Oscar Pistorius - Sentencing - 6.13.2016 #2

[Cloen]

Bib - isn't this what the defence believe Reeva did?

Biu​

- isn't this the very detail that fuelled the fear Pistorius claimed to have felt?

and if any one of those ROBBERS had shot and killed Reeva and/or her family
they would be on trial for MURDER DOLUS DIRECTUS wouldn't they !

I'm afraid you cannot use that much FORCE (firing 4 shots) at another human being when there is no threat to you whatsoever (and that doesn't include 'thinking' there is a threat) , certainly not in SA. Unfortunately for Pistorius, he DID and he'll be sentenced for Murder for thinking he had a right to take a life under those circumstances. :jail:

 

[aftermath]

and if any one of those ROBBERS had shot and killed Reeva and/or her family
they would be on trial for MURDER DOLUS DIRECTUS wouldn't they !

I'm afraid you cannot use that much FORCE (firing 4 shots) at another human being when there is no threat to you whatsoever (and that doesn't include 'thinking' there is a threat) , certainly not in SA. Unfortunately for Pistorius, he DID and he'll be sentenced for Murder for thinking he had a right to take a life under those circumstances. :jail:

DD or DE, I would guess, depending on the nature of the shooting, just as If Reeva or her family had shot and killed a robber, it could have been DD, DE or CH, depending on the circumstances.

Of course you can't fire four times like that and not expect to be found to have acted unlawfully. But if- as you say- robberies are common and often involve armed intruders, that would explain some of Pistorius's fear, wouldn't it? And if Reeva previously locked herself in a room away from robbers, it might explain the locked bathroom door.

 

[Cloen]

DD or DE, I would guess, depending on the nature of the shooting, just as If Reeva or her family had shot and killed a robber, it could have been DD, DE or CH, depending on the circumstances.

Of course you can't fire four times like that and not expect to be found to have acted unlawfully. But if- as you say- robberies are common and often involve armed intruders, that would explain some of Pistorius's fear, wouldn't it? And if Reeva previously locked herself in a room away from robbers, it might explain the locked bathroom door.

If Pistorius' version , one of his many , were true, which it isn't .
And you can't compare the two incidents. Reeva was with all her family/friends whoever was there and they consulted eachother and knew eachother should all go together to another room and lock themselves in , so very different to what Pistorius did in his house.

This is why he used the reason of her being an Intruder , because it happens in SA,
Problem for Pistorius is, that it was also known that Silverwoods Estate was the MOST SECURE gated complex in South Africa when he murdered Reeva,which was raised in the trial by the Prosecution. Pistorius was so relaxed there he didn't use his alarms, and fell asleep with his double windows wide open.
None of his preconceptions about Intruders takes away from his actions of firing 4 shots he knew would kill whoever was in his tiny cubicle toilet, he knew he would kill them, so that's why he's now being sentenced for Murder,
- no excuses can be given here.

I am hopeful of a just sentencing by Masipa taking into account all of the SCA's findings

 

[Cloen]

DD or DE, I would guess, depending on the nature of the shooting, just as If Reeva or her family had shot and killed a robber, it could have been DD, DE or CH, depending on the circumstances.

Of course you can't fire four times like that and not expect to be found to have acted unlawfully. But if- as you say- robberies are common and often involve armed intruders, that would explain some of Pistorius's fear, wouldn't it? And if Reeva previously locked herself in a room away from robbers, it might explain the locked bathroom door.

If Pistorius' version , one of his many , were true, which it isn't .
And you can't compare the two incidents. Reeva was with all her family/friends whoever was there and they consulted eachother and knew eachother should all go together to another room and lock themselves in , so very different to what Pistorius did in his house.

This is why he used the reason of her being an Intruder , because it happens in SA,
Problem for Pistorius is, that it was also known that Silverwoods Estate was the MOST SECURE gated complex in South Africa when he murdered Reeva,which was raised in the trial by the Prosecution. Pistorius was so relaxed there he didn't use his alarms, and fell asleep with his double windows wide open.
None of his preconceptions about Intruders takes away from his actions of firing 4 shots he knew would kill whoever was in his tiny cubicle toilet, he knew held kill them, so that's why he's now being sentenced for Murder,
- there's no excuses can be given here.
I am hopeful of a just sentencing by Masipa taking into account all of the SCA's findings , and will be back to comment on sentencing.

 

[Trotterly]

If Pistorius' version , one of his many , were true, which it isn't .
And you can't compare the two incidents. Reeva was with all her family/friends whoever was there and they consulted eachother and knew eachother should all go together to another room and lock themselves in , so very different to what Pistorius did in his house.

This is why he used the reason of her being an Intruder , because it happens in SA,
Problem for Pistorius is, that it was also known that Silverwoods Estate was the MOST SECURE gated complex in South Africa when he murdered Reeva,which was raised in the trial by the Prosecution. Pistorius was so relaxed there he didn't use his alarms, and fell asleep with his double windows wide open.
None of his preconceptions about Intruders takes away from his actions of firing 4 shots he knew would kill whoever was in his tiny cubicle toilet, he knew held kill them, so that's why he's now being sentenced for Murder,
- there's no excuses can be given here.
I am hopeful of a just sentencing by Masipa taking into account all of the SCA's findings , and will be back to comment on sentencing.

BIB Including the one about not knowing it was Reeva of course.

 

[Cloen]

BIB Including the one about not knowing it was Reeva of course.

That's was his 'story'.

For this trial and sentencing - It doesn't matter who was behind the door
The life of an intruder doesn't have less worth than that of Reeva's

What Pistorius really knew he'll have to live with that lie

 

[Trotterly]

That's was his 'story'.

For this trial and sentencing - It doesn't matter who was behind the door
The life of an intruder doesn't have less worth than that of Reeva's

What Pistorius really knew he'll have to live with that lie

BIB ..and a finding of the SCA.

 

[4MrsB]

BIB Including the one about not knowing it was Reeva of course.

Of course, everyone has their own reasons for believing whether or not OP might have known Reeva was in the toilet, or whether he simply thought it was an intruder.

I have personally found no other explanation that satisfies ME, other than he knew, 100%, it was Reeva in that toilet. This, as I've said, is what I believe. Others may see it differently of course. Some of the key reasons I have, that swayed me, are as follows:

A) all the testimony from strangers that stated they heard arguing and also screaming from a woman.....before the time of the killing. The neighbor seeing the lights on in the bathroom and movement in front of the window of a person...before the killing.

B) when OP gets the gun - he would have warned her. Simple...he would have warned her + he would have made sure she was awake. Time had passed from asking him in the middle of the night after being awoken, "can't you sleep baba?" ....after that OP got up, brought in 2 fans, closed doors, closed curtains, was dealing with annoying stereo light, and all while on his stumps. Since no talking or help offered by Reeva - very likely she rolled over + went back to sleep. So he would have made sure she was awakened + warned her of what "he thought he heard" (although he simply hears a window opening, nothing more yet - he says he is certain he knows it's an intruder). He is inches from her, he would have warned his loved one, and made sure she was awake.

C) I don't think the "ugly green key" in the bathroom door was something left there day to day. I believe it was kept out of sight in one of the drawers. As no need for a single man to have a key attached to an ugly plastic green fob hanging from the master bathroom door of his modern, expensive, sleek bachelor pad home. Just silly to think that for a second. He is not going to need it or use it. It's his bathroom. And only other person using that bathroom...ever, are going to be female guests/girlfriends. And OP will not anticipate them ever needing/wanting it. So in the drawer it goes. Which means...OP got it out AFTER he shot Reeva, to open the door. (I also think if the key was left in the door on a regular basis, it would definitely NOT have that green plastic fob hanging from it. It would be just the key, left in the door for someone if needed. The plastic green fob is attached so a "spare key" doesn't get lost, like when it's thrown in a drawer. IF HOWEVER, THE KEY WAS IN THE DOOR, I believe it was because Reeva reached in the drawer and grabbed it, to lock herself in, safe from OP, or so she thought.)

D) I believe he was mad & scaring Reeva. And had the gun in his hand while doing so. Why was he mad? I don't know, could be a number of reasons which we will never know. I believe Reeva, scared...ran to the bathroom. And eventually said she was going to call the police. OP lost it at this point and fired into the toilet to stop her from doing this. He was not about to let his celebrity status, his career, his idolization/hero status by So. Africa be jeopardized by this night...Reeva exposing his crazy gun welding actions. He couldn't allow that. Oscar being Oscar...the narcissist he was....wasn't too worried about escaping punishment. He knew he would ALWAYS be believed with whatever story/crap he came up with. He had always been protected before. But NOT if Reeva was there to tell her 1/2 of the story, that might be a problem. It could potentially ruin/damage his career. A lot.
(Of course this is ALL speculation on my part)

E) the moving of Reeva...he even said in his ITV interview, he knew right away she was dead. So why move her downstairs? Because it was so important to alter the scene. And because he wanted to get Reeva out of there, hopefully someone else take her to the hospital, giving him more time to clean things up, come up with answers, and to hide/alter anything that might conflict with this intruder story....maybe fetch the pants thrown out the window, unpack her bags, etc.

He is lying about everything IMO. His "story" doesn't hold water.

 

[Marfa Lights]

Re: the TV interview, I really needed a green bucket when the murderer 'nostalgically' recounted (between chuckles) how Reeva had told him to go brush his teeth the night he murdered her. It was as if she had died from a long slow illness rather than being shot to death in a toilet - by him! Did he or his family actually watch it before it was aired? Does anyone have any awareness in that clan?

Soozie, that part drove me insane and I watched it over and over trying to catch his mumbled explanation that immediately followed about why he was on the wrong side of the bed and got up without his legs to go brush his teeth, and IMO that bit was inserted to be a cute distraction so you would not question why his stumps were on one side of the bed and he was on the other-- or something like that. I tried watching it several times to get the gist of his explanation but his acting so cute about the tooth brushing bit so nauseated me I could not follow it. I think it was inserted for a reason, I am just not sure exactly what that was. It was in his court testimony as well. Anyone?

Also, now that I think about it... I believe the police noted that the adjacent guest bedroom bathroom appeared to have someone's toiletries still set up in there as if it had been currently or recently used. According to Oscar, Reeva asked him to "come" brush his teeth and implied they brushed their teeth together. Did they actually find Reeva's toiletries in his main bathroom? In her overnight bag? I know when my SO and I travel and there is the opportunity to have two separate bathrooms we are quick to take advantage of it.

 

[Marfa Lights]

BIB - I totally agree, and it was the final insult when he declared on national TV that the woman he shot dead would want him to live a life where he could help others. He likes Reeva to have a voice (his voice) when it benefits him. In his affidavit he claimed they were "deeply in love" and that "Reeva felt the same way." As she'd just been violently murdered by him hours before, I doubt it. Then he decides she wouldn't want him to waste his life in prison. Having Reeva 'sympathise' with him from beyond the grave is unreal.

Didn't he also try to communicate in his testimony that he wanted her parents to know Reeva died knowing she was loved.
He may still think he "loved" her. But he also thought she was his to dispose of in the heat of a moment.

 

[Marfa Lights]

All of this . I hope Masipa has her head screwed on the right way on sentencing THIS TIME.

Well, she certainly allowed herself enough time to think it through!

 

[Sherbert]

and if any one of those ROBBERS had shot and killed Reeva and/or her family
they would be on trial for MURDER DOLUS DIRECTUS wouldn't they !

I'm afraid you cannot use that much FORCE (firing 4 shots) at another human being when there is no threat to you whatsoever (and that doesn't include 'thinking' there is a threat) , certainly not in SA. Unfortunately for Pistorius, he DID and he'll be sentenced for Murder for thinking he had a right to take a life under those circumstances. :jail:

According to the SCA, Cloen, he couldn't possibly have thought he had a right to take a life in those circumstances.

 

[4MrsB]

Re ITV INTERVIEW...
I could not handle OP's hysterical crying. It seemed so fake. So forced.

It's 3 years after her death and he is in planned interview - and yet he is crying this hysterically. Uncontrollable. Snot running down his nose. .....I'm not buying it.

Then we have Reeva's father....he is truly suffering. You can feel his pain. As tortured as he is, talking about the loss of his beloved daughter in front of the world, he does not get hysterical. He is not crying out of control, turning red, snot dripping everywhere. But it is clear to every living sole, how tortured and tormented he is, over the loss of his daughter.

OP's "acting" is way over the top, and very unbelievable IMO.

 

[Sherbert]

In both of these, his disability plays a part in why he reacted the way he did, so I feel it has a mitigating significance.

RSBM

I think there's a big question mark over whether or not his disability played a direct part in explaining why he reacted as he did.

IMO, there are a few variables:

1. Masipa now privately believes that Pistorius knew that Reeva was behind the door, that her first judgement was wrong on the facts and wishes to sentence accordingly.

2. Masipa still believes that her first judgement was correct, but has been instructed from on high that justice must be seen to be done by the majority and sentence in line with public sentiment.

3. Masipa still believes that her first judgement was correct, but wishes to appease the majority for the sake of a quiet life.

4. Masipa still believes that her first judgement was correct and is determined to show as much mercy as she can without provoking the State to appeal.

If 4. applies, then, doubtless, his disability will factor in the sentencing.

However, in my view would should, and, probably, will not, feature, as an aggravating factor, is that it cannot be disputed that it has been found that Pistorius never took the Court into his confidence. As a result of this, Reeva's family will never know what really happened that night and will always be left wondering about it.

 

[cottonweaver]

I'll keep it as short as I can, but just to develop a further point from Sherbert's on how Masipa will interpret the SCA findings.....

I'm undecided as to 1-3 in Sherbert's post above.

As for 4, disability will play a part in her sentencing in another way though. I am putting aside the issue of whether it reduces culpability on the night, (as Roux says - "moral blame worthiness" ) just because IDK her thoughts, how she interprets SCA yet.

Disability will play a part in her sentencing of OP as an individual, as it stands, purely re him as an individual in 2016.
Yes, she knows, and still holds, IMO that disabled people can be catered for for quite well in prison.
Instead it will form part of the "mercy" ticket.

I don't mean to sound cynical.
And actually I am hoping that ticket will not take him very far - only a year's mitigation I hope, but it could be more.

Add in "loss" - I am hoping that will not count for too much, but it WILL count IMO. I don't mean the loss of Reeva.

Now his psych Defence from Scholtz. I am intrigued to see how she weighs Scholtz as I think Nel did a lot of damage there. So I am unsure of how much his mental health is going to knock off months/years. ( I do believe, that whilst she may agree Scholtz is not too credible -for a whole host of reasons that I won't go into to now- I do think she will think this man has some serious issues, even if they are still undiagnosed and she will allocate something for that too.)

I'm wondering what people are thinking, in terms of specific mitigation numbers/weighting - ie. years
for these factors alone - disability, mental health, ie. the needs of and mercy for the individual as he is today , not as he was in 2013 when he committed murder.

 

[Trotterly]

Of course, everyone has their own reasons for believing whether or not OP might have known Reeva was in the toilet, or whether he simply thought it was an intruder.

I have personally found no other explanation that satisfies ME, other than he knew, 100%, it was Reeva in that toilet. This, as I've said, is what I believe. Others may see it differently of course. Some of the key reasons I have, that swayed me, are as follows:

A) all the testimony from strangers that stated they heard arguing and also screaming from a woman.....before the time of the killing. The neighbor seeing the lights on in the bathroom and movement in front of the window of a person...before the killing.

B) when OP gets the gun - he would have warned her. Simple...he would have warned her + he would have made sure she was awake. Time had passed from asking him in the middle of the night after being awoken, "can't you sleep baba?" ....after that OP got up, brought in 2 fans, closed doors, closed curtains, was dealing with annoying stereo light, and all while on his stumps. Since no talking or help offered by Reeva - very likely she rolled over + went back to sleep. So he would have made sure she was awakened + warned her of what "he thought he heard" (although he simply hears a window opening, nothing more yet - he says he is certain he knows it's an intruder). He is inches from her, he would have warned his loved one, and made sure she was awake.

C) I don't think the "ugly green key" in the bathroom door was something left there day to day. I believe it was kept out of sight in one of the drawers. As no need for a single man to have a key attached to an ugly plastic green fob hanging from the master bathroom door of his modern, expensive, sleek bachelor pad home. Just silly to think that for a second. He is not going to need it or use it. It's his bathroom. And only other person using that bathroom...ever, are going to be female guests/girlfriends. And OP will not anticipate them ever needing/wanting it. So in the drawer it goes. Which means...OP got it out AFTER he shot Reeva, to open the door. (I also think if the key was left in the door on a regular basis, it would definitely NOT have that green plastic fob hanging from it. It would be just the key, left in the door for someone if needed. The plastic green fob is attached so a "spare key" doesn't get lost, like when it's thrown in a drawer. IF HOWEVER, THE KEY WAS IN THE DOOR, I believe it was because Reeva reached in the drawer and grabbed it, to lock herself in, safe from OP, or so she thought.)

D) I believe he was mad & scaring Reeva. And had the gun in his hand while doing so. Why was he mad? I don't know, could be a number of reasons which we will never know. I believe Reeva, scared...ran to the bathroom. And eventually said she was going to call the police. OP lost it at this point and fired into the toilet to stop her from doing this. He was not about to let his celebrity status, his career, his idolization/hero status by So. Africa be jeopardized by this night...Reeva exposing his crazy gun welding actions. He couldn't allow that. Oscar being Oscar...the narcissist he was....wasn't too worried about escaping punishment. He knew he would ALWAYS be believed with whatever story/crap he came up with. He had always been protected before. But NOT if Reeva was there to tell her 1/2 of the story, that might be a problem. It could potentially ruin/damage his career. A lot.
(Of course this is ALL speculation on my part)

E) the moving of Reeva...he even said in his ITV interview, he knew right away she was dead. So why move her downstairs? Because it was so important to alter the scene. And because he wanted to get Reeva out of there, hopefully someone else take her to the hospital, giving him more time to clean things up, come up with answers, and to hide/alter anything that might conflict with this intruder story....maybe fetch the pants thrown out the window, unpack her bags, etc.

He is lying about everything IMO. His "story" doesn't hold water.

I did see it as a list of points and had a scenario in mind at one point but now I'm not sure.

No one heard an argument and the prosecution had no evidence of one.

The screaming of a woman had me convinced for a while that it could only have been DV murder. I had dismissed EVDM's evidence as having been mistaken about hearing a woman as an aberration but Masipa's caution when treating audio ID evidence in the same measured way as visual ID evidence convinced me that the screams were unsafe. EVDM was mistaken about the gender of one voice but no one else heard this "disputed" voice as questionable in any way. They were all 100% sure they heard either a man or a woman.

Your doubts about him not checking with Reeva make sense 100%. However OP put forward a defence of an "accident" and I consider it quite possible that he could have fixated on the "threat" to the exclusion of all else and had to make the best of it in court.

I'm not sure I follow your logic with the key. How would Reeva lock herself in the toilet (common cause) and leave the key outside for OP to use? I'm not sure I would be able to read too much into a green tag.

The prosecution theory that Reeva fled to the cubicle because of OP sounded good until I tried to fit in each possible scenario and nothing fitted with all the evidence except the rather unlikely one of OP chasing Reeva into the cubicle and firing as she was closing the door. This is mainly because if she was being threatened even indirectly with the gun it is impossible for me to believe she would have done anything but hide in the corner next to the loo to minimise her exposure to the door. This is a really important point. If you think you life is or might be under threat from a gun you do not stand right behind the door. Other scenarios like Reeva talking to OP behind the door do not work for other reasons but especially not with OP brandishing that gun.

He did say he knew she was dead in the interview, but he couldn't have known and as he testified in court he subsequently discovered he was wrong when he said she was breathing. The state's blood stain evidence of arterial bleeding at the bottom of the stairs shows that Reeva was still alive at that point so I don't buy the alteration of the scene or disposal of Reeva's body.

 

[Really?]

2..........:jail:

 

[cottonweaver]

2..........:jail:

hey Really,

I am anticipating something good from you now when you reach zero. There has to be a relevant emoji for it.

You know what'll happen don't you - you'll miss your alarm on the 6th:gaah:!


Hey I just realised now - happy 4th July to all those celebrating!:happy4th:

 

[soozieqtips]

I'm wondering what people are thinking, in terms of specific mitigation numbers/weighting - ie. years
for these factors alone - disability, mental health, ie. the needs of and mercy for the individual as he is today , not as he was in 2013 when he committed murder.

snipped

The 'broken' individual he is today has nothing (IMO) to do with remorse for killing another human being, but a lot to do with the countdown to prison getting closer and closer. His disability shouldn't factor in at all, since he already served time inside and coped fine. He'll still have his legs, therefore the stumbling and hobbling round his cell won't be a factor (although we all know how nimble he is on his stumps in the dark...)

As for his mental health, again, I think that's to do with the fact he thought this day would never come and that he'd never have to go back inside. His delay tactics and appeals have come to nothing, so it's not surprising the poor murderer is suffering, knowing he's all out of tricks. And mercy? Hmm. Perhaps if he hadn't used national TV to speak for Reeva from beyond the grave, or used the court to exaggerate his disability so he could play on Masipa's sympathy, then maybe he'd deserve some mercy. However, he showed Reeva no mercy. He's tried every tactic to avoid more prison time, and he's dragged Reeva's family through an emotional roller coaster - all to avoid doing time for murder.

IMO, he is exactly the same devious person he was in 2013. Little has changed, although unsurprisingly we've seen his continued resistance to being punished for the crime of murder, ie; the Con Court debacle and the TV interview. Then there's the utter disregard for Reeva's family as he ploughs on thinking only of himself, talking graphically about Reeva's blood on TV, making out they were so in love. For God's sake, they knew each other for a matter of weeks! And for some of that time Reeva was scared of him. Hardly Romeo and Juliet.

So after much ranting, I think Masipa will give him a few years off the minimum (because he's 'broken') and maybe add another 10 for the fake hobbling and sly TV interview!

 

[Trotterly]

hey Really,

I am anticipating something good from you now when you reach zero. There has to be a relevant emoji for it.

You know what'll happen don't you - you'll miss your alarm on the 6th:gaah:!


Hey I just realised now - happy 4th July to all those celebrating!:happy4th:

Yes the jail door will open and the little man will escape :facepalm: