General Discussion Thread #2

[otyikondo]

This is my first post on this case. I have read most of the 38 pages on this thread, but none on the other thread so I apologise if this has already been mentioned. I have been following this greatly, including most of the tweets from journalists in the courtroom during the bail hearing.

If OP heard sounds coming from the bathroom (he couldn't possibly have known it was the toilet at this stage), got his gun and went into the bathroom, how did he know to aim at the toilet room and not the shower? The reconstructions of the bathroom I have seen show a separate toilet and a separate shower, within the bathroom. The shower room is partially hidden from view. How did OP know the 'intruder' was in the toilet and not in the shower room hiding? No shots were aimed at all at the shower.

I'm just throwing this out there.

Fair point, but I think (it's only a "think") the shower had a glass door...

and therefore he'd have seen a shadow behind - (or NOT, since it was allegedly pitch dark... hang on, hang on... you might have the germ of something here...

Will have to think about this. Interesting point!

 

[Waddles]

I don't believe for one second any of the rumours about him using the bat to hit her on the head. Whether he is guilty or telling the truth.
MOO

 

[Estelle]

Sorry about the snip, but I'd say the MAIN reason why I'm having problems with this story comes down to the source.

Now, even allowing for bias (and there IS bias, I'm sure) in the other direction, please read this and you'll see where I'm coming from.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

The Daily Mail is basically a watchword for the worst of UK scare journalism. It just about keeps its nose above the gutter of The Sun and The Star, but fundamentally it is trading in the same muck.

I might just as well ask you, to turn this whole thing on its head, why you are so convinced based on this one source...

Have you read this same stuff from respected broadsheet papers, from serious South African newspapers, from senior broadcasters? Or is the seat of the fire the Daily Mail? What exactly do you KNOW about the Daily Mail that makes you want to believe its every word?

Sure, a broken clock can be right twice a day, and they may have got the skinny on this one, but their track record in the past is ...well.. not great.

Estelle, don't get me wrong. I'm pretty sure the guy's as guilty as sin. Either that or he's a dangerous paranoid moron, who probably ought to be locked up for his own good. But I don't buy one-off tabloid journalism without a L I T T L E bit of healthy scepticism.

I can understand your point of view in being sceptical about the "Daily Mail" but I have seen several reports that her family have been informed about the fractured skull and even seen photos of it. The word "Autopsy" report was not used for a reason and that is because it was a secret then as they wanted OP to account for his actions first to see how he fitted the bloody cricket bat into his version. It is quite usual for the prosecution to hold information back at a bail hearing in most countries and to tell those they have told to not disclose it. hence Cecil Myers and the parents said nothing as they wanted to catch OP out. Probably the media should not have disclosed this either before the bail hearing but they found out somehow. Botha did not disclose it and will use the excuse the autopsy results were not back so he wanted to make sure first. But it appears that the family knew before she was cremated. That is why the father is saying OP needs to tell the truth.

IMO Reeva could have already been dead after he hit her over the back of the head with the cricket bat at least unconscious as I have never understood how she could have still run to the toilet when the cricket bat was described as being so "bloody". bashing a toilet door down with a cricket bat does not make a cricket bat "bloody".

I know about the reputation of the Daily Mail as I have followed the McCann case but when they used the "autopsy" word in the heading and that the parents had been told, it gave their article credence to me. One cannot generalise about the media always getting it wrong.

Also about the street clothes, it was very obvious to me that Reeva was still in her street clothes as soon as I saw that photo of her in the CCTV with the black top on driving in at 6pm.

 

[Waddles]

Didn't Cecil Myers say he identified her body and was really surprised by later reports of her skull being crushed by a bat because he saw nothing to that effect at all when he saw her body. Not that he is an expert, just saying.

 

[otyikondo]

I can understand your point of view in being sceptical about the "Daily Mail" but I have seen several reports that her family have been informed about the fractured skull and even seen photos of it. The word "Autopsy" report was not used for a reason and that is because it was a secret then as they wanted OP to account for his actions first to see how he fitted the bloody cricket bat into his version. It is quite usual for the prosecution to hold information back at a bail hearing in most countries and to tell those they have told to not disclose it. hence Cecil Myers and the parents said nothing as they wanted to catch OP out. Probably the media should not have disclosed this either before the bail hearing but they found out somehow. Botha did not disclose it and will use the excuse the autopsy results were not back so he wanted to make sure first. But it appears that the family knew before she was cremated. That is why the father is saying OP needs to tell the truth.

IMO Reeva could have already been dead after he hit her over the back of the head with the cricket bat at least unconscious as I have never understood how she could have still run to the toilet when the cricket bat was described as being so "bloody". bashing a toilet dorr down with a cricket bat does not make a cricket bat "bloody".

I know about the reputation of the Daily Mail as I have followed the McCann case but when they used the "autopsy" word in the heading and that the parents had been told, it gave their article credence to me. One cannot generalise about the media always getting it wrong.

Also about the street clothes, it was very obvious to me that Reeva was still in her street clothes as soon as I saw that photo of her in the CCTV with the black top on driving in at 6pm.

OK. Give me these independent (non-Mail) reports and I might start to raise an interested eyebrow. Until then, sorry, this dog won't hunt.

 

[shane13]

Brilliant! That is what I have been thinking ever since I knew about the casing in the toilet. He tried to cover it up - his fracturing the back of her skull by shooting at it.

I have even thought of another scenario. Could the bashing of the skull with the cricket bat actually have caused her death or at least made her unconscious so he carries her into the toilet (he then knows exactly where she is), locks the door/bashes it with the cricket bat (if that was necessary in his cover up tactic) then goes outside and shoots to make it look like he was shooting at an intruder and she only dies then when in fact, she could have already been dead before being in the toilet. Otherwise, why no screams from her when being shot? I am not convinced that anyone can prove that she was still alive when he carried her down the stairs. From what I have read, it is only his word that she died in his arms.

One thing I commented on before is the bullet wound to her hand. And that this appears to be defensive to try to shield her head. If this aspect is accurate, it again implies she was conscious after the bat strike.

The fractured skull from the strike (not a bullet IMO as your top paragraph has it) may not have been severe as I have posted even wiki reports on several levels of severity of skull fracture with the lowest level not causing much impairment.

The point is that any assault he did on her, he then knew his life as he knew it was over, and his first thoughts were to kill the witness, instead of getting her help as IMO she could well have been saved at that point.

But again your scenario is possible until we learn how the door locks.

I would think that it would only lock from the inside, so I think again that she was conscious when she went in there. To me this fits everything better than your scenario from what is known now.

 

[Acticoe]

Fair point, but I think (it's only a "think") the shower had a glass door...

and therefore he'd have seen a shadow behind - (or NOT, since it was allegedly pitch dark... hang on, hang on... you might have the germ of something here...

Will have to think about this. Interesting point!

Regardless to whether it has a glass door or not, it (according to the plans) has an area to hide in it to the right as you go in. Certainly a more obviously place for an 'intruder' to hide. Whereas a locked toilet is a better place for someone trying to get away from an aggressor?

Please excuse the link - the quickest one I found with a plan of the bathroom.

http://au.sports.yahoo.com/galleries/g/16214801/the-oscar-pistorius-murder-case/16214809/

 

[Waddles]

I think as her skull was crushed by the bullets and as the cricket bat was bloodied all the rumours arose out of that

 

[shane13]

If the police are the ones who told the media (as the media have been claiming) that the bat was used on her head, in addition to blood they could have known this immediately by there being hair and other tissue on the bat, not just blood.

 

[Estelle]

Well your scenario could be correct. But that's whyI earlier wrote RE the fractured skull that autopsy X-rays will show the extent of the fracture. If they are good, hopefully they can separate the bat-caused effects from the bullet-caused effects of him shooting into that area.

And if he shot into her skull from close range, she almost certainly would be dead at that point, before carrying her down the stairs.

I thought from day one, that every claim or fact in his affidavit was false. This verifies it further.

But another problem with your scenario is "him locking the toilet door." Did it lock only from the inside? And had to be locked to stay in that position for him to shoot at it. These factors will help pinpoint if your scenario is possible as the bullet holes in the door are strong evidence. Or if she was able to stagger on her own to the toilet and lock it.

Thinking about it now, I don't think he would have bothered to lock the toilet door himself as who could prove he did, but he had to pretend she locked it as it had to be part of his version of events. The forensics should have found her fingerprints on the door/key (or however it locks) if she had been still capable of locking it. To me, all this has been his cover up scenario.

 

[Alyce]

And given the renewed verification of the bat-caused skull fracture, I will now put together a possible scenario to explain everything.

OP loses is and hits Reeva with the bat. She staggers into the toilet and locks it. Then he knows his life as he knew it is over, and decides to shoot and kill her.

He does this from outside the toilet door. But after he gets the door open he tries to cover up the fractured skull from his bat strike, and shoots her in the area where her skull was fractured. And that one casing ends up in the toilet. (If that is a bullet casing.)

If all the reports are true--this fits them all.

Sounds very plausible to me ..... except, if he attacks RS with the bat, and then uses same bat to break down the * allegedly* locked door, then wont the door have - am trying to say this as nicely as possible - particles from RS embedded into the wood ?
How would he expxlain that ?

 

[otyikondo]

I think as her skull was crushed by the bullets and as the cricket bat was bloodied all the rumours arose out of that

That works for me, too, and basically this whole thing arose out of blurry initial reports from police and paramedics at the scene, of the "and I saw this bloody cricket bat" variety.

I'm still waiting to hear of independent references to the alleged police disclosure to the family that her skull had been bashed in. The fact that her half-brother went and denied it pointblank suggests something's not quite right.

And I have some trouble believing that all the local media in SA are "in on the secret" and keeping quiet like good little boys and girls for the sake of the prosecution. It doesn't work like that, in my experience.

 

[Alyce]

Brilliant! That is what I have been thinking ever since I knew about the casing in the toilet. He tried to cover it up - his fracturing the back of her skull by shooting at it.

I have even thought of another scenario. Could the bashing of the skull with the cricket bat actually have caused her death or at least made her unconscious so he carries her into the toilet (he then knows exactly where she is), locks the door/bashes it with the cricket bat (if that was necessary in his cover up tactic) then goes outside and shoots to make it look like he was shooting at an intruder and she only dies then when in fact, she could have already been dead before being in the toilet. Otherwise, why no screams from her when being shot? I am not convinced that anyone can prove that she was still alive when he carried her down the stairs. From what I have read, it is only his word that she died in his arms.

My thoughts as well, I think that RS was * placed* in the toilet, then the door closed ( not locked ) and OP then fires through the door at the correct angle, because he knows exactly where he needs to direct the shots.

The carrying downstairs was, imo, to cover the bloodstains in the corridor, perhaps even against the wall leading from bedroom to bathroom, where there may be blood splatter from the attack with the bat
Also, by picking up RS, then OP ensured he had blood all over him, no possibility for forensics to guage blood patterns on his clothes and work out what might have happened

 

[Alyce]

shorts and a vest top are what millions of women wear in bed, it is a version of pajamas just with shorts not long trousers,

I find nothing odd that she was wearing shorts and a vest top

Agree......

but vest top and long trousers ( if the long trouser version is true ) would surely not be worn in summer time

Long trousers says to me that neither of them were in bed and asleep

 

[otyikondo]

My thoughts as well, I think that RS was * placed* in the toilet, then the door closed ( not locked ) and OP then fires through the door at the correct angle, because he knows exactly where he needs to direct the shots.

The carrying downstairs was, imo, to cover the bloodstains in the corridor, perhaps even against the wall leading from bedroom to bathroom, where there may be blood splatter from the attack with the bat
Also, by picking up RS, then OP ensured he had blood all over him, no possibility for forensics to guage blood patterns on his clothes and work out what might have happened

Phew! Holy Moley... For all this to pan out this geezer has to be a Bond-film master criminal and a Weapons Grade Psychopath with a razor-sharp brain. And I thought he was a runner of some sort. Who knew?

Alyce, if you turn out to be right on this one, I'll definitely doff my hat. Right now it all sounds a bit like CSI meets Midsomer Murders.

 

[otyikondo]

Agree......

but vest top and long trousers ( if the long trouser version is true ) would surely not be worn in summer time

Long trousers says to me that neither of them were in bed and asleep

This is why it's so critical before drawing ANY conclusions on this that we know what we are talking about (terminology) with these items of clothing, and also that we have confirmation on whether they were long pants or short...

To the best of my knowledge that confirmation has NOT been forthcoming.

Or has it? We'd need someone to trawl through the clothing references.

 

[Estelle]

Didn't Cecil Myers say he identified her body and was really surprised by later reports of her skull being crushed by a bat because he saw nothing to that effect at all when he saw her body. Not that he is an expert, just saying.

My comment to that is that she was allegedly bashed on the back of her head and Cecil Myers had only to identify her face as being Reeva. Also , for many reasons, police often tell relatives not to disclose many aspects of the case as they are trying to trick the killer.

 

[shane13]

Thinking about it now, I don't think he would have bothered to lock the toilet door himself as who could prove he did, but he had to pretend she locked it as it had to be part of his version of events. The forensics should have found her fingerprints on the door/key (or however it locks) if she had been still capable of locking it. To me, all this has been his cover up scenario.

Well my point was that I don't know if that door was capable of being in the closed position without being locked--as many such doors will be well inside the stall unless locked.

One thing that fits your scenario is that he needed to carry her after he was done because he already carried her; otherwise her blood on him will not be explainable.

But it's not conclusive as she still could have gone to the toilet on her own and if he shot into her fractured skull from close range, he would have gotten her blood and tissues all over him at that point--even if he did not carry her to the toilet. That is firing into her skull from close range likely would have some blowback of blood and tissue, so he had to do the carry down the stairs bit whichever way it happened earlier. Again the hand wound (shielding the head) is important here along with the door.

But I can see why he sobbed whenever they touched upon the horrors that he did--and likely from close range while looking at her. Does he have some conscience? Or just self-pity that he may be going to jail for a long time?

 

[Estelle]

OK. Give me these independent (non-Mail) reports and I might start to raise an interested eyebrow. Until then, sorry, this dog won't hunt.

I have posted links to these articles before but nobody seems to read them!

I will have a search but it is approaching bedtime for me so I might have to do that tomorrow.

 

[otyikondo]

My comment to that is that she was allegedly bashed on the back of her head and Cecil Myers had only to identify her face as being Reeva. Also , for many reasons, police often tell relatives not to disclose many aspects of the case as they are trying to trick the killer.

And my response to THAT would be that her brother Adam Steenkamp rejected the theory out of hand. Now, why did HE break ranks and not follow the party line?

And where are these independent, non-Daily Mail reports? If you've got other sources, this might make some semblance of sense, but with a single source it's very iffy.

Edit: OK. I'll run through your posts to date and see what I turn up...