• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Oscar Pistorius shoots girlfriend - Part 2

Samson said:
Oscar has been denied leave to appeal his conviction finally, and may face 15 years, though who knows what Masipa can do. I would have thought discretion for her is gone.

The situation remains most unsatisfactory. If he knew he was shooting Reeva the sentence looks fair to on the light side.
But if he thought he was shooting an intruder, all we have is a deterrent sentence and two lives destroyed for the price of a mistake.
Click to expand...


The appeal court did not deal with whether the probabilities were that Oscar knew it was Reeva. That was not their job. Although if one watched the appeal, they were quite skeptical, and Oscar's lawyer knew they would lose.

Ask yourself these questions.

Given that Oscar is supposed to be a high strung nervous person about break-ins, why did he not wake when Reeva got up (in the dark?), dressed, and got here cell-phone?

Why did Oscar not put his hand out to warn Reeva that she should keep quiet while he went to investigate?

Why was the evidence regarding the state of Reeva's side of the bed ignored by the High Court judge?

He said he screamed like a girl. When a man screams in a high pitched voice of fear, he still cannot match the pitch of a woman doing the same thing. The opinions of the witnesses were ignored.

Comment: When a person has "accidentally shot an intruder" they have usually been startled by a sudden appearance of a person. Oscar pleaded startle reaction to a sound but the person was behind a closed door and he was more than awake.

Does anyone think OJ was innocent? Money buys good legal council to fabricate a story.

Oscar would have done better to confess, and plead temporary insanity due to a domestic dispute. He would have saved himself money, got some sympathy, and probably a lesser sentence. 15 years is too light because he will be out after 5 years. Even less if a minister gets involved. Lying miserable SOB. No, I am not biased - that is what I think because he is clearly guilty!
 
The Atheist said:
This is an interesting addition to the case:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11626623
Click to expand...


Thanks for that. I was in NZ and attended a sentencing hearing for a man who had stabbed his wife to death. The reason was the judge was to hear a case a friend was involved in, and I wanted to assess the judge.

The man called the police who met him at the door. He was bloody. He said his wife was dead in the living room and he thinks he stabbed her, but had no recollection. His finger prints were on the knife. Found guilty, the judge said that typically he should get 10-12 years.

But the wife's sister said she had been visiting him in jail, and had forgiven him completely. He expressed a lot of remorse. No priors. The years came down to 4 1/2, with 2 already served. As he walked out the sister went up to him and the relationship between them became clear. The sister was besotted with him.

As far as I am concerned, they plotted a way to get rid of the wife so they could pursue their affair. (And not have to split the marital assets). The Judge must have seen it too, but NZ jails are way too full. He could not care about justice.

The man and his wife made a living from selling porn in their adult shop, just so you can judge what kind of characters one is dealing with. And they did drugs.
 
Samson said:
I can see him being a loose unit, but beating her on the back with a cricket bat looks far fetched.
Click to expand...

Why?

He was known to have an extreme temper.

He was known to have violent proclivities.

Men are known to beat their wives/girlfriends/etc.

Why would it be far-fetched to have a bloke beating up a chick? Especially given the rumours of another bloke - which is more than enough for some specimens of the male persuasion.
 
I don't consider it far fetched but I am a little suspicious about this being introduced so late in the trial process.
 
Were they looking hard at the time?

Chick blown to pieces by soft-nosed bullets, how hard do you look for bruises?
 
The Atheist said:
Were they looking hard at the time?

Chick blown to pieces by soft-nosed bullets, how hard do you look for bruises?
Click to expand...


I seem to remember the testimony about the bruising, so I looked it up.

These two articles are interesting. There are serious weaknesses in SA's current police-work. {{Aside - A friend's factory was burgled. The finger-print expert was so useless he could not even find a print on a item I deliberately handled. He could not find a fingerprint anywhere. I think he was using copier toner powder.}}

Of course, conjecture to sell a book could be the motive for the speculation.

They rightly point out that the judge did not visit the house to see how close it was to the voice-identification witnesses.

http://www.sabc.co.za/news/a/b7b061...ned-bruising-on-her-back,-buttocks-and-breast
Model and law graduate Reeva Steenkamp sustained bruising to her back, buttocks and breast, the High Court in Pretoria heard on Monday.

Pathologist Gert Saayman said Steenkamp had two scratches on her back. This could have been caused by a blunt object or shrapnel.

Her right buttock was bluish in colour.

Saayman said this could have stemmed from the injury that Steenkamp had sustained on her right hip, where a bullet had penetrated.
Click to expand...
http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...ts-bat-might-have-been-a-weapon/#.VxnqOzFkngA
The Molletts have just published their third book, Oscar vs The Truth (Piquet Publishers) and have drawn several shocking conclusions in relation to Reeva’s murder, including that two oval abrasions that were found on her back appeared to match the corner of the Lazer bat Pistorius said he had used to bash down the door after shooting.

This would suggest, say the brothers, that Reeva sustained this injury, as well as other bruises on her body that were overlooked or unexplained in the pathologist’s report and testimony, during a heated, life-and-death struggle that took place in Pistorius’s house before Reeva sought refuge from a raging Pistorius by locking herself in the bathroom.
Click to expand...
 
The Atheist said:
Were they looking hard at the time?

Chick blown to pieces by soft-nosed bullets, how hard do you look for bruises?
Click to expand...

Actually you should. . . .I have been listening to Real Crime Profiles and one of the hosts is Laura Richards - Formerly of New Scotland Yards and a domestic abuse specialist. She would certainly argue that one should get such evidence.

I was willing to entertain the argument that he did not know whom was in the bathroom but I was doubtful. Assuming that she had bruising, that absolutely slams that door and it is the equivalent of first degree murder.
 
Desert Fox said:
Actually you should. . . .I have been listening to Real Crime Profiles and one of the hosts is Laura Richards - Formerly of New Scotland Yards and a domestic abuse specialist. She would certainly argue that one should get such evidence.

I was willing to entertain the argument that he did not know whom was in the bathroom but I was doubtful. Assuming that she had bruising, that absolutely slams that door and it is the equivalent of first degree murder.
Click to expand...
Except the prosecution said those bruises were consistent with falling after being shot, and of course Oscar carried her here and there in a panic, any such handling possibly resulting in bruising from adrenaline fueled urgency.
 
At trial the prosecution actually argued the back bruises came from a shot that missed her, struck a wall of the cubicle and that the fragments then struck Reeva Steenkamp in the back causing the bruising. The defense contended the bruises were caused by Steenkamp falling into a magazine rack after she was struck by the first shot (which broke her right hipbone).

In highly aggressive exchanges, Pistorius’s defence counsel Barry Roux repeatedly suggested wounds on Ms Steenkamp’s back came from the magazine rack, not from secondary bullet fragments, and that their own expert analysis will show that. Captain Mangena, a respected ballistics expert with 20 years experience, stated more than ten times, that “I disagree.” news link
Click to expand...
 
Clearly the case can turn on this evidence. I would like to see the magazine rack, and other objects that would deliver those bruises in a fall. I reject the notion it was a bat to the back. I think employing the bat twice for different parts of the theory is far fetched. The rubber on the handle could easily be torn without needing a struggle. I think we need to keep searching for some data point that is unambiguous, so far it is conjecture. If his story is true a correct account can be written. This is always the way, as in David Bain, and so on. The truth is like dominos toppling, one end to the other.
 
Just bumping this to point out that the sentencing hearing starts today, and could last about a week. There is no appeal possible.

BBC
 
Mitigation could reduce it, plus of course, time-served. I'll take a stab at 12 years, less time served, which means say 10 years.......out in about 5. I don't know whether murderers get the option of serving some of the sentence at home. All in all, that looks a bit lenient to me.
 
Last edited:
Let us hope fiction never obscures the facts. A scared man in obsessivly defending his paramour tragically kills her.
Pistorious is innocent of the charge.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
Let us hope fiction never obscures the facts. A scared man in obsessivly defending his paramour tragically kills her.
Pistorious is innocent of the charge.
Click to expand...

Provably incorrect.

Come on, do a Fonzie. You are wrong. Admit it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom