Post sentencing discussion and the upcoming appeal

[Val1]

Well, if it is true what many of us believe happened that night, she clearly wasn't going to put up with it any longer, and was about to leave him. The problem with these types of Jeckyll and Hyde characters is that you are drawn in by them because of their nice soft, caring side and often their wit and intelligence (not sure that applies in OP's case .. but Reeva did mention him being clever once, and she seemed to be very struck by him because of that), and then when they start getting nasty, you can't quite believe it, so you keep on giving them the benefit of the doubt until such time as you realise that you're not imagining it, and this is what they are really like. But give her some credit, she was only with him for 3 months and it seems she was most likely leaving him that night because she'd had enough.

This is one of the things people in general need to learn about abusive relationships and how you can't just say 'why didn't she leave him' .. there are all sorts of reasons why women don't, or are not able to (especially if they are not financially independent) .. and imo, the question shouldn't even need to be asked, not if people fully understand these types of relationships.

It wasn't even 3 months really, wasn't someone going to try and do a time chart to see just how much time they had actually spent together, what with both their careers, traveling, holidays, living in different towns, etc?

 

[lolastareyes]

So, hey, thanks for this, Judge, I really appreciate it!

From that link:

Taylor initially told City Press Reeva is dating one of Pistorius’ friends, and later said the model was fully aware of what had happened in her and Oscar’s relationship.

“She has been following me for a long time on Instagram (a photo-sharing system on Twitter) and knows exactly where I am and everything going on in my relationship with Oscar,” she said.


Does anyone here have any experience with Instagram? I have no idea how it even works. How exactly would ST know that Reeva was "stalking" her there?

On the topic, in general, does anyone here have any...

Thoughts?
Reflections?
Ideas?
Speculation?

...or is the whole thing complete nonsense - the fruit of ST's heartbroken/jealous heart?

I was very surprised to see Sam wearing a Reeva photo in court. That I just could not believe. :waitasec: Considering OP said in court that Sam was attacking Reeva online (apparently).

I think when Sam saw Oscar with Reeva she was extremely hurt and perhaps wanted to attack and humiliate them both. I honestly don't think we are ever going to get the truth.

Also keep in mind Joberg social circles are very small.

 

[jay-jay]

On top of it all, we have fame and fortune and a bunch of enablers around him. He never had to be accountable for his poor behavior.

I believe that Reeva was the first person that ever stood up to him and he just couldn't handle it. He 'lost it' that nite and now he is suffering the consequences.

~rsbm~

BBM - I think you are absolutely spot on there.

 

[jay-jay]

Well, if it is true what many of us believe happened that night, she clearly wasn't going to put up with it any longer, and was about to leave him. The problem with these types of Jeckyll and Hyde characters is that you are drawn in by them because of their nice soft, caring side and often their wit and intelligence (not sure that applies in OP's case .. but Reeva did mention him being clever once, and she seemed to be very struck by him because of that), and then when they start getting nasty, you can't quite believe it, so you keep on giving them the benefit of the doubt until such time as you realise that you're not imagining it, and this is what they are really like. But give her some credit, she was only with him for 3 months and it seems she was most likely leaving him that night because she'd had enough.

This is one of the things people in general need to learn about abusive relationships and how you can't just say 'why didn't she leave him' .. there are all sorts of reasons why women don't, or are not able to (especially if they are not financially independent) .. and imo, the question shouldn't even need to be asked, not if people fully understand these types of relationships.


Edit: just to add .. it's a known fact that in abusive, violent, relationships .. the most dangerous time for the woman is when she is about to leave the relationship. This is known by all the DV support agencies. Hence another reason why many women just do not feel they are able to leave, i.e. because they feel their life may be in danger if they do try to attempt it.

Replying to my own post ..

This link to the 'Refuge' site (the UK's biggest support agency) explains the 'why doesn't she just leave him' question in more detail: http://www.refuge.org.uk/about-domestic-violence/barriers-to-leaving/

.. and this bit about leaving the relationship:

It takes a great deal of courage to leave someone who controls and intimidates you. Women often attempt to leave several times before making the final break.

Remember, leaving an abusive partner can be very dangerous. Women are actually at the greatest risk of homicide at the point of separation or after leaving a violent partner.

It is important that you plan your departure safely. If you are planning to leave an abusive partner, read our Planning to leave page.

.. this is the bit where these agencies are of the most help to women trying to leave a relationship .. the DV centre I was registered with gave me a huge amount of support at the time I was trying to end the relationship with my violent partner (which wasn't a case of me leaving him, because he was living in my house, so it was a case of having to try and get him out), and they gave me advice on how to end the relationship, and about how I had to be careful because then was the time that he would start 'pulling out all the stops' .. which is exactly what he ended up doing after I finally got him out (with the help of the police) and then he came back next day, broke in and trashed the place (fortunately I wasn't there at the time .. god knows what would have happened to me if I had been).

 

[JudgeJudi]

I was very surprised to see Sam wearing a Reeva photo in court. That I just could not believe. :waitasec: Considering OP said in court that Sam was attacking Reeva online (apparently).

I think when Sam saw Oscar with Reeva she was extremely hurt and perhaps wanted to attack and humiliate them both. I honestly don't think we are ever going to get the truth.

Also keep in mind Joberg social circles are very small.

I have a different view. I think Sam knew leaving him was the right thing to do and had seen enough of his bad behaviour, but I still think she cares for him. Did you see when Kim Martin was addressing the Court, Sam was crying as were many others. How could anyone not be moved by her words. IMO she's one very lucky girl because it could so easily have been her.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Keep safe... I know forest fires and they can get out of hand too quick. Please don't leave it till the last minute... I'd be lost without you to keep coming back at me! :●)

Thank you G.bng. It's all a bit surreal here at the moment. The fire is 20 times bigger than when I first posted. Where I live there's only one way in and one way out, so we couldn't leave even if we wanted to because the highway is closed. We're expecting a cool change in the next couple of hours but unfortunately that can blow the fire directly towards us. I'm not overly worried. You sort of get used it after all these years. Last year just under 200 homes burnt down 15 minutes away from us. Now that was a catastrophe. When you see the flames and hear them ... it sounds like a massive freight train bearing down on you. We've seen that twice and it's terrifying beyond belief.

ETA. Apropos your last comment, it's always good for others to have a different opinion. Makes you think outside the square.

 

[JudgeJudi]

So sorry to hear this Judi. Keep yourselves and doglet safe.

Thanks IB. We're okay. If I can't see it or hear it I feel safe. Ridiculous I know but what else can we do, we're stuck here. The doglet is very unhappy with the aircranes because they're so low over the house that even the walls shake and she gets very scared. It's getting dark now so they'll probably stop very soon. It's not even summer yet so I guess it's going to be a very long, very hot one when it starts.

 

[jay-jay]

I have a different view. I think Sam knew leaving him was the right thing to do and had seen enough of his bad behaviour, but I still think she cares for him. Did you see when Kim Martin was addressing the Court, Sam was crying as were many others. How could anyone not be moved by her words. IMO she's one very lucky girl because it could so easily have been her.

Yes, plus also I think it says something about her integrity that she choose to back the Steenkamps after apparently not being particularly enamoured with Reeva while she was alive. To those saying she (Sam) is in it for the money, etc .. well, she could just have easily have backed Oscar if she was that way minded, and tried to get back in with him and his mega-rich family .. but she didn't did she, she chose to support the family who, it seems, holds the same type of values as most normal people do .. and I think it really says quite a lot about her that she can put behind her any rivalry there would've been between her and Reeva, and I guess she now finds a kind of connection with her, having both experienced the same thing with OP, and that she feels it could so easily have been her. I don't find it odd at all that she is supporting the Steenkamps, and supporting justice for Reeva.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Yes, plus also I think it says something about her integrity that she choose to back the Steenkamps after apparently not being particularly enamoured with Reeva while she was alive. To those saying she (Sam) is in it for the money, etc .. well, she could just have easily have backed Oscar if she was that way minded, and tried to get back in with him and his mega-rich family .. but she didn't did she, she chose to support the family who, it seems, holds the same type of values as most normal people do .. and I think it really says quite a lot about her that she can put behind her any rivalry there would've been between her and Reeva, and I guess she now finds a kind of connection with her, having both experienced the same thing with OP, and that she feels it could so easily have been her. I don't find it odd at all that she is supporting the Steenkamps, and supporting justice for Reeva.

I agree 100%. When she cried while testifying I thought then, and still believe it's because she still cares for him in some way, but not that she wants him back. If this is so, it would have been a painful experience to testify against him. While some people thought she was a jealous ex out for revenge, she didn't give me that impression at all. There are still some people left in the world with honesty and integrity and I think she was standing up for what she believed was right.

 

[JudgeJudi]

<Respectfully snipped>

.. and this bit about leaving the relationship:

.. this is the bit where these agencies are of the most help to women trying to leave a relationship .. the DV centre I was registered with gave me a huge amount of support at the time I was trying to end the relationship with my violent partner (which wasn't a case of me leaving him, because he was living in my house, so it was a case of having to try and get him out), and they gave me advice on how to end the relationship, and about how I had to be careful because then was the time that he would start 'pulling out all the stops' .. which is exactly what he ended up doing after I finally got him out (with the help of the police) and then he came back next day, broke in and trashed the place (fortunately I wasn't there at the time .. god knows what would have happened to me if I had been).

Until I joined WS I knew next to nothing about DV. I can now appreciate why victims often don't leave those situations, but before I didn't really understand why it just wasn't a case of walking out the door. As I don't know anyone who has been a victim - and I know it's frequently hidden from others - I thought it more a case of a mother with children who had nowhere to go and no means of support, and that was basically it. Yes, I was very naïve. It's been a massive learning curve being here and reading the awful ordeals so many have been through. The statistics worldwide are worsening each year so I count myself lucky to have never experienced that.

Last night I was looking at a few other areas of WS and I discovered a brand new thread posted by Marlywings who just happens to be Australian. I was almost sick when I read what happened to this poor woman and I just can't get it out of my mind. Sometimes it might be better to be dead than to live with horror of this magnitude. Talk about man's inhumanity to man. I can't abide cruelty in any way, shape or form, and that includes animals. You only have to look at people like Hitler and now the members of ISIL to see that cruelty knows no bounds, and they don't have to look very far to find many people who can and do commit atrocities. I've obviously lived a very sheltered life and don't understand any of this.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...was-tortured-by-an-evil-monster-Blacktown-NSW

 

[lolastareyes]

Yes, plus also I think it says something about her integrity that she choose to back the Steenkamps after apparently not being particularly enamoured with Reeva while she was alive. To those saying she (Sam) is in it for the money, etc .. well, she could just have easily have backed Oscar if she was that way minded, and tried to get back in with him and his mega-rich family .. but she didn't did she, she chose to support the family who, it seems, holds the same type of values as most normal people do .. and I think it really says quite a lot about her that she can put behind her any rivalry there would've been between her and Reeva, and I guess she now finds a kind of connection with her, having both experienced the same thing with OP, and that she feels it could so easily have been her. I don't find it odd at all that she is supporting the Steenkamps, and supporting justice for Reeva.

It does show a degree of maturity on her part, she really is the only person who would understand what Reeva went through.

 

[Starmelody]

Does anyone else think that if Nel had not boldly stated in his closing arguments that if the sentence was too light, the public might take justice into its own hands, Masipa would have felt free to hand down a non-custodial (non)sentence?

Were Nel’s barbed words a polite but very real reminder - a WARNING - of potentially grave social consequences, shall we say, not in OP’s best “interests”?

I think she was leaning heavily towards a velvet-gloves, token “sentence” (mansion arrest) ... before Nel spoke and dropped her back into hard reality.

While in her own mind she was being “merciful”, Masipa did OP no favors with her ultra-light sentence on multiple counts.

Above all, she cheapened Reeva’s life and that of every woman in SA.

She made a mockery and travesty of the law.

She essentially scolded OP, naughty boy - if you go killing another woman you’ll have to do another 10 months in VIP Prison.

I vehemently disagree with Masipa - the public has a vested interest in the sentence, as the criminal offense was against the public interest; public sentiment should carry great weight in sentencing. After all, the judiciary represents the interest of the public.

Where once vigilantism served social justice, now the rule of law must.

If SCA doesn’t do it’s job and bring down the hammer, OP may face more “challenges” than he ever bargained for when he steps outside those (safe) prison walls - real punishment.

I completely agree with you.
I am very annoyed that Massipa claimed that REEVA did not have time to scream. What did she base this on?

The pathologist said:

Saayman: “I think it would be abnormal if one did not scream after sustaining an injury of this nature.”

Mangena said that there would be a pause between the first and second shot - due to the location of the injuries.
None of this was disputed.
So in her judgement statement how could she conclude that reeva did not scream.

Am I missing something here?

 

[jay-jay]

I completely agree with you.
I am very annoyed that Massipa claimed that REEVA did not have time to scream. What did she base this on?

The pathologist said:

Saayman: &#8220;I think it would be abnormal if one did not scream after sustaining an injury of this nature.&#8221;

Mangena said that there would be a pause between the first and second shot - due to the location of the injuries.
None of this was disputed.
So in her judgement statement how could she conclude that reeva did not scream.

Am I missing something here?

BBM .. and not only that but, seeing as the second shot missed .. then Reeva would've had extra time to have screamed after the first shot. So .. first shot .. hits Reeva's right hip .. she screams out while Pistorius pauses then re-aims .. and misses her .. she's still screaming .. then the third shot to her arm .. who knows whether she is still able to scream by this point (i.e. through exhaustion?) but she isn't dead at that point and it's still possible .. then the fourth shot to the head .. then silence. Hardly a coincidence that OP decides to stop shooting right at that precise moment, imo. He stops because she's stopped screaming, I'm certain of it.

I wish we had a better idea as to the intervals between those shots, and the pause .. they may not have been quite as quick as the defence tried to make out they were (and which Masipa decided all four were just 'in quick succession' )

 

[mrjitty]

I completely agree with you.
I am very annoyed that Massipa claimed that REEVA did not have time to scream. What did she base this on?

The pathologist said:

Saayman: &#8220;I think it would be abnormal if one did not scream after sustaining an injury of this nature.&#8221;

Mangena said that there would be a pause between the first and second shot - due to the location of the injuries.
None of this was disputed.
So in her judgement statement how could she conclude that reeva did not scream.

Am I missing something here?

Yes. There are so many examples of this circular logic.

She didn't scream - therefor the witnesses did not hear her!

And of course no need to deal with all the evidence in detail.

 

[JudgeJudi]

This first tweet is only to show that Reinhardt van Wyk is one of Carl’s “inner circle”

Carl Pistorius @carlpistorius • Nov 12
Chilled (literally) evening with my WINGMEN @reyrey1247 @Phill_Cruize tonight! Some deep laughter! Missing a few of my other inner circle.

But looking at Reinhardt van Wyk’s tweets, I found this and thought it more than a little interesting:

Reinhardt van Wyk @reyrey1247 • 11 Oct 2013

"Part of a best friend's job should be to clear your browser history when you die" @RynerWagner


Reinhardt van Wyk is a friend of Ryner Wagner

Ryner Wagner &#63743;&#9813; @RynerWagner • 26 May 2013

Super awkward for auditing. Computer auditing on general knowledge - this will not end well. #LetTheGamesBegin #CEVs

To better understand what computer auditing was I Googled it. Mr Fossil, would these tweets indicate anything to you? I know Carl knows something about IT but obviously these friends do too.

http://www.readyratios.com/reference/audit/computer_auditing.html

 

[JudgeJudi]

I see that you're here mrjitty and wonder if you could help me out on the appeal. When Nel said that the State were appealing the conviction and sentence, I automatically assumed that the DT would be presenting argument as well. If this is the case, what is the purpose of them also appealing, because I can't for one moment believe they'd be appealing the conviction or sentence.

 

[soozieqtips]

Daily Mail again.

Although a lot of its sensationalist headlines are exaggerated, some are not. So I don't know what to believe of the following.

"Oscar Pistorius has been training behind bars alongside one of South Africa's most infamous underworld criminals, it emerged today. News of the unlikely partnership was revealed in a letter of complaint to prison authorities after a treadmill and exercise bike used by the Czech fugitive and the Paralympian sprinter were moved".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aining-sessions-notorious-Czech-gangster.html

 

[Mr Fossil]

This first tweet is only to show that Reinhardt van Wyk is one of Carl&#8217;s &#8220;inner circle&#8221;

Carl Pistorius @carlpistorius &#8226; Nov 12
Chilled (literally) evening with my WINGMEN @reyrey1247 @Phill_Cruize tonight! Some deep laughter! Missing a few of my other inner circle.

But looking at Reinhardt van Wyk&#8217;s tweets, I found this and thought it more than a little interesting:

Reinhardt van Wyk @reyrey1247 &#8226; 11 Oct 2013

"Part of a best friend's job should be to clear your browser history when you die" @RynerWagner


Reinhardt van Wyk is a friend of Ryner Wagner

Ryner Wagner &#63743;&#9813; @RynerWagner &#8226; 26 May 2013

Super awkward for auditing. Computer auditing on general knowledge - this will not end well. #LetTheGamesBegin #CEVs

To better understand what computer auditing was I Googled it. Mr Fossil, would these tweets indicate anything to you? I know Carl knows something about IT but obviously these friends do too.

http://www.readyratios.com/reference/audit/computer_auditing.html

Ryner seems to be working as or studying something that involves computer auditing. Computer auditing involves checking the integrity, checks & balances, procedures, back-ups, security etc. of a computer system. This can involve varying degrees of IT capability. It could be part of a wider accountancy course (it doesn't have to be IT specific).

RvW's comment is probably just a comment. It's an interesting area of discussion in itself: what happens to your internet presence when you die? I was asked the other day if I wanted to add my father as a friend on Facebook ... I didn't know he used it and he's been dead for nearly 3 years but his internet presence clearly lives on until I figure what to do about it.

I don't see either comments as sinister but worth keeping in mind that Carl may have had some assistance.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Daily Mail again.

Although a lot of its sensationalist headlines are exaggerated, some are not. So I don't know what to believe of the following.

"Oscar Pistorius has been training behind bars alongside one of South Africa's most infamous underworld criminals, it emerged today. News of the unlikely partnership was revealed in a letter of complaint to prison authorities after a treadmill and exercise bike used by the Czech fugitive and the Paralympian sprinter were moved".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aining-sessions-notorious-Czech-gangster.html

"My equipment was offered to Mr Oscar Pistorius, to train on, on his arrival at this facility... without my knowledge," Krejcir wrote.

"I did not object to Mr Pistorius utilising my equipment after he arrived at this facility and in fact Mr Pistorius and I started training together."

However, on Sunday the equipment was moved to the visiting area and then again to a single cell on the ground floor of the prison, he said".

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/O...ght-lipped-over-Oscar-Krejcir-claims-20141114

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Daily Mail Online &#8207;@MailOnline 3 Std.Vor 3 Stunden

Revealed: Oscar Pistorius is gym training with Czech gangster behind bars http://dailym.ai/1GVJTsD

SA Breaking News &#8207;@SABreakingNews 3 Std.Vor 3 Stunden

Krejcir and Pistorius workout buddies http://ow.ly/EfJcE

Themba Mbuzi &#8207;@TMbuzi 3 Std.Vor 3 Stunden

&#8220;@SABreakingNews: Krejcir and Pistorius workout buddies http://ow.ly/EfJcE &#8221; Soon to be wife & husband in jail

Elsie Rambau &#8207;@ElsieRambau 3 Std.Vor 3 Stunden

@SABreakingNews Hope Krejcir will not corrupt Pistorius!"