we know he is standing there with a firearm under his coat. Tooled up and ready to shoot. Strange world
You'd wonder why it was that Dr Stipp kept going back inside periodically to check on her condition perhaps. And why it was that he described it as not changing much.
Thank you for your sensible post.
This only started because I mentioned that Dr Stipp's evidence had been, in part, helpful to OP. i.e. he testified that OP seemed genuine to him in his emotions and his desperation for Reeva to be saved.
That poster immediately launched into a diatribe about how wrong Dr Stipp was, yet refuted the idea that Dr Stipp had been mistaken in his perception. Madness.
She may be crying, but whenever I see pictures like that now we know he is standing there with a firearm under his coat. Tooled up and ready to shoot. Strange world
this is the photo i've been looking for, it's one that's been used a lot in the media, this is the very one where I think the relationship looks strained, especially in OP's face --
It's been spoken today about Oscar's slip of the tongue and I thought I'd add one that I think I noticed.
Oscar was describing what he did with his gun before he went to bed. He said words to the effect ....
"I put my gun on the table ummm I mean under the bed and ...."
It seemed like he realised what he said and corrected himself very quickly.
I think this was on the first day when he was going through his testimony with Roux or maybe first day with Nel. I won't say I'm definite about this but quite sure.
Anyway this isn't as big as the one highlighted earlier. Which might confirm what I've always thought that the thing that sent him over the edge to pulling the trigger was Reeva threatening to call the Police.
can't remember this bit, have you got a link and time on a VT for this ?
he did make a few mistakes as he called it, tripping up between his memory of what really happened and his fake version..........
crikey ,,,,,,,,,he's just shot his girlfriend after going AWOL on her.because she threatened to call the police on him.........she's dead , ,,he's in an absolute frenzy,,,,,,,,,,he wants her to live, even if it's impossible and he knows she's dead, he wants desperately for her not to be dead, I believe he was distraught as he knew he'd be up for murder and wouldn't be able to explain what he'd done, it must have crossed his mind the trouble he was now in , if she died - I believe Stipp that he was distraught as he was in fear for HIMSELF and what this would do to him, genuine emotions, consequences for him if she died.
You could be right. That wasn't really the point though. The only point originally was that, mistaken or not, Dr Stipp is on the record as having perceived OP to be genuine in his emotions and his desire for Reeva not to die.
It was a small and almost unimportant point, and has only grown to this because of a certain poster's obtuseness. Obtuseness that resulted in the absurd situation where he was arguing against his own argument but blaming everyone else for it.
Lessons in English would be helpful for you. Either that, or someone being as childishly objectionable in respect of each of your posts as you aim to be towards mine.
English is my fourth language… so I'm not ashamed of making mistakes or not living up to your oh so 'high' standards.
I would however pit my education, knowledge and experience against yours any day of the week, baby ! :cool:
Have you considered that your arguments might be 'childishly objectionable' to begin with and therefore illicit 'childishly objectionable' responses ? ^_^
You could be right. That wasn't really the point though. The only point originally was that, mistaken or not, Dr Stipp is on the record as having perceived OP to be genuine in his emotions and his desire for Reeva not to die.
It was a small and almost unimportant point, and has only grown to this because of a certain poster's obtuseness. Obtuseness that resulted in the absurd situation where he was arguing against his own argument but blaming everyone else for it.
As a figure of speech I believe that’s called an Oscarism
English is my fourth language… so I'm not ashamed of making mistakes or not living up to your oh so 'high' standards.
I would however pit my education, knowledge and experience against yours any day of the week, baby ! :cool:
Have you considered that your arguments might be 'childishly objectionable' to begin with and therefore illicit 'childishly objectionable' responses ? ^_^
can't remember this bit, have you got a link and time on a VT for this ?
he did make a few mistakes as he called it, tripping up between his memory of what really happened and his fake version..........
No sorry Sandy I can't remember the exact point he said it definitely near the beginning of him on the stand as he was going through the sequence of events of the night. I thought I'd put it on here in case anyone watches again they could maybe listen out for it.
1.19.05
Nel asks OP what he shouted
OP tells Nel that he screamed GET THE F OUT OF MY HOUSE
He's fairly controlled until that point, and then kind of cracks and shrieks - well.........watch the Sister's face when the camera pans on her, while OP is kind of flipping and goes to the extreme when he says GET THE XXXXX ...........no emotion, no change in expression from his sister, I think that's rather odd , she's watching her brother , listening to his account of that night, highly emotional stuff, but not her.......she showed no difference in her face before during or after OP shrieks !
a) The two sets of sounds could have been confused as guns and bats can sound the same.
But...don't you? The Stipps (even former army man Dr. Stipp) thought the two sounds were identical and sounded like gunshots. Surely then, it must be possible to confuse them.
b) Oscar may be able to scream like a woman and scream and shout in a way that sounds like a man and a woman, and the witnesses who heard both together may have been wrong, it was just OP shouting and screaming himself.
Well, this is the defense's case after all.
Full of holes mind, as has been pointed out by many.
And thats before you consider OPs other testimony.
Well as I said, we know one of the witnesses that night was wrong, and that she mistook Pistorius' voice for a woman's voice. And we only know that because her husband happened to know Pistorius, otherwise we'd now be talking about three couples who heard a woman's voice that night.
I think it raises the reasonable possibility others may have made the same mistake she did.
But...don't you? The Stipps (even former army man Dr. Stipp) thought the two sounds were identical and sounded like gunshots. Surely then, it must be possible to confuse them.
Well as I said, we know one of the witnesses that night was wrong, and that she mistook Pistorius' voice for a woman's voice. And we only know that because her husband happened to know Pistorius, otherwise we'd now be talking about three couples who heard a woman's voice that night.
I think it raises the reasonable possibility others may have made the same mistake she did.
As others have said, Geelong, I think it's NOT likely that the gunshots would be mistaken by anyone further away than the Stipps. Gun shots only sound like bat strikes in particular circumstances, not all as they are different, and one much louder than the other.
One woman was wrong at the very end of the event and her husband put her right, as HE could tell the difference.
The weight of the witness testimony is very much that it was a WOMAN screaming, not a man.
I don't think this detail throws the others into the doubt you think it may.
And I don't think it's 'possible' really, except in the 'barest possible' sort of way that pretty much anything is, that the screams were all from Oscar, the arguing heard with two voices, was Oscar, and nor that he didn't or couldn't hear her scream.
I don't think the possiblity is reasonable, especially with the surrounding evidence.
Even if I were to agree with your arguments, which I don't, it is still irrelevant IMO because the Court will have to come to a decision in deliberations and the following points remain immutable (no matter the possibility of other things being possible) :
- Regardless of any recordings or expert testimony provided by the Defence, the Court will never be able to hear what RS sounded like when she screamed.
- The court will never have the opportunity of testing those recordings on the 5 witnesses because the Defence CHOSE not to have them hear it.
- OP has already stated that he cannot reproduce the 2 distinct voices because he never felt so terrorized in his life… not being able to reproduce the emotions he felt, he is unable to reproduce the screams.
- The Court has no alternative but to accept the testimony of the 5 witnesses who say they heard 2 people scream as reliable…. plus those testimonies are aligned with the circumstances and add weight to the reasonable inference that RS screamed.
- To go the way of the Defence, would mean deeming the 5 witnesses unreliable, ignoring the circumstances and believing OP's unreproducible, untested, uncorroborated and unlikely ability to scream alternatively with 2 distinct voices !
Well, I disagree. To me it's about reasonable possibility, and those aspects which corroborate Pistorius' account - two sets of bangs, a man shouting for help, and a witness who mistook his voice for a woman's - create the reasonable possibility the witnesses may have been mistaken. I think it's all the more important to be cautious in assessing their testimonies when we know they were aware of the details of the shooting - and in some cases, convinced of Pistorius' guilt - before they first gave their accounts to the police.
Well if my posts are giving the impression of my absolute certainty then I am not expressing myself clearly enough. I try to offer/explore/ask about other possible alternative reasonable interpretations, in order to really test the 'beyond reasonable doubt' requirement if he is to be found guilty of all charges. I am not certain about whether he is guilty of premeditated murder or not- but have yet to be convinced by the prosecution's case/evidence.
Based on what I've heard/seen, at the moment I don't believe his reactions in the aftermath of the shooting was play acting, but I wouldn't consider my viewpoint fixed and unchanging on any of it.
But...don't you? The Stipps (even former army man Dr. Stipp) thought the two sounds were identical and sounded like gunshots. Surely then, it must be possible to confuse them.
Well as I said, we know one of the witnesses that night was wrong, and that she mistook Pistorius' voice for a woman's voice. And we only know that because her husband happened to know Pistorius, otherwise we'd now be talking about three couples who heard a woman's voice that night.
I think it raises the reasonable possibility others may have made the same mistake she did.
Well the woman's screaming or man's sceaming theory is all well and good, BUT OP's testimony of the times he said he 'screamed' wipes the above out , because it all sounded so very contrived when he described why he screamed and the points that he did, and when at the most likely times a when it would have been 'reasonable' for him to have screamed .......... he didn't and he never said he screamed continuously as described by the witnesses who obviously heard 'Reeva' and definitely NOT OP !!
And don't forget , his 'slip ups' during his testimony, ,,,,,,,,,, so he shot her, as she was going to call the police on him..........there is your MOTIVE.
NO - it's more than that, listen again............
WOW
no idea how I missed this this previously.., it's subtle but it's there.....
Nel : "Why would you scream , why would you... screaming out ?" OP : "I was scared, I wanted to ask Reeva why she was phoning the police ! "
:o:o:o:o
SO---- Reeva must have threatened to call the police when OP was losing it........so he shot her !!
that's what really happened !
that's it.
OP slipped up.......lost concentration........and said what really happened in error..,... then he switched back to telling the lie of his 'story'----:o
I missed that originally, - and sorry if bit slow picking up on this, but just heard it and seen the link ---- Nel should have interjected at that bit, and said "what did you just say ?" but he missed it.
Well, I disagree. To me it's about reasonable possibility, and those aspects which corroborate Pistorius' account - two sets of bangs, a man shouting for help, and a witness who mistook his voice for a woman's - create the reasonable possibility the witnesses may have been mistaken. I think it's all the more important to be cautious in assessing their testimonies when we know they were aware of the details of the shooting - and in some cases, convinced of Pistorius' guilt - before they first gave their accounts to the police.
Have you considered the reasonableness of the possibility that OP is lying to avoid spending his life in jail ?
How reasonable would it be that the accused is lying to save his arse and that the witnesses are telling the truth ?
In any case, your opinion is your own and you are very much entitled to it.
Well if my posts are giving the impression of my absolute certainty then I am not expressing myself clearly enough. I try to offer/explore/ask about other possible alternative reasonable interpretations, in order to really test the 'beyond reasonable doubt' requirement if he is to be found guilty of all charges. I am not certain about whether he is guilty of premeditated murder or not- but have yet to be convinced by the prosecution's case/evidence.
Based on what I've heard/seen, at the moment I don't believe his reactions in the aftermath of the shooting was play acting, but I wouldn't consider my viewpoint fixed and unchanging on any of it.
I appreciate your position and respect it.
I am willing to explore any reasonable possible alternative and I have done so… and will continue to do so… but as of the adjournment, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that OP knew that he was shooting at RS.
Comments
No you didn't! I understand what you're saying:)
Oscar was describing what he did with his gun before he went to bed. He said words to the effect ....
"I put my gun on the table ummm I mean under the bed and ...."
It seemed like he realised what he said and corrected himself very quickly.
I think this was on the first day when he was going through his testimony with Roux or maybe first day with Nel. I won't say I'm definite about this but quite sure.
Anyway this isn't as big as the one highlighted earlier. Which might confirm what I've always thought that the thing that sent him over the edge to pulling the trigger was Reeva threatening to call the Police.
She may be crying, but whenever I see pictures like that now we know he is standing there with a firearm under his coat. Tooled up and ready to shoot. Strange world
This was a rather provocative post I thought.
And this disingenuous.
We've been here before.
http://cdn.urbanislandz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Oscar-Pistorius-and-Reeva-Steenkamp.jpg
this is the photo i've been looking for, it's one that's been used a lot in the media, this is the very one where I think the relationship looks strained, especially in OP's face --
can't remember this bit, have you got a link and time on a VT for this ?
he did make a few mistakes as he called it, tripping up between his memory of what really happened and his fake version..........
You could be right. That wasn't really the point though. The only point originally was that, mistaken or not, Dr Stipp is on the record as having perceived OP to be genuine in his emotions and his desire for Reeva not to die.
It was a small and almost unimportant point, and has only grown to this because of a certain poster's obtuseness. Obtuseness that resulted in the absurd situation where he was arguing against his own argument but blaming everyone else for it.
I would however pit my education, knowledge and experience against yours any day of the week, baby ! :cool:
Have you considered that your arguments might be 'childishly objectionable' to begin with and therefore illicit 'childishly objectionable' responses ? ^_^
My No. 1 fan.
As a figure of speech I believe that’s called an Oscarism
No. That would be absurd in the circumstances.
It is indeed now.
No sorry Sandy I can't remember the exact point he said it definitely near the beginning of him on the stand as he was going through the sequence of events of the night. I thought I'd put it on here in case anyone watches again they could maybe listen out for it.
Sorry I don't see any of that…. just said it could be a tear in her right eye
Could be tears of joy, a bit of mascara in her eye, the dry weather, the blinding flashes…who knows ?
Nope, just inferring from your posts
Nel asks OP what he shouted
OP tells Nel that he screamed GET THE F OUT OF MY HOUSE
He's fairly controlled until that point, and then kind of cracks and shrieks - well.........watch the Sister's face when the camera pans on her, while OP is kind of flipping and goes to the extreme when he says GET THE XXXXX ...........no emotion, no change in expression from his sister, I think that's rather odd , she's watching her brother , listening to his account of that night, highly emotional stuff, but not her.......she showed no difference in her face before during or after OP shrieks !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxZYtDsMhIE
Naturally ^_^
Well as I said, we know one of the witnesses that night was wrong, and that she mistook Pistorius' voice for a woman's voice. And we only know that because her husband happened to know Pistorius, otherwise we'd now be talking about three couples who heard a woman's voice that night.
I think it raises the reasonable possibility others may have made the same mistake she did.
As others have said, Geelong, I think it's NOT likely that the gunshots would be mistaken by anyone further away than the Stipps. Gun shots only sound like bat strikes in particular circumstances, not all as they are different, and one much louder than the other.
One woman was wrong at the very end of the event and her husband put her right, as HE could tell the difference.
The weight of the witness testimony is very much that it was a WOMAN screaming, not a man.
I don't think this detail throws the others into the doubt you think it may.
And I don't think it's 'possible' really, except in the 'barest possible' sort of way that pretty much anything is, that the screams were all from Oscar, the arguing heard with two voices, was Oscar, and nor that he didn't or couldn't hear her scream.
I don't think the possiblity is reasonable, especially with the surrounding evidence.
Well, I disagree. To me it's about reasonable possibility, and those aspects which corroborate Pistorius' account - two sets of bangs, a man shouting for help, and a witness who mistook his voice for a woman's - create the reasonable possibility the witnesses may have been mistaken. I think it's all the more important to be cautious in assessing their testimonies when we know they were aware of the details of the shooting - and in some cases, convinced of Pistorius' guilt - before they first gave their accounts to the police.
Based on what I've heard/seen, at the moment I don't believe his reactions in the aftermath of the shooting was play acting, but I wouldn't consider my viewpoint fixed and unchanging on any of it.
And don't forget , his 'slip ups' during his testimony, ,,,,,,,,,, so he shot her, as she was going to call the police on him..........there is your MOTIVE.
See link below
Have you considered the reasonableness of the possibility that OP is lying to avoid spending his life in jail ?
How reasonable would it be that the accused is lying to save his arse and that the witnesses are telling the truth ?
In any case, your opinion is your own and you are very much entitled to it.
I appreciate your position and respect it.
I am willing to explore any reasonable possible alternative and I have done so… and will continue to do so… but as of the adjournment, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that OP knew that he was shooting at RS.