General Discussion Thread #4

[seattlechiquita]

What occurred to me when I saw the two bullet holes on the photos:

1. This two bullet holes show that OP precise fired the area of the toilet. That demonstrate that his aim was on a person on or near by the toilet seat.

It was not someone randomly shooting through a door anywhere else what you should expect if he was so scared of a burglar inside the toilet and didn’t know where exactly this person was in the toilet.

He knew exactly WHO was in the toilet and WHERE !!


2. If there were bullet holes in the broken panel of the door, these bullets wouldn't've hit Reeva but the wall on the right side of the toilet.

Bravo.

I am a bit concerned with the delay until August though. What are your thoughts on that, friends?

 

[Pisto_lius]

Bravo.

I am a bit concerned with the delay until August though. What are your thoughts on that, friends?

No cause for concern , this was to be expected and will not be the last delay.

I'm sure on August 19 the defence will make an application for postponement because the longer it takes until the beginning of the process, the longer OP is on the loose and can do whatever he wants.

 

[sorrell skye]

here it is folks

Interview with Reeva Steenkamps parents - YouTube

Thank you, shane, for posting this video.

Barry & June are such lovely people. It's clear that Reeva was absolutely adored by her parents. No wonder Reeva grew up to be such a loving, happy woman who was admired by so many.

My heart breaks for Reeva's mother & father. I'm glad they have a close relationship with one another and can comfort one another. Watching them sort through childhood photos of Reeva and listening to their sentimental comments brought me to tears.

I'm grateful to her parents & friends for giving this interview, because it provides the world the chance to get to know who Reeva was, as well as how Reeva's death has profoundly impacted them.

There have been more than enough articles relating how Oscar has been allegedly suffering since he killed Reeva - all while he fought to have his so-called right to drink alcohol restored, his so-called right to travel reinstated, his so-called right to more or less do as he pleases protected, despite the fact that he's been charged with premeditated murder.

Meanwhile, prior to this interview, it seemed as if the media had forgotten that a wonderful young woman named Reeva Steenkamp was gunned down, and that her family and friends are hurting beyond measure and wanting answers.

I'm glad to see that, for once, the story is about Reeva and her family & friends. I'm glad that, for once, the story is about the victim and those who truly love her.

 

[Pisto_lius]

The more I think about the bullets, the more doubts come to me

Perumal said they (supposedly) have found a bullet inside the toilet bowl which was overlooked by investigators.

I can't believe this because the toilet lid was open (as you can see on the photos) so I'm sure the investigators also looked inside the toilet bowl and would see if there was a bullet inside.

Could this assertion might have been not more than another trap to confuse the prosecution?

Then why the defence restrained this important piece of evidence until the bail hearing instead deliver it to the investigators immediately?

Did the prosecution ever seen this bullet??? Nothing heard about this.

 

[Pisto_lius]

It seems police have big problems to recover the data of one of the 4 cellphones which is believed to have belonged to Reeva.

Were Reeva's final calls encrypted?

An encrypted iPhone recovered from the bloody bathroom of murder accused and South African Olympic hero Oscar Pistorius is believed to be crucial to the police's investigation.

The police were yesterday given three months to wrap up their investigation of the StValentine's Day killing of the track star's model girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.

As Pistorius made a brief appearance yesterday before acting Pretoria chief magistrate Daniel Thulare, investigators a few blocks away were sifting through volumes of encrypted data on the cellphone. It was among four phones seized from Pistorius's luxury Silver Lakes home hours after he fired through a toilet door and hit Steenkamp.

Pistorius has insisted that the shooting was a horrible mistake and that he mistook Steenkamp for an intruder.

Though both the police and the National Prosecuting Authority insist that the investigations are going well, officers assigned to the case are said to be battling.

"Crucial to this investigation are the cellphones. Most of the data have been downloaded from the phones, bar one, which is either completely, or at least partially, encrypted," a source said.

The phone in question is believed to have belonged to Steenkamp, who is thought to have taken it with her when she locked herself in the toilet.

Steenkamp's mother, June, claimed in an interview with the UK's Channel 5 TV this week that her daughter and Pistorius had had several fights shortly before the shooting and that Reeva was frightened of the Blade Runner.

The police are asking why Steenkamp would go to the bathroom at 3am in the morning with a cellphone.

"There are serious concerns around when the phone and its data [were] encrypted and why," said the source. Data on the phone might reveal Reeva's final calls or SMSes.

"The information on the phone, the toilet door and the ballistics reports are the keys to this case."

The investigators have refused to name the cellphone's owner.

"The fear is [that] this will be leaked and provide the defence with ammunition to try to destroy the state's case."

Information security specialist Haroon Meer said the police could ask for phone manufacturer Apple's assistance in decrypting the data.

"Apple could get them data on SMSes, calls and phonebook contacts. The question is time, with Apple recently reporting a backlog in calls for help from law-enforcement agencies worldwide.

"Though an older phone is easier to decipher because it has a pin code, [the] more modern iPhones are password-encrypted and access would depend on the strength of the password.

"After trying a password a certain number of times, the phone is locked with a remote data destruction process eventually occurring," the source said.

Police spokesman Brigadier Phuti Setati said: "We are making progress ... we are making sure that justice will be served." He would not comment on the encrypted cellphone.

"Whatever evidence we collect will be presented at the right time, at the right place - in court."

The trial was yesterday postponed to August 19 - which would have been Steenkamp's 30th birthday.

http://m.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/?articleId=9260095

 

[kittychi]

I don't believe this report Reeva was holding her mobile phone when she was shot inside the toilet. For me this is tabloid fairy-tale like much else.

BBM

Agreed, Pisto...Daily Mail always seems to have a tabloid vibe. That statement may be true, but who of us following this case closely has ever read that anywhere until now in this Daily Mail article?

 

[kittychi]

The more I think about the bullets, the more doubts come to me

Perumal said they (supposedly) have found a bullet inside the toilet bowl which was overlooked by investigators.

I can't believe this because the toilet lid was open (as you can see on the photos) so I'm sure the investigators also looked inside the toilet bowl and would see if there was a bullet inside.

<snipped>

Then why the defence restrained this important piece of evidence until the bail hearing instead deliver it to the investigators immediately?

Did the prosecution ever seen this bullet??? Nothing heard about this.

BBM:

1. Unless the bowl was full of blood and the bullet could not be seen. The police seem to be inept enough (or are painted to be inept enough) that we're not sure if they would have looked for a bullet in bloody toilet water. At that point, they may not have known how many bullets or casings they should find (some could be in her body.)

2. IMO, the ONLY reason to point out that a bullet was found by OP's camp is to inject a big fat doubt about the police work and then add more drama yet by springing it on everyone at the bail hearing.

Nothing about OP's camp supposedly finding that bullet was about learning the truth about the shooting. The only way I would give them credibility on that is if they took a photo of it in bloody water.

 

[Pisto_lius]

Another (translated) very critical German report - I like it very much

Defendant polishes its image
Oscar Pistorius staged themselves as victim

Did Oscar Pistorius accidentally shot his girlfriend? That's how he represent it and pretend to be a broken man. Does he stage themselves as victim? His appearance in public at any rate allows this interpretation.

During his appearance in court on Tuesday Pistorius seemed depressed. Again, the 26-year-old said little publicly. "Yes, your honor," Pistorius responded only when the judge asked if he understood the decision process of the adjournment and continuation of the bail conditions. The athlete remains at large. Ironically, on 19 August, he is to appear in court again. This is the birthday of the victim, his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. The model would be 30 years old on that day. Pistorius admits to have accidentally shot her because he was suspected burglars behind the door.

When Pistorius shortly before nine clock, initially shielded by bodyguards and police officers entered the courtroom, a flurry of camera flashes was hit over him. To the surprise of all the accused of murdering looked the same as always: in a gray suit and blue shirt, with accurate tie, straight face and especially without a beard. This one his uncle had announced in an interview, because Pistorius allegedly did not want to be recognized in public.

Smooth, dismissive and unapproachable

The disabled professional athletes with prosthetic legs presented oneself smooth, dismissive and unapproachable. As if his PR professionals would have advised him that a beard would only have been the occasion for all sorts of new stories. In addition, a beard could nourish the suspicion that Pistorius was not only in "mourning, reading and praying," as his uncle had described it. It could be classified as a sign that the 26-year-old hardly recognizable with the beard could seek all possible distractions.

For when the according to the depiction of his family deeply depressed Pistorius was allegedly seen in one evening in April in high spirits in bars and restaurants, there was a giant vortex in the South African public. "With the utmost resolutely" Pistorius' family then contradicted the "disappointing sensational representations" of newspapers.

Pistorius is represented as a broken man

The excursion to the entertainment district seems to be the only error in the consistent defense strategy of the disciplined athletes since the fatal shooting of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on 14 February.

The interviews of his uncle and his manager shortly before the trial date appear as part of a clever image campaign. Pistorius is repeatedly described as a broken man who isn't finished with accidentally shot "the love of his life".

"Only one really knows what happened"

But meanwhile also the victim's parents seem attach great importance to the influence of the media on the proceeding through which the judge uttered very concerned on Tuesday: On the eve of the court hearing the British channel "Channel 5" broadcast a documentation of the case and an exclusive interview with the hitherto taciturn parents Barry and June Steenkamp.

"We argued, we fight a lot," their daughter told them, June Steenkamp reported. "She must have had such a fear in the toilet, when someone fired bullets through the door on her." But the mother avoided any blame: "We don't know what happened. Only one really knows what happened."

http://www.focus.de/panorama/welt/a...eniert-sich-selbst-als-opfer_aid_1005309.html

 

[Interested Bystander]

Firstly, hello to everyone here. I have been following this thread for some long while now and am impressed by the objectivity of most. I am in the UK where there is much reporting of the case, mainly by the tabloids who, in general, can be viewed as a little sensational. However I watched the Channel 5 documentary about Pistorius and was very disappointed with its content.

This documentary seemed, to me, to have a strong pro Pistorius bias. There was not a great deal of new information except for the re-enactment of Pisorius' claim that it was so dark he did not see Reeva and sound tests to verify the distance from which shouting could be heard. There was a studio set for the lighting experiment which was brightly lit. Pistorius claimed he was in the dark. To replicate this darkness the bright studio lights were turned off and the lawyer playing the defence role was asked immediately what he could see. The prosecuting lawyer was asked to get into bed to try to determine if she could be seen.

My point here is that switching from bright studio lighting to total darkness causes one to be unable to see properly for some 15 minutes or so until the eyes adjust properly. Therefore the 'defence lawyer' inevitably would see nothing. Pistorius claimed he was in an already darkened room so his night vision would be functioning at its best. Any half decent lighting expert would without question know this. The test was therefore completely invalid.

Now to the sound test. It is known that the evening of the murder the weather was good and moonlit. The test, again conducted by a supposed expert, was carried out on a rainy night that necessitated the use of an umbrella. It is a fact that rain dulls sound quite considerably and the sound of rain on an umbrella would further reduce one's ability to hear properly. Again any decent sound recordist would know this. Again another invalid test.

There was also a test to try to determine the angle of the bullets. This was probably the nearest the program got to producing any useful information but, again, it was not compelling.

I find it difficult to believe that these tests were ever meant to throw light on the questions of whether Pistorius could see in his bedroom or whether shouting could be heard from any predetermined distance. So much so, that I am concerned this programme was intentionally made with a Pistorius bias and that troubles me greatly. I am beginning to wonder who was involved behind the scenes in this 'documentary'.

 

[Estelle]

Pistorius trial: the key questions:

&#8220;THE VIDEO YOU ARE TRYING TO WATCH CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM YOUR CURRENT COUNTRY OR LOCATION&#8221;

http://www.channel5.com/shows/pisto...ns/episodes/pistorius-trial-the-key-questions

He became the first ever double amputee to compete in the Olympic games. His picture was plastered across billboards worldwide as a symbol of triumph over adversity, and he became one of the world's most recognisable superstars. Oscar Pistorius was the face of London 2012. Yet just six months later, he was arrested and charged with the pre-meditated murder of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. How could such an admired sporting champion and role model to millions be involved in such a shocking event?
As he awaits trial, two eminent South African lawyers weigh the evidence for and against him with the aid of a purpose-built replica of his bedroom and bathroom.

As I cannot view this documentary, I have made a summary of points made by commentators so we can guess what might have been discussed.

• he must have looked through keyhole and saw where she was crouching
• she must have been screaming tellinh him not to shoot
• looks obvious he was aiming at her as target - not shooting aimlessly
• 4 bullets are said to have been fired - only one missed.
• whether he had the prosthetic legs or not is immaterial (could aim at target with or without the prosthetic legs)
• he had plenty of time to have thought about what he was doing
• first natural thing you do in case of intruders is to wake up person in a whisper to ask if they had heard noise saying shhh be still or hide.
• case sited shows the wife alerted her husband and he reached for the gun knowing his wife was safe with him.
• poor Reeva must have been petrified and begging him not to kill her.
• woud Oscar really risk his whole life to shoot someone he was potentially in love with?
• incident highlights key weakness in the government and constitution in South Africa and levels of security
• it took four repeat advertisements to even be able to watch this
• what is wrong with this site - drove me crazy
• where did first shot hit Reeva?
• why did she not shout out after this shot to alert Oscar that she was in the toilet?
• why was the toilet door shut?
• whole thing seems a little strange - why would he risk his entire career, unless the thought he could literally 'get away with murder'??
• even if he did not murder her in a rage, he deserves to go to prison
• surely he would have noticed her go to the loo in the night and he would have heard loo being flushed
• not the sort of thing an intruder would do.
• why did he not call out to 'the person' in the loo and get an answer before shooting.
• did he have a TV in his room?
• did he have an illuminated alarm clock?
• the raining and wind direction must be valid points
• there is an outstanding question about why Oscar didn't check Reeva was in bed or not but did not try to answer it at all.....
• not sure the acoustic reconstruction was fair at all as it was done while it was raining!!
• sound waves are muffled and deflected in rain
• atmospheric pressure also plays a part
• the actual night of the shooting was still and moonlit (cannot believe the so-called sound expert did not pick this up)
• totally dark room???? TV on standby?? alarm clock?? still could not see her?? why did he not see or feel her when he got out of bed in the light??? they are amateurs - no one asked these questions because they do not want us to know the answers

Access denied: Pistorius Trial: The Key Questions: Series 2013 - Pistorius Trial: The Key Questions - YouTube

 

[Pisto_lius]

Firstly, hello to everyone here. I have been following this thread for some long while now and am impressed by the objectivity of most. I am in the UK where there is much reporting of the case, mainly by the tabloids who, in general, can be viewed as a little sensational. However I watched the Channel 5 documentary about Pistorius and was very disappointed with its content.

BIB 1 - This documentary seemed, to me, to have a strong pro Pistorius bias. There was not a great deal of new information except for the re-enactment of Pisorius' claim that it was so dark he did not see Reeva and sound tests to verify the distance from which shouting could be heard. There was a studio set for the lighting experiment which was brightly lit. Pistorius claimed he was in the dark. To replicate this darkness the bright studio lights were turned off and the lawyer playing the defence role was asked immediately what he could see. The prosecuting lawyer was asked to get into bed to try to determine if she could be seen.

My point here is that switching from bright studio lighting to total darkness causes one to be unable to see properly for some 15 minutes or so until the eyes adjust properly. Therefore the 'defence lawyer' inevitably would see nothing. Pistorius claimed he was in an already darkened room so his night vision would be functioning at its best. Any half decent lighting expert would without question know this. The test was therefore completely invalid.

Now to the sound test. It is known that the evening of the murder the weather was good and moonlit. The test, again conducted by a supposed expert, was carried out on a rainy night that necessitated the use of an umbrella. It is a fact that rain dulls sound quite considerably and the sound of rain on an umbrella would further reduce one's ability to hear properly. Again any decent sound recordist would know this. Again another invalid test.

There was also a test to try to determine the angle of the bullets. This was probably the nearest the program got to producing any useful information but, again, it was not compelling.

I find it difficult to believe that these tests were ever meant to throw light on the questions of whether Pistorius could see in his bedroom or whether shouting could be heard from any predetermined distance. So much so, that I am concerned this programme was intentionally made with a Pistorius bias and that troubles me greatly. BIB 2 - I am beginning to wonder who was involved behind the scenes in this 'documentary'.

:welcome6: Interested Bystander and TXL for your very interesting estimation of the doc.

BIB 1 - This reminds me of the BBC doc which was also very disappointed with its content

BIB 2 - I guess the same people who were involved behind the scenes in the BBC "documentary"

 

[shane13]

Thank you, shane, for posting this video.

Barry & June are such lovely people. It's clear that Reeva was absolutely adored by her parents. No wonder Reeva grew up to be such a loving, happy woman who was admired by so many.

My heart breaks for Reeva's mother & father. I'm glad they have a close relationship with one another and can comfort one another. Watching them sort through childhood photos of Reeva and listening to their sentimental comments brought me to tears.

I'm grateful to her parents & friends for giving this interview, because it provides the world the chance to get to know who Reeva was, as well as how Reeva's death has profoundly impacted them.

There have been more than enough articles relating how Oscar has been allegedly suffering since he killed Reeva - all while he fought to have his so-called right to drink alcohol restored, his so-called right to travel reinstated, his so-called right to more or less do as he pleases protected, despite the fact that he's been charged with premeditated murder.

Meanwhile, prior to this interview, it seemed as if the media had forgotten that a wonderful young woman named Reeva Steenkamp was gunned down, and that her family and friends are hurting beyond measure and wanting answers.

I'm glad to see that, for once, the story is about Reeva and her family & friends. I'm glad that, for once, the story is about the victim and those who truly love her.

You're welcome sorrell.
It's great that June proclaims that OP shot and injured her first and shot later till she was dead.
There sure is premeditation in that, if true.

 

[Pisto_lius]

It seems the Channel 5 doc is blocked world-wide ullhair:

But I just have found another interesting website regarding the preparation of this doc.

It was sometime near the beginning of April this year that I was contacted by a British Television News and Documentaries Producer. The Producer needed assistance with the making of a documentary on the Oscar Pistorius trial and the evidence that will be looked at before the trial commences.

I gave the Producer the details of other people to contact in South Africa, as I was rather reluctant to involve myself in a high-profile case or in a field of expertise I was no longer permanently involved in, namely Forensic Ballistics.

Nevertheless, I was contacted again later when the Producer eventually arrived in South Africa - only to discover that the people who initially promised to assist with the Ballistic aspects of the documentary had suddenly changed their minds. &#8220;We urgently need a safe place where we can shoot at a door,&#8221; the Producer said. &#8220;Oh, and we also need a 9mm pistol, ammunition, and a door or two to shoot at, and a Firearms/Ballistics Expert.&#8221;

It was quite apparent - the poor Producer was in a real tight spot and also had a strict deadline to adhere to, as the planned documentary not only involved the Oscar Pistorius case, but also other related matters, which they intended incorporating into the 1-hour documentary.

After confirming that I was dealing here with a team of distinguished professionals, and not some-or-other backyard television crew, I contacted an old mate of mine, an ex-colleague from the old SA Police forensic days. Together we quickly made a plan, although I must confess &#8211; my old friend did most of the planning and all the work

We all met at a nearby outdoor shooting range on 19 April 2013, where the original house plans of Oscar&#8217;s home were used to construct an outline of the bathroom area where the fatal shooting occurred.

An integral part of the team consisted of two eminent South African lawyers who were not involved in the case, the one in Oscar&#8217;s defence and the other representing the State&#8217;s case. I acted only as a silent observer in the whole affair and watched the scene from a distance. I also managed to record some footage of my own (with permission, of course), which I combined with some graphics to compile an amateur video, the quality of which will obviously come nowhere near the professionalism that will be featured in the final product.

Please bear in mind that this amateur video was made long before a leaked picture of the scene flooded the Internet http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-may-go-free-because-of-pics-Botha-20130602 (a rather insensitive act I must add), and thus long before the type of door (solid or hollow) or actual location of bullet holes in the door were known. The simple reconstruction depicted here was thus based on the version of the shooting as provided in the Official Affidavit by Oscar Pistorius himself, and should not be construed as the only true version. The video, however, does point out how the mainstream media, in their many sensational speculations, attempted to bring the shooter closer to the bathroom door, while preliminary observations showed that the shooter probably fired the shots into the door from as far a distance as possible &#8211; taking into consideration, of course, the confines of the available space in the bathroom.

http://tia-mysoa.blogspot.de/2013/0...se-shooting-at.html?showComment=1370290772081

And that's the video they made about "shooting at doors"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i8RuuYS-kUQ

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

Yepp. So many new things and photos
Amazing comments so far I read... Trying to catch up with you guys..

 

[soozieqtips]

~snipped~

There was a studio set for the lighting experiment which was brightly lit. Pistorius claimed he was in the dark. To replicate this darkness the bright studio lights were turned off and the lawyer playing the defence role was asked immediately what he could see. The prosecuting lawyer was asked to get into bed to try to determine if she could be seen.

My point here is that switching from bright studio lighting to total darkness causes one to be unable to see properly for some 15 minutes or so until the eyes adjust properly. Therefore the 'defence lawyer' inevitably would see nothing.

Pistorius claimed he was in an already darkened room so his night vision would be functioning at its best. Any half decent lighting expert would without question know this. The test was therefore completely invalid.

Very good points and welcome to Websleuths! They were supposed to recreate the scenes as accurately as possible, but as you noted, the switching from bright light to no light was not the situation OP was in.

Did you notice how the guy acting as the defence lawyer had to fumble around the bed and feel it to avoid tripping over? If OP was truly in pitch black and unable to see a single thing, wouldn't he too have fumbled around the bed feeling his way and felt an empty space where Reeva was supposed to be before he retrieved his gun?

 

[shane13]

An interesting comment from Ch 5 website

"surely he must have looked through the key hole and saw where she was crouching and most certainly must have been screaming for him not to shoot.

Having seen her position it looks obvious he was aiming at her as the target and was not shooting aimlessly. The four bullets are said to have been fired and only one missed. So whether he had the prosthetic legs or not is imaterial. He could aim at the target with or without the prosthetic legs. Its only material in the sense he had plenty of time to have thought about what he was doing. The first natural thing you do in that case of intruders you wakeup the person in a whisper to ask if they had heard the noise. You say Shhh be still or hide. Supposing the intruder was with someone larking in the bedroom? He would have wanted to make sure she was safe.. He would have felt for her. The case that is sited shows you the wife alerted her husband and he reached for the gun knowing his wife was safe with him. The poor girl must have been pertrified and most likely begging him not to kill her. He has to leave with his concious for the rest of his life."

 

[whiterum]

~snipped~


Very good points and welcome to Websleuths! They were supposed to recreate the scenes as accurately as possible, but as you noted, the switching from bright light to no light was not the situation OP was in.

Did you notice how the guy acting as the defence lawyer had to fumble around the bed and feel it to avoid tripping over? If OP was truly in pitch black and unable to see a single thing, wouldn't he too have fumbled around the bed feeling his way and felt an empty space where Reeva was supposed to be before he retrieved his gun?

Yes I did very good point that was indeed the case he put his hand on the bed at that side to steady himself. I wonder did this also happen in the actual defence reconstruction of the dark room. Could this be why Reeva was supposed to move to his usual side of the bed , the balcony side because he allegedly had a bad shoulder. Otherwise he would have known without a doubt that she was not in the bed if she were on the left her usual side. If the defence guy had have stumbled around the right side of the bed he would have put his hand right on top of the body that was lying on the right side of the bed in the video lol . IMO the whole affidavit is a concoction anyway to get off, so IMO none of this ever happened.

 

[Estelle]

 

[Estelle]

Botha says the door is critical to the case and he personally ordered it to be removed and sent for analysis.

He said: "It looks like the pictures have been taken one or two days after the scene because on the Saturday [following the shooting] I took it [the door] down and sent it away for forensics.

Botha said the pictures - which also show the door panel smashed in - were not official police pictures and he believed they were taken with a mobile phone.

It means the defence team may have seen raw crime scene photos before they were officially disclosed to lawyers - potentially impeding the police investigation.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-may-go-free-because-of-pics-Botha-20130602

BBM Why would this impede the police investigation? I would not have put it past OP's team to pay someone to take these photos OR if all of OP's family and friends were there at the crime scene on February 14, (many before police arrived), one of them could have taken them with their mobile phone then.

 

[whiterum]

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Oscar-may-go-free-because-of-pics-Botha-20130602

BBM Why would this impede the police investigation? I would not have put it past OP's team to pay someone to take these photos OR if all of OP's family and friends were there at the crime scene on February 14, (many before police arrived), one of them could have taken them with their mobile phone then.

Estelle it appears that the door must have already had some forensic / police examination at the scene with the white stickers that where placed on the door marking bullet holes and also by the arrow markings on the shower door. But someone could have been paid to take these photos as you say someone OPs side. It's also interesting that Sky News said they never paid a penny for the photos but I'll bet someone else did.