Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #65~ the appeal~

[Interested Bystander]

Yes, I see what you mean. It is part of the top of the door. Not sure, because of its shape that it could produce such a deep pattern but it would take forensics to determine that. The wood that the door is made from I think is a fairly soft wood if I remember from a description somewhere but it is a possibility. The metal plate covered the inspection point for the plumbing and I think and was much nearer the waste bin than the piece of wood.

 

[Interested Bystander]

Thanks though when and where exactly did the towel come from?

That towel is very interesting. I am guessing that it must have been one of the first photos and then it was moved to take more photos. I think the photo I posted must have been taken after that and after it had been moved. My photo could not have been from the first sweep as it obviously post dates the one you have uploaded.

EDIT

Is it because the photos are taken from different angles?

 

[Sherbert]

Yes, but if I understand correctly that would be the right question for PPD. If the court has ruled out any legitimate claim of PPD and are moving on to DE, it would be understood that his actions have been determined to be unlawful. Then the question becomes whether or not he had subjective foresight and reconciled himself to the possibility of causing death.

Do I have that right?

Even if PPD fails because, for example, the killer used excessive force, this would not necessarily preclude a finding that there was no intention to kill unlawfully. Such a finding would depend on the oral evidence presented and on inferences drawn from the objective facts.

Even if the attack had been imminent in the sense that OP had seen the door begin to open, for example, and then proceeded to fire just one shot, the killing would still have been an unlawful killing.

If OP had intended to kill the intruder in PPD, but genuinely didn't realise that his conduct was unlawful, (unlikely as that is), he'd be entitled to a verdict of CH.

IMO, given the lack of imminence and the four shots, Masipa could have gone one of two ways:

1. She could have found that he couldn't possibly have believed that he was entitled to fire. This is where consideration of DE comes into play and the consequent questions about foresight and reconciliation.

2. The court could have found find that he was genuinely in fear for his life and was simply trying to prevent an attack, which could well mean no dolus. This would result in a verdict of CH.

As we know, Masipa accepted his intruder story as reasonably possibly true, but also brought foreseeability and intention into the equation, confusing everyone in the process.

 

[jilly]

one thing to consider post shooting, from op's point of view… although he has fired four shots into the confined space, he cannot be 100% certain that Reeva is alive or not until he opens the door/enters the cubicle.

if the version is that there has been an argument - this appears to be the version you are proposing - then he would enter the toilet with some trepidation, knowing she may still be alive [and if she is, will fight to remain so], and also knowing that he cannot allow her to survive. for this reason, i have considered whether it was likely that he took the gun with him into the toilet. note in the ER clip how he lifts her out of the toilet. note where his hand is, right in the centre of her back. the filming shows both left and right hand in this position. also consider, if one hand was holding the gun, that would correspond to where the two [gun grip*] marks are on her back.

*your piece regarding the gun grip pattern is a compelling argument.

Welllll ok.....99% which is as far as I will go. He knew what his bullets would do to watermelons when he shot them and he definitely referred to brain matter.

Thing about OP is that it was his nature to be an entitled hot-head, show off who took risks to impress people. My arm-chair pschological analysis further includes that he had a lot of bottled up anger. This time, he went too far and got caught and what does he do? He resorts to "oh poor me with a deformity and anxiety issue" which may have worked before but not now. I don't think he was ever taught about consequences which is what he's now having to deal with. From the recent photo of him, it doesn't look like he's accepted the latter.

 

[elfie]

There have been something like 60 threads about this case, and posters have definitely given reasons as to why OP might have had to kill Reeva. One of them is the obvious one, that he needed to stop her reporting him. Remember when he stuttered when he told Nel: "I asked Reeva... why are you calling the police" - at least, that's what some of us heard - and others heard "why are you not calling the police" or something similar. Anyway, I don't understand how you can say not a single person has given any possible reason or explanation as to why OP chose to kill Reeva when they have. Also, although going from being angry to murder might be a long shot - murderers are generally angry at the time of murdering.

Thank you so much soozieqtips! I searched through the transcripts at the end of the trial to find this quote but could never find it. I heard that so clearly, too. It was always so telling.

 

[Val1]

That towel is very interesting. I am guessing that it must have been one of the first photos and then it was moved to take more photos. I think the photo I posted must have been taken after that and after it had been moved. My photo could not have been from the first sweep as it obviously post dates the one you have uploaded.

EDIT

Is it because the photos are taken from different angles?

I don't think so, if you go to the site it came from(on the bottom of the pic) there's a few more from different angles. What I find interesting is that the towel appears to used for cleanup of some kind, whether by OP when he washed up before he'd been photographed in the garage, or used to clean up other evidence(ie.mrjitty's suspicions, we'll never know).:/ I also hadn't been aware that those two boards beside the tub had come out apparently as one piece.

 

[Val1]

Even if PPD fails because, for example, the killer used excessive force, this would not necessarily preclude a finding that there was no intention to kill unlawfully. Such a finding would depend on the oral evidence presented and on inferences drawn from the objective facts.

Even if the attack had been imminent in the sense that OP had seen the door begin to open, for example, and then proceeded to fire just one shot, the killing would still have been an unlawful killing.

If OP had intended to kill the intruder in PPD, but genuinely didn't realise that his conduct was unlawful, (unlikely as that is), he'd be entitled to a verdict of CH.

IMO, given the lack of imminence and the four shots, Masipa could have gone one of two ways:

1. She could have found that he couldn't possibly have believed that he was entitled to fire. This is where consideration of DE comes into play and the consequent questions about foresight and reconciliation.

2. The court could have found find that he was genuinely in fear for his life and was simply trying to prevent an attack, which could well mean no dolus. This would result in a verdict of CH.

As we know, Masipa accepted his intruder story as reasonably possibly true, but also brought foreseeability and intention into the equation, confusing everyone in the process.

That's impossible, he took a course that he passed 100% proving he knew it was unlawful, plus he knew what his gun and ammo were capable of(zombiestopper video). Now whether he stopped to consider the consequences of what doing that would actually mean to him just before he opened fire, probably not, but that's no excuse. If I had a flamethrower and used it on a house/car/boat/anything resulting in a death, you can bet I'd be charged and convicted of murder. Ignorance is seldom a viable defence, unless you're proven mentally incompetent.

 

[Val1]

I still have questions about what this was all about... was he making a smartass remark after finding out, or was it before RS was shot?

http://otlmedia.co.za/2013/11/meanwhile-who-is-twerker-happened-oscar-pistorius/
"The media reports rumours that a SMS from Reeva’s former love interest rugby player Francois Hougaard could have sparked a fight between Oscar and Reeva that ended in the gun being fired."

 

[Val1]

one thing to consider post shooting, from op's point of view… although he has fired four shots into the confined space, he cannot be 100% certain that Reeva is alive or not until he opens the door/enters the cubicle.

if the version is that there has been an argument - this appears to be the version you are proposing - then he would enter the toilet with some trepidation, knowing she may still be alive [and if she is, will fight to remain so], and also knowing that he cannot allow her to survive. for this reason, i have considered whether it was likely that he took the gun with him into the toilet. note in the ER clip how he lifts her out of the toilet. note where his hand is, right in the centre of her back. the filming shows both left and right hand in this position. also consider, if one hand was holding the gun, that would correspond to where the two [gun grip*] marks are on her back.

*your piece regarding the gun grip pattern is a compelling argument.

His testimony about how he got into the toilet room after killing RS didn't sound right imo.

I'm more inclined to think he had had the key all along and after not only terrorizing RS for upwards of 15 minutes(gun shots through the bedroom door, her jeans pulled off inside out at the foot of the bed(bruises on RS's thighs), another pair of jeans tossed out the bathroom window, screaming at her to "get the *advertiser censored** out of my house! get the *advertiser censored** out of my house!", the bashing of the bathroom(metal plate, tiles, toilet door) and then the final four shots that killed her likely while she had either been trying to get out of the locked room or trying to hold the door shut against him.

That would explain why she hadn't called anyone even if she did have her cell with her, would explain why the keys in the door didn't appear bloody, would explain how convoluted his explanation was of how he broke the door down and got the keys, yet the one big plank in the toilet room was lying partly over the threshold and there were large splinters of wood in the toilet bowl that RS had supposedly been draped over.

It would also explain why he pulled her out of there(I think he may have pushed/pulled the panels out while the door was open and she had already been pulled out) and why so much blood was in the bathroom where, according to his explanation, they shouldn't have left the big pools that were there. It would also explain the rumours that her car had been sitting running in the driveway, her bag had been packed ready to leave, and according to one media source her valentine card had been tossed aside carelessly. MOO

http://www.channel4.com/news/oscar-pistorius-guns-reeva-steenkamp-court
"A Valentine's card addressed to Ozzie carelessly thrown nearby."

[video=youtube;qx5ibmqsiR4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx5ibmqsiR4[/video]

 

[Ochre Blue]

.......interesting observations there, but nowhere is there any mention nor indication why he had to kill her.......in fact going back through all the threads on here no one has given any possible reason or explanation as to why he chose to kill her.......if he did it on purpose that is ....being angry is one thing, murder is something else....

Why he had to kill her..... NPD, anger management problems, domestic violence etc

IMHO

 

[Val1]

Mr Fossil

A separate item relating to staging

Why was the 2nd iphone found in the bathroom?

Apparently under the mat?

For those coming late to the party...

 

[mhiforme]

What is the difference between PPD and PD?

 

[Val1]

......do you really believe that constitutes a reason to murder with all the risk that may involve which would turn out to be far worse than if she had supposedly reported him.....that's not a reason, there's been no valid explanation that goes anywhere near common sense....there needs to be a valid reason for firing four shots......

That's the problem for OP, there is no valid reason. As for why he would take the chance... money talks and as for how he may have come up with his "plan"... http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Man-who-shot-wife-in-error-can-sympathise-with-Oscar-20140407 gives a pretty good blueprint, something he would likely have been aware of since it was said he was big into murder mysteries et al.

 

[elfie]

Were the wood splinters in Reva's wounds found to be consistent with the wood of the toilet door?

 

[Val1]

Were the wood splinters in Reva's wounds found to be consistent with the wood of the toilet door?

Iirc yes. What I do remember fairly clearly is that they aligned consistently with her having been standing close to the door when she got the hip shot, not so clearly for any others there may have been since she may have been too far for them to have penetrated... I would have to go back and review the trial tapes. Hopefully someone else has a better memory.

 

[elfie]

Iirc yes. What I do remember fairly clearly is that they aligned consistently with her having been standing close to the door when she got the hip shot, not so clearly for any others there may have been since she may have been too far for them to have penetrated... I would have to go back and review the trial tapes. Hopefully someone else has a better memory.

Just wondering if the room and the door were the only things hit with the bat.

 

[DexterMorgan]

So he screams get out of my house within 2ft of where reeva is sleeping. But it never dawned on him of why she didn't jump out of bed to see what's going on. I hate Massipa for calling certain bs factual while not asking or pressing common sense rebuttals. She had 6 months or more to think of some better questions to ask him.

 

[elfie]

His testimony about how he got into the toilet room after killing RS didn't sound right imo.

I'm more inclined to think he had had the key all along and after not only terrorizing RS for upwards of 15 minutes(gun shots through the bedroom door, her jeans pulled off inside out at the foot of the bed(bruises on RS's thighs), another pair of jeans tossed out the bathroom window, screaming at her to "get the *advertiser censored** out of my house! get the *advertiser censored** out of my house!", the bashing of the bathroom(metal plate, tiles, toilet door) and then the final four shots that killed her likely while she had either been trying to get out of the locked room or trying to hold the door shut against him.

That would explain why she hadn't called anyone even if she did have her cell with her, would explain why the keys in the door didn't appear bloody, would explain how convoluted his explanation was of how he broke the door down and got the keys, yet the one big plank in the toilet room was lying partly over the threshold and there were large splinters of wood in the toilet bowl that RS had supposedly been draped over.

It would also explain why he pulled her out of there(I think he may have pushed/pulled the panels out while the door was open and she had already been pulled out) and why so much blood was in the bathroom where, according to his explanation, they shouldn't have left the big pools that were there. It would also explain the rumours that her car had been sitting running in the driveway, her bag had been packed ready to leave, and according to one media source her valentine card had been tossed aside carelessly. MOO

http://www.channel4.com/news/oscar-pistorius-guns-reeva-steenkamp-court
"A Valentine's card addressed to Ozzie carelessly thrown nearby."

[video=youtube;qx5ibmqsiR4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx5ibmqsiR4[/video]

I think you have really hit on something here, Val. If she were pulling on the door handle with all her might to prevent him from entering the cubicle it explains why she was not in the only corner that would have provided any limited protection or on the phone or smashing the window open with the magazine rack, and why she was in front of the door.

 

[Mr Fossil]

I think Cottonweaver accepted this recording may have been correct but that OP mentioned Reeva's breathing on many other occasions which negated its importance. I listened to it and thought it was very likely he was saying "everything" rather than "breathing" at this particular point. This is what she said in her post:-

"This audio clip may say he was misquoted at this particular point"

Accepted. I read the reply too quickly. Ok, I'll say it. Although it sounds like he might say 'she was everything' it is highly unlikely that he does since the very first thing he says when he is next on the stand is 'she wasn't breathing'. This undermines the whole point of the article doesn't it?

 

[Mr Fossil]

one thing to consider post shooting, from op's point of view… although he has fired four shots into the confined space, he cannot be 100% certain that Reeva is alive or not until he opens the door/enters the cubicle.

if the version is that there has been an argument - this appears to be the version you are proposing - then he would enter the toilet with some trepidation, knowing she may still be alive [and if she is, will fight to remain so], and also knowing that he cannot allow her to survive. for this reason, i have considered whether it was likely that he took the gun with him into the toilet. note in the ER clip how he lifts her out of the toilet. note where his hand is, right in the centre of her back. the filming shows both left and right hand in this position. also consider, if one hand was holding the gun, that would correspond to where the two [gun grip*] marks are on her back.

*your piece regarding the gun grip pattern is a compelling argument.

Thank you. I think you're reading more into the ER re-enactment than I would want to.