Oscar Pistorius thread

zenf1 said:
I'd be surprised if he's found not guilty and apologies if this point has already been made, but I just don't see how it could ever be reasonable to hear noise in your bathroom and open fire on the assumption it's a burglar, even in SA. Maybe if you heard noises downstairs of someone sneaking around, going through valuables etc you might make that assumption, but in a bathroom with the door closed? Why would a burglar trap himself like that? It seems like a very strange assumption to me but I'm sure there are other aspects I'm not aware of.
Click to expand...

Why do people keep focusing on doors, locked doors and bathrooms.

1/ burglar breaks in, thinks house is empty or people are asleep, hears Oscar get up and goes into nearest room and shuts door hoping to hide.
2/ burglar breaks in through bathroom window, people keep their bathroom doors shut, he's on the other side.
3/ burglar comes in the extreme dark is going into one room at a time and shutting the door behind him so poking around drawers and things make less noise.... shutting yourself in the bathroom requires knowing its the bathroom first, someone who hasn't been in the house before going room by room won't know its the bathroom till they are in there.

I'm not saying what he's guilty of, or if he meant to kill her, just some of the absolute lack of reasoning is astonishing. People can't think of a single reason for an intruder to be in a room with a closed door.... therefore he's guilty of murder, I mean really?
 
Gilly said:
Innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

Well I thought it was just a decision between whether he killed someone through intent, stupidity or fear. Sorry, I didn't realise there was another option, that he didn't have anything to do with taking a young woman's life.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Why do people keep focusing on doors, locked doors and bathrooms.

1/ burglar breaks in, thinks house is empty or people are asleep, hears Oscar get up and goes into nearest room and shuts door hoping to hide.
2/ burglar breaks in through bathroom window, people keep their bathroom doors shut, he's on the other side.
3/ burglar comes in the extreme dark is going into one room at a time and shutting the door behind him so poking around drawers and things make less noise.... shutting yourself in the bathroom requires knowing its the bathroom first, someone who hasn't been in the house before going room by room won't know its the bathroom till they are in there.

I'm not saying what he's guilty of, or if he meant to kill her, just some of the absolute lack of reasoning is astonishing. People can't think of a single reason for an intruder to be in a room with a closed door.... therefore he's guilty of murder, I mean really?
Click to expand...

I can't imagine many burglars go into people's houses without a torch or some kind of light... Wandering around in pitch black in the hope you stumble across something worth stealing doesn't seem very effective or likely, so I doubt point 1 or 3 are very likely. And it was my understanding that it was an ensuite bathroom, so it's unlikely to be on the ground floor and therefore unlikely that the burglar would've gained access through the window of the ensuite bathroom.

And you may want to read my post again. I never said he was guilty of murder, but the reasoning he's given for shooting her seems pretty unlikely to me.
 
Spit said:
Sorry, your right. The poor bloke, maybe a few massages as well to help soothe his soul.
Click to expand...

No need for sarcasm.
I'm just being realistic.

Put yourself in his situation and its quite clear that doing nothing is only going to drive you crazy, with what you did and whether you are going to prison. As an athlete, its also his job, he doesn't really have anything else to be doing, especially with all his promotional contracts suspended.
 
Nexus said:
No need for sarcasm.
I'm just being realistic.

Put yourself in his situation and its quite clear that doing nothing is only going to drive you crazy, with what you did and whether you are going to prison. As an athlete, its also his job, he doesn't really have anything else to be doing, especially with all his promotional contracts suspended.
Click to expand...

Its the lack of thought for Reeva and her family that riles me the most. Its all about poor Oscar. Whether he intended to kill her or not, he was responsible and all we are trying to work out his how long he should spend in jail.
 
Of course, but if he is granted bail today, then going back to his training his a genuine call, as the trial, of which he is of course guilty of her death, won't be until later in the year.
 
zenf said:
I can't imagine many burglars go into people's houses without a torch or some kind of light... Wandering around in pitch black in the hope you stumble across something worth stealing doesn't seem very effective or likely, so I doubt point 1 or 3 are very likely. And it was my understanding that it was an ensuite bathroom, so it's unlikely to be on the ground floor and therefore unlikely that the burglar would've gained access through the window of the ensuite bathroom.

And you may want to read my post again. I never said he was guilty of murder, but the reasoning he's given for shooting her seems pretty unlikely to me.
Click to expand...

I don't need to read your post again, read mine, I was generalising across multiple people in the thread also, again if you hear someone and want to hide in the nearest place, don't you think if you had a torch, leaving it on would be a dead give away... its ever more likely that someone who dived inside the nearest room to hide would also turn out any light or any torch to not give themselves away.

Point 3, burglars don't gain access through non ground floor windows, thats a new one. More people leave windows open upstairs because they think the same way, and burglars will go through an open window over a closed door. From what I recall they've also stated there were ladders outside the window, making it again more likely to gain access through there than anywhere else.

There are multiple reasons for an intruder to end up in just about any room in a house with the door shut and the lights off. I just find it funny there are so many people in this thread who suggest its almost impossible for an intruder to end up in the bathroom with a door shut, when I can think of loads, not least it being the most likely entry point. The toilet of course being the window most likely to be open in every house :p
 
Spit said:
Well I thought it was just a decision between whether he killed someone through intent, stupidity or fear. Sorry, I didn't realise there was another option, that he didn't have anything to do with taking a young woman's life.
Click to expand...

He's charged with killing someone with intent though.

In that charge he's innocent until proven guilty.

His defence has already admitted he's guilty of culpable homicide, although that may be dropped for humanitarian reasons - or he may go to prison.

Been some interesting stuff on the stress on the prison system in SA.

Personally, I expect he will get bail. The judge, has, I believed, made it quite clear he doesn't believe Oscar is a flight risk (he joked with the prosecution about his disability making it hard). I also don't think their comparison (Julian Assange) is as well known internationally as pistorious, nor have the same disability barriers to flight (Yes this is relevant, and in this case, you have to be aware that his disability does have an effect on his potential flight risk).

Furthermore, they've yet to disprove Oscar's defence. That's the bottom line at the moment.

kd
 
drunkenmaster said:
I don't need to read your post again, read mine, I was generalising across multiple people in the thread also, again if you hear someone and want to hide in the nearest place, don't you think if you had a torch, leaving it on would be a dead give away... its ever more likely that someone who dived inside the nearest room to hide would also turn out any light or any torch to not give themselves away.
Click to expand...

Well if it wasn't directed at me, it wasn't exactly clear considering it was a response to my post. And my point about the torch was that if he could see his surroundings, he'd be unlikely to end up in an ensuite bathroom as there would be no escape and it's unlikely there would be anything worth stealing in there.

drunkenmaster said:
Point 3, burglars don't gain access through non ground floor windows, thats a new one. More people leave windows open upstairs because they think the same way, and burglars will go through an open window over a closed door. From what I recall they've also stated there were ladders outside the window, making it again more likely to gain access through there than anywhere else.
Click to expand...

I never said they don't gain access through non-ground floor windows, just that it seems less likely. Generally, people don't leave windows open that have ladders right outside them... It's generally more difficult to enter a building if you're not on the ground floor.

drunkenmaster said:
There are multiple reasons for an intruder to end up in just about any room in a house with the door shut and the lights off. I just find it funny there are so many people in this thread who suggest its almost impossible for an intruder to end up in the bathroom with a door shut, when I can think of loads, not least it being the most likely entry point. The toilet of course being the window most likely to be open in every house :p
Click to expand...

Of course there are and I'm not discounting them but on the balance of probabilities, given the fact he knew his girlfriend was in the house, hearing a noise in the bathroom shouldn't cause a reasonable person to open fire.
 
Gilly said:
Innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

I think its pretty certain hes guilty, just have to figure out whether he did it pre-meditated or not.

Tbh this whole thing is a farce, the SA justice system has a lot to answer for. They are now in their 4th day of whether to grant Oscar bail or not:confused:, i just dont understand how unbelievably stupid the police, especially the original investigator has been. I mean surely the prosecution should have realised that Botha himself was under charges of murder himself. Pathetic but hilarious at the same time.

I wouldnt at all be surprised if they let him go as the prosecution team really have messed this up big time. I feel sorry for Reeva's family, who have to live with the fact that the person who killed their daughter could possibly walk free. Reminds me of that Shrien Dewan killing a few yrs ago in SA, to this day they cant get that scumbag back to SA to face murder charges.
 
Spit said:
Its the lack of thought for Reeva and her family that riles me the most. Its all about poor Oscar. Whether he intended to kill her or not, he was responsible and all we are trying to work out his how long he should spend in jail.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you expecting to happen? Everyone knows it is a tragedy but the focus right now is to try and find out what happened, so of course that means it will be all about him and some of the "facts" that seem to be chucked about here with seemingly reckless abandon. When someone takes exception to those "facts", that doesn't automatically mean they're siding with OP and don't care what happened to her. As Gilly says, innocent until proven guilty, the trial right now is to get to the bottom of this horrible tragedy and of course it will centre around him because he is the one that took her life. I can understand how some might not understand his situation at all (live in SA for a while and you soon will) but just because there is that lack of understanding doesn't immediately mean you have to start calling him a cold-blooded killer. People get burgled / hijacked / mugged / attacked all the time in SA, it is a part of daily life. From an early age your default behaviour is to always look out for yourself and your loved ones every minute of the day.

And just to clarify, it isn't for anyone here to work out how long he should spend in jail. That's the whole purpose of the trial. If some here had their way he'd be sentenced to death already. Great society we live in these days.
 
Last edited:
CHokKA said:
What exactly are you expecting to happen? Everyone knows it is a tragedy but the focus right now is to try and find out what happened, so of course that means it will be all about him and some of the "facts" that seem to be chucked about here with seemingly reckless abandon. When someone takes exception to those "facts", that doesn't automatically mean they're siding with OP and don't care what happened to her. As Gilly says, innocent until proven guilty, the trial right now is to get to the bottom of this horribly tragedy and of course it will centre around him because he is the one that took her life. I can understand how some might not understand his situation at all (live in SA for a while and you soon will) but just because there is that lack of understanding doesn't immediately mean you have to start calling him a cold-blooded killer. People get burgled / hijacked / mugged / attacked all the time in SA, it is a part of daily life. From an early age your default behaviour is to always look out for yourself and your loved ones every minute of the day.

And just to clarify, it isn't for anyone here to work out how long he should spend in jail. That's the whole purpose of the trial. If some here had their way he'd be sentenced to death already. Great society we live in these days.
Click to expand...

The trial has not even started. We are just waiting to find out whether he will have his freedom until the trial starts. I for one think he should not. There is no dispute whether he took a young woman's life just the events surrounding it. Either way he was responsible so I do not think he should be back training next week.
 
If someone breaks into your house they dont lock themselves in your bathroom, nor do you get up to investigate without checking for your wife first.

Or you shout "get out of my bathroom" and your wife shouts "**** off you bully" and you put your gun away realising its not a nasty burglar man.

If you shoot once and hear a woman screaming or breathing her last breaths you dont pop another few rounds in to make sure.
 
I'm all for the whole innocent until proven guilty thing, however, in this instance pre-meditation is seemingly extremely difficult to prove. It's possible he just snapped and killed her in a fit of rage, but he and his defence team have spun a story that is difficult to disprove.

I personally think his story is just too ridiculous and inconsistent to be true. Several of the things he claimed are extremely unlikely and while that doesn't prove his guilt, a manslaughter verdict (or similar) would just be a joke.

The South African justice system just appears to be a total joke as well, they're making it up as they go along. I bet the conviction rate is woeful.
 
He is guilty of murder whichever way you look at it, whether it's accidental or intentional it's still murder and he could have done so many things that night which would have prevented her death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom