Oscar Pistorius thread

Captain Planet said:
No it doesn't. If it's a mistake then it means he unintentionally killed her, which is manslaughter.
Click to expand...

The problem is, how can firing four shots at someone, be seen as anything other than an attempt to kill them? Especially as he had experience and training in using firearms. He knew exactly how they worked, and knew exactly what damage those black talon rounds could do to a person, yet he willingly fired FOUR of them directly at a person.

It is absurd. Of course he had intent to kill.
 
OldCoals said:
My mistake, ordering the wrong part.

His mistake, a dead woman.

Calling what he did a mistake dishonours the memory of his victim.
Click to expand...

Just watching the documentary on bbc3 now. Her own mother has just said she forgives him, he made a mistake, but he needs to take responsibility for his mistake. Seems her own mother dishonours her by your logic.
 
Captain Planet said:
Just watching the documentary on bbc3 now. Her own mother has just said she forgives him, he made a mistake, but he needs to take responsibility for his mistake. Seems her own mother dishonours her by your logic.
Click to expand...

but does she believe he made a mistake in killing her as opposed to killing an intruder or does she believe he made a mistake in killing anyone...

Intent to kill her was not necessarily going to stick... but the idea he wasn't trying to kill the person behind the door when he fired into it several times is pretty dubious, he didn't make a 'mistake' in that respect... he was quite clearly aware, as almost anyone should be, that he was very likely to kill a person through his actions
 
Captain Planet said:
Of course, but he wasn't on trial for murdering just anyone. He was on trial for the murder of his GF, which he has been deemed not guilty of.
Click to expand...

actually he could have been found guilty as a result of the former - they didn't necessarily have to prove he intended to murder her specifically for a murder charge to stick
 
Captain Planet said:
Of course, but he wasn't on trial for murdering just anyone. He was on trial for the murder of his GF, which he has been deemed not guilty of.
Click to expand...

But he still could have been found guilty of second degree murder. You think that if you set out to kill person A but accidentally kill person B instead (through mistaken identity), that you would get away with murder?
 
As if you would start shooting at someone through a door without saying something first...

Wake up early hours of the morning, oh where is my bird? who was with me earlier, oh no I hear someone in the bathroom, must be an intruder, but I won't say anything, and start shooting, on valentines day.

The guy is a head case, his ex bird said he had violent mood swings as well.

should have been done for murder, bang him up for life the goon.
 
The only surprising sentence to me would be actual jail time.

Some expert on now harping on about how he has represented SA in the Olympics blah blah blah, first offender blah blah.
 
Last edited:
Hahaha, Nel absolutely destroying this joke of a witness :)

This is actually pretty sickening, the defense appears to revolve around how much of a nice guy he is, and how much work he's done for charity etc etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom