Theory Thread - What happened at Pistorius' house on the night of Feb. 13, 2013?

[Mr Fossil]

"When I finished the phone call she called me to come brush my teeth. So I walked to the, I walked to the bathroom without my prosthetic legs on and I brushed my teeth. Whilst I was busy brushing my teeth she went back to the bedroom."

The cleaning teeth episode is strange until you realise that OP wants to confirm he's legless, place her wash bag in the bathroom and himself there after her so that he can confirm, if asked, that the window was closed when he went to bed. The last sentence is amazingly unnecessary detail to give over one year later.

 

[Mr Fossil]

I'm investigating OP's "texting back and forth" with his cousin Graham Binge before he calls him at 20:25:07 on 13 Feb. GB says the WhatsApps started at 20:10 but the GPRS connection allows this 'conversation' to last a maximum 58 seconds unless I'm misreading something. Something is wrong.

 

[Mr Fossil]

If I was sending WhatsApp messages to someone else late that evening / early morning and I got found out, an argument ensued and I shot someone, I would need to have the incriminating messages removed before handing the phone into the police. I can’t destroy the phone or corrupt it as that too would be incriminating. Simply deleting the messages would leave the data on the phone so that wouldn't work. But if I knew a clever IT person I could get them to edit the raw message data in situ on the phone to change the time, recipient and content of each message to look like the messages were a conversation with someone else at an earlier time. The phone data integrity would remain intact.

 

[Interested Bystander]

If this were a trial by jury with WS members, the jury would reach a guilty verdict (by my reckoning of % of posters leaning one way or the other.) Over on Debate.org, 83% believe him to be guilty (the percentage equates to the 10-2 needed for a jury verdict).

It will certainly be interesting to hear Masipa's judgement.

I know nobody amongst my friends and associates who believes he is not guilty, not a single soul.

 

[Suthrnqt]

I know nobody amongst my friends and associates who believes he is not guilty, not a single soul.

Ditto!!!

 

[eimajjjj]

Just had a look at calendar and time difference and I see it's my day off Sep 11th so 5pm my time I'll be able to watch Masipa do her thing live!

Anyone have any idea how long she'll take, or what order she'll go through the counts, or when she tells us she's found him guilty/not guilty? Any references/transcripts for SA judges giving verdicts?

I suspect we'll know straightaway from her tone/choice of words how it's going to pan out.

Or perhaps she'll keep us guessing like the psych evaluation verdict..

 

[pandax81]

I quoted you directly, and I was very careful to.

Here are the misrepresentations which you persist in making:

1. You falsely accuse me of saying one can act in self defence or putative self defence without intention. You can offer no evidence to support this false accusation because I never said it, and I do not propose it. Here’s one of my many previous posts on this issue to prove it:

Thought, awareness and intention are therefore necessary components of acting in putative private defence. “The defence of putative private defence implies rational but mistaken thought. It is inconsistent with a lack of awareness of what you are doing.” S v De Oliveira 1993 (2) SACR 59 (A). In his evidence, the accused was clear in claiming awareness of discharging the firearm, but denying thought and denying intention. It is therefore simple to reject putative private defence in this case, as this was not the evidence of the accused himself.

2. You falsely accuse me of saying one can have acted in self defence and still be negligent in the killing and found guilty of culpable homicide. You can offer no evidence to support this false accusation because I never said it, and I do not propose it. Here’s one of my recent posts on this issue to prove it:

Private defence: I did not kill unlawfully. Subjectively I believed I was acting in private defence, and objectively I did act in private defence. There is no unlawful killing and therefore I am not guilty of murder or culpable homicide.

3. You then played what I’m very sorry to say appears a devious trick. You falsely accused me of asking for evidence that I said Y, and then went back and quoted me saying Y - I guess as ‘proof’ of me being contradictory and untruthful. The truth is however I was asking about X. You falsely accused me of X, I told you I never said X, and asked you where you got the idea from that I said X. It goes further though - I explicitly explained that I had indeed said Y and stood by my statement of Y. For me, this makes it implausible that you made a mistake. It appears you were trying to deceive people who read your post in order to assassinate my credibility. This is inexcusable behaviour in my book, sorry. Here are the posts in question to prove it:

Firstly, I never said you can act in self defence and be found guilty of culpable homicide. Your 2nd sentence and Q therefore does not apply, I agree it is impossible to negligently kill someone when you acted in self defence. I wonder where you got the idea I had said that from?

I did however say you can act in putative self defence and be found guilty of culpable homicide.

You also very clearly said: "Until you accept that an accused can be found to have acted in putative self-defence and STILL be guilty of culpable homicide....."

Now you are saying you don't know here I got the idea that you think that? From you!

4. You falsely accused me of claiming you had directly misquoted me. I never said you misquoted me, I said you were not reading my posts properly at all and were misrepresenting what I said, and that this I did not welcome. The misrepresentations include nos 1 to 3 above, They now also include this one, no 4, which shows that you were not even reading that post properly which pointed out you were not reading posts properly!

It’s up to you, but I would receive gratefully an apology and acceptance that 1-4 were not my propositions and that you innocently misunderstood. I did not want to get involved in petty argument, but I feel you are trampling on my credibility unfairly and I feel I must defend myself.

(We are then left with what your argument actually consists of. I have read it carefully and with respect and reasoned interpretation as I do all posts. Your first argument rests on your proposition that culpable homicide requires acting without intent, i.e. automatically. Your second rests on your proposition that dolus directus for murder does not require direct intent to kill. I think these views speak for themselves, the most polite I can be is that I think they are seriously and obviously flawed, and I do not personally wish to give them further consideration and discussion if you don't mind, although I fully respect your right to hold your opinion and to share your disagreement)

Hope we can move on now,
Sorry guys and gals for interrupting your interesting discussion, i felt i had to respond, that's all
Regards
pandax

 

[Lux et Veritas]

"When I finished the phone call she called me to come brush my teeth. So I walked to the, I walked to the bathroom without my prosthetic legs on and I brushed my teeth. Whilst I was busy brushing my teeth she went back to the bedroom."

The cleaning teeth episode is strange until you realise that OP wants to confirm he's legless, place her wash bag in the bathroom and himself there after her so that he can confirm, if asked, that the window was closed when he went to bed. The last sentence is amazingly unnecessary detail to give over one year later.

It is strange in the extreme. What adult would ever call another adult to come brush his teeth (especially romantic girlfriend/boyfriend)? That is the stuff for six year olds.

As completely ridiculous as OP's scenario is, I think you're correct on his preemptive strategy. He really is a cold, calculating b#stard.

 

[Giles]

Just had a look at calendar and time difference and I see it's my day off Sep 11th so 5pm my time I'll be able to watch Masipa do her thing live!

Anyone have any idea how long she'll take, or what order she'll go through the counts, or when she tells us she's found him guilty/not guilty? Any references/transcripts for SA judges giving verdicts?

I suspect we'll know straightaway from her tone/choice of words how it's going to pan out.

Or perhaps she'll keep us guessing like the psych evaluation verdict..

Gosh, it's exciting just thinking of it.

I kept my diary free as soon as I heard when the verdict would be given. I hope it doesn't last more than a day though, because I'm busy the next day. A couple of legal experts said it could last between 1-3 days because of how much evidence there is.

I reckon she'll keep us guessing to some extent, but the key issue will be if she decides to reject Oscar's testimony. If she does, we will have a very good idea of what's to come. If not, it might be nail biting. [emoji4]

 

[4MrsB]

Reality is she will heavily rely on the Heads of Argument. For sure, she won't be delving deep into the phone records etc to bring up points that weren't made in court or put to the witnesses. Therein lies an appeal.

I respectfully disagree. Not knowing the S.A. court of law & the differences wi the US courts, I may be totally off the mark. However, my thoughts are that this judge will not simply "rely heavily on the Heads of Argument" summation presented in determining a verdict. Yes, she is overloaded with cases, but she will not use that as an excuse to make things easier on her. Certainly not in this case.

In the US, I don't even think the closing arguments can be considered evidence (although attorneys can't present anything new during closings. They can only refer to what's already been brought before the court during trial). Each side is not just stating facts/evidence, they're "interpreting" the evidence and the role they believe it plays. The Heads of Argument seem quite similar to this, although council in S.A. seem to have much more leeway with what they include & how it's interpreted. Roux certainly seemed to exercise a great deal of freedom in this area.

I think of the Heads of Argument as the "Cliff Notes" for the Judge, pointing her in the direction the state/defense is aiming. Highlighting what they believe to be very important, and why. Placing the "puzzle pieces" together so the Judge can "see" a more clear picture of what they believe to be the truth as to what happened. IMO they serve as a "road map" for the Judge, directing her to various aspects of the trial. So she can then go back to the transcripts and her notes & look closely at that testimony, cross, specific evidence (including photos & possibly phone records), etc. I believe wholeheartedly Judge Masipa & her Assessors will be diligent in focusing closely on details & specific testimony brought out during trial, weighing it's importance after thorough examination of the transcripts & her personal notes (of areas she finds important). I think to be suggesting she will simply rely mainly on the Heads of Argument for determining her verdict is selling her short. As a Judge in a criminal matter with the stakes this high (possibility of life in prison, and a young woman who has lost her life), she will not be taking any shortcuts. The Heads of Argument will guide her to areas the state/defense hopes she spends care on, but she may not even agree with what those areas are & choose not to spend much/any time on some of them. She may have her own agenda as to the areas she wants to go over with a fine tooth comb.

After careful consideration of the evidence and how it applies to the laws of SA, I believe Judge Masipa will render a very fair verdict in this case. I believe Reeva's loved ones will be satisfied that justice was served.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

It was about five minutes before I hit the door with the cricket bat that I fired my weapon.
- Oscar Pistorius, testimony April 9 2014

@25:57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgGuW2XPL5E


Put another way - I shot four times through the closed door then waited five minutes before I hit the door with the cricket bat.

OK, we’ll play his fantasy game.

Even on his version, WTF was he doing for FIVE MINUTES?!!!

At the very most, it would take him only 1 minute to “search” for Reeva in the “dark” bedroom and put on his legs (documented at 27 seconds).

I’ll tell you exactly what he was doing.

If she wasn’t already dead, he was waiting for her to bleed out, carefully formulating his “intruder” story and manipulating the scene.

Worse, after he bashed open the door, he was “sad” (no screaming in shock), sat down and cried over Reeva for well...he doesn’t know how long!
More damning proof he wanted to insure she died.

Worst of all, on the State’s charge, OP had +/- 15 minutes between first hitting the door with the bat starting at about 3:00am (blood-curdling, escalating female screams) then shooting through the door at about 3:15am (female screams stop). This means that OP was virtually terrorizing Reeva for 15 MINUTES (damaged bath panel and broken wall tiles).

This is how the truth should have come out of his mouth:
“It was about fifteen minutes before I fired my weapon that I hit the door with the cricket bat.”

Guaranteed that Reeva was dead before he dramatically carried her downstairs and tried to “save” her.

OP’s statement above is all but a signed confession.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

I respectfully disagree. Not knowing the S.A. court of law & the differences wi the US courts, I may be totally off the mark. However, my thoughts are that this judge will not simply "rely heavily on the Heads of Argument" summation presented in determining a verdict. Yes, she is overloaded with cases, but she will not use that as an excuse to make things easier on her. Certainly not in this case.

In the US, I don't even think the closing arguments can be considered evidence (although attorneys can't present anything new during closings. They can only refer to what's already been brought before the court during trial). Each side is not just stating facts/evidence, they're "interpreting" the evidence and the role they believe it plays. The Heads of Argument seem quite similar to this, although council in S.A. seem to have much more leeway with what they include & how it's interpreted. Roux certainly seemed to exercise a great deal of freedom in this area.

I think of the Heads of Argument as the "Cliff Notes" for the Judge, pointing her in the direction the state/defense is aiming. Highlighting what they believe to be very important, and why. Placing the "puzzle pieces" together so the Judge can "see" a more clear picture of what they believe to be the truth as to what happened. IMO they serve as a "road map" for the Judge, directing her to various aspects of the trial. So she can then go back to the transcripts and her notes & look closely at that testimony, cross, specific evidence (including photos & possibly phone records), etc. I believe wholeheartedly Judge Masipa & her Assessors will be diligent in focusing closely on details & specific testimony brought out during trial, weighing it's importance after thorough examination of the transcripts & her personal notes (of areas she finds important). I think to be suggesting she will simply rely mainly on the Heads of Argument for determining her verdict is selling her short. As a Judge in a criminal matter with the stakes this high (possibility of life in prison, and a young woman who has lost her life), she will not be taking any shortcuts. The Heads of Argument will guide her to areas the state/defense hopes she spends care on, but she may not even agree with what those areas are & choose not to spend much/any time on some of them. She may have her own agenda as to the areas she wants to go over with a fine tooth comb.

After careful consideration of the evidence and how it applies to the laws of SA, I believe Judge Masipa will render a very fair verdict in this case. I believe Reeva's loved ones will be satisfied that justice was served.

Excellent post, MrsB!

Given her background and judicial history, Judge Masipa was the perfect choice for this case - her demeanor and actions have been exemplary - stellar, in fact. She has taken great pain to insure an orderly,100% fair trial. I believe she will go far beyond a fine-tooth comb - she will employ a cutting-edge laser in coming to a decision.

The OP murder trial really is a landmark case for SA - the first ever televised, the first of a SA national/global sports hero, etc. - she absolutely wants to get it right. Whatever her verdict, she knows it will set precedent - one of which would have far-reaching, disastrous consequences in a nation already beset by epidemic murder and violence against women.

I read in a profile about her that she regularly arrives at work before anyone else (some ungodly hour like 5am?) and works very long hours - her husband does all the cooking! This is a judge who takes her duties extremely seriously - she will not simply gloss over the HoAs to come to a verdict. I fully expect My Lady’s verdict to be every bit as fascinating as the trial itself - if not more.

 

[Mr Fossil]

Sales testifies that the web browsing history of the iPad3 starts at 18:29 and that the history prior to this time had been wiped by the owner.

OP in his EIC states "I had access to it [the iPad] the entire day"

Why would he wipe it unless there was something he didn't want Reeva to see?

NB I'm surprised that the deleted history couldn't be recovered

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Lux, not to digress, but do you think OP (assuming his guilt for a moment ;-)) has confided in a family member? I'm under the impression they are all under his spell.

Sent from my Windows Phone 8X by HTC using Tapatalk

I’m 99.99% positive that OP has told NO ONE the truth.

As much as he might want to, he simply cannot afford to. Confession means TOTAL TRUST in someone else ... essentially putting your life in their hands. OP is a control freak - he’s not about to do that. He’s lost virtually everything already - he could never take the chance of telling the truth to his family and potentially losing their love and respect forever. Family is all that OP has left - without their 100% support and goodwill he’d be out on the street ... not many people would stick their necks out and take in a known killer, no matter how much they profess to “Support Oscar” and wave white balloons - the guy is toxic. I can guarantee you he has not told the truth to any close friends - way too risky. When it comes to murder, “friendship” only goes so far, even between best friends (unless, of course, you’re of the same narcissistic, murderous mind set).

As far as his family goes, no matter how much he loves them and they love him, he could NEVER be sure about even their support and silence if he spilled his guts. He’s got a very large family and I imagine not all of them share OP’s exact values and philosophy. (Hellz, I’m not even sure all of them believe his story! Surely, at least a couple have to seriously wonder.) He’s smart enough to know that confession to the wrong person(s) could mean total betrayal - even within his immediate family. He is NOT gonna go there. Even one unintentional slip of the tongue by a trusted family confidant to the wrong person is all it would take for a firestorm to consume the rest of his life. He’s got one thing of value left - freedom - and he’s not about to do anything so stupid as confess the brutal truth to jeopardize it. OP is all about image and he will do literally anything to protect it - even LIE to his family.

For a man who did what he did to Reeva Steenkamp and then professed not only innocence to murder but victimization, lying to his family should come smooth and easy.

In fact, I suspect the very LAST people he would ever tell the truth to would be Carl and Aimee - he values their love and respect more than anyone on earth. He simply could not withstand their possible revulsion, hatred and rejection. Yes, they’re siblings and yes, they’re extremely close but even close siblings don’t always agree and see eye to eye ... or approve of each other’s dealings. Murder is a line the vast majority of humans do not cross - their friendship, love, respect and support is never tested by same. To confess to Carl and Aimee, OP would have to be certain they share the same exact values and mind set, be absolutely certain of their response (who has that kind of guarantee?) - but when it comes to murder, that is truly the ultimate test. OP could never really be 100% certain about even Carl and Aimee.

Is it possible he confessed to Carl and Aimee? Yes.
Is it probable? No.

OP is already a social pariah - he cannot confess and take the terrible chance of becoming an outcast in his own family.

Oscar Pistorius must be a very lonely and yes, alienated man - imprisoned with the TRUTH inside his head.

Then again, playing devil’s advocate ... perhaps he’s already confessed the truth to his immediate family.

After all, the rotted apple doesn’t fall far from the rotted tree.

 

[sleuth-d-]

I’m 99.99% positive that OP has told NO ONE the truth.

As much as he might want to, he simply cannot afford to. Confession means TOTAL TRUST in someone else ... essentially putting your life in their hands. OP is a control freak - he’s not about to do that. He’s lost virtually everything already - he could never take the chance of telling the truth to his family and potentially losing their love and respect forever. Family is all that OP has left - without their 100% support and goodwill he’d be out on the street ... not many people would stick their necks out and take in a known killer, no matter how much they profess to “Support Oscar” and wave white balloons - the guy is toxic. I can guarantee you he has not told the truth to any close friends - way too risky. When it comes to murder, “friendship” only goes so far, even between best friends (unless, of course, you’re of the same narcissistic, murderous mind set).

As far as his family goes, no matter how much he loves them and they love him, he could NEVER be sure about even their support and silence if he spilled his guts. He’s got a very large family and I imagine not all of them share OP’s exact values and philosophy. (Hellz, I’m not even sure all of them believe his story! Surely, at least a couple have to seriously wonder.) He’s smart enough to know that confession to the wrong person(s) could mean total betrayal - even within his immediate family. He is NOT gonna go there. Even one unintentional slip of the tongue by a trusted family confidant to the wrong person is all it would take for a firestorm to consume the rest of his life. He’s got one thing of value left - freedom - and he’s not about to do anything so stupid as confess the brutal truth to jeopardize it. OP is all about image and he will do literally anything to protect it - even LIE to his family.

For a man who did what he did to Reeva Steenkamp and then professed not only innocence to murder but victimization, lying to his family should come smooth and easy.

In fact, I suspect the very LAST people he would ever tell the truth to would be Carl and Aimee - he values their love and respect more than anyone on earth. He simply could not withstand their possible revulsion, hatred and rejection. Yes, they’re siblings and yes, they’re extremely close but even close siblings don’t always agree and see eye to eye ... or approve of each other’s dealings. Murder is a line the vast majority of humans do not cross - their friendship, love, respect and support is never tested by same. To confess to Carl and Aimee, OP would have to be certain they share the same exact values and mind set, be absolutely certain of their response (who has that kind of guarantee?) - but when it comes to murder, that is truly the ultimate test. OP could never really be 100% certain about even Carl and Aimee.

Is it possible he confessed to Carl and Aimee? Yes.
Is it probable? No.

OP is already a social pariah - he cannot confess and take the terrible chance of becoming an outcast in his own family.

Oscar Pistorius must be a very lonely and yes, alienated man - imprisoned with the TRUTH inside his head.

Then again, playing devil’s advocate ... perhaps he’s already confessed the truth to his immediate family.

After all, the rotted apple doesn’t fall far from the rotted tree.

these must be strange, strained circumstances for close family members to live with.

if op is sticking to his court story with the family, even if it is the truth... the family members must have wondered if it is so - especially after his performance in the witness box.

if the real story is something different, and he has told them... then he has burdened them with also carrying the lie.

if he has lied but hasn't told them... when that lie eventually comes out, what are they going to think of him?

 

[Ncl1968]

I would like to think the judge will start with an obvious guilty for the restaurant shooting as his own defense threw him under that bus at the last minute..that should lock him up for 5 yrs whilst he appeals the main course of murder 25 years sentence
Sounds like a plan

 

[kittychi]

If I was sending WhatsApp messages to someone else late that evening / early morning and I got found out, an argument ensued and I shot someone, I would need to have the incriminating messages removed before handing the phone into the police. I can’t destroy the phone or corrupt it as that too would be incriminating. Simply deleting the messages would leave the data on the phone so that wouldn't work. But if I knew a clever IT person I could get them to edit the raw message data in situ on the phone to change the time, recipient and content of each message to look like the messages were a conversation with someone else at an earlier time. The phone data integrity would remain intact.

BBM: Except by this time that clever IT person would know exactly why he/she was asked to do perform this task. Would someone keep a secret like that? I know OP could have paid someone, or it could be a family member, but though they may be a delusional family, I don't see them colluding in this manner.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[Mr Fossil]

these must be strange, strained circumstances for close family members to live with.

if op is sticking to his court story with the family, even if it is the truth... the family members must have wondered if it is so - especially after his performance in the witness box.

if the real story is something different, and he has told them... then he has burdened them with also carrying the lie.

if he has lied but hasn't told them... when that lie eventually comes out, what are they going to think of him?

The disappearing phone has to have involved someone, which means that someone knows something, even if it's not the truth as such. There are not many candidates.

 

[jay-jay]

I wonder if I will be the only person on here who will be keeping everything switched off on 11/9 coz whatever the verdict, it will make me feel physically sick .. if he's found guilty, then that will be confirmation of what Reeva went through that night, and if he's found not guilty then I will be sickened that he's got away with it, so either way is not going to be good news and certainly isn't anything I'm looking forward to hearing.

 

[Mr Fossil]

BBM: Except by this time that clever IT person would know exactly why he/she was asked to do perform this task. Would someone keep a secret like that? I know OP could have paid someone, or it could be a family member, but though they may be a delusional family, I don't see them colluding in this manner.

Just my opinion, of course.

I agree. Depends what he said. Let's imagine he was two-timing Reeva and the messages were from the other person. He might say to his brother, could you get rid of them as it will look bad and paint him in a bad light. He's done nothing wrong, of course, it was an accident, but you know how it looks ...

Who the other person was or what was being discussed might also have some bearing but I could speculate all night. I'm just trying to figure a plausible scenario for what actually happened that evening that led up to Reeva's death, so am exploring a lot of possibilities. I put them up here to let others put me straight or develop them. It all helps!

I have to ask though, why else did the phone disappear unless Oldwage had it all along!