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

[Exchange973]

I think very few on here assumed Pistorius' guilt, although many may be expecting a guilty verdict for the murder charge. Many on here have concluded he is guilty because of the 4 witnesses who heard terrified female screams plus a mans screams/shouts.

As you're in a question answering mood, do you think all four witnesses were mistaken and didn't actually hear Steenkamp screaming before she was shot?

I certainly have doubts and that is enough. I think the help help help that witnesses heard at this point introduces reasonable doubt.

 

[Scand]

http://www.morgansilkblog.co.uk/morgan-silk-blog/2009/3/18/south-africa-volvo-liv-magazine.html

That magazine rack locks very much like the one that was in the bathroom! Maybe he had more than one. If not, this explains his slightly odd reply when asked by Nel where he usually kept it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Lux et Veritas]

OP was not shot that night, he was never attacked or even remotely threatened at any point (where’s the “self-defense”?). Yet we are to believe that only OP screamed - that murdered Reeva ... shot to death in a hail of gunfire ... was DEAF and DUMB throughout this entire “intruder” event.

In what parallel universe would this be reasonable?

Contrary to Defense’s best (i.e. pathetic) efforts, her screams cannot be explained away.
Whether OP screamed/yelled/cried that night is 100% irrelevant. I'm sure he did.

Reeva’s screams are the crucial core, the heart of this case - the one thing that can and will convict him.

Remember when Nel asked OP if Reeva screamed when he shot? Instead of a yes or no*, we got a silent, wailing OP for an unbelievable 31 SECONDS (go ahead, time how long that really is) ... until Nel inexplicably rescued him by speaking first.

In my mind, this wailing and stunning silence is nothing short of a confession. He knew she was screaming for her life, he can never get those terrified screams out of his head. If this was not so, why the silent crying?

FOUR highly credible, unbiased ear witnesses testified to Reeva’s (“blood-curdling”, “escalating”, etc.) screams, as well as male and female voices intermingled - not to mention intense, lengthy arguing heard by another.

Defense has offered literally zero evidence (other than simply declaring that OP screams like a woman, as if it was automatic fact) to counter these witnesses - NONE. (Sorry, having your female defense witnesses attempt to scream like a man attempting to scream like a terrified woman does not count.)

Since Defense offers no proof that OP screams like a woman, State’s ear witness testimonies must stand as undisputed FACT.

How Judge Masipa could ever fish an acquittal out of this kettle of stew would be a mystery for the ages.


* Elsewhere in his testimony, he claims she did NOT scream - even though he admits he was deaf after firing four shots! LOL Like handling explosives, tailoring evidence is a delicate, dangerous and sometimes lethal game. LOL

 

[IndianSummer]

Thanks very much; from the link:

Oscar was quiet and self-contained. And then, apropos of nothing, he told a story. He was driving on the outskirts of a black township, he said, when a dog ran under his wheels. In his rear-view mirror, he watched as it dragged itself off the road by its front legs, its hind legs useless to it now. Its back was clearly broken. He stopped and got out of his car to find that the dog's owner had come out on to the street, shouting, cursing, gesticulating. What to do? Oscar grabbed his gun, shot the dog through the back of the head and drove off.
---

I find it very confusing that he wasn't charged with anything for this.

I find it ironic that he would coldly conclude to end a life ...post his mistake/ encounter.

IMO he kept firing at her for a reason.

 

[geevee]

I certainly have doubts and that is enough. I think the help help help that witnesses heard at this point introduces reasonable doubt.

How can 4 separate ear witnesses of the same thing lead to any "reasonable" doubt? I'd think the help help help could be reasonably doubted as, if I recall correctly only 1 witness heard that, but the other 4 hearing the same thing? That isn't reasonable doubt in my book.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

http://www.morgansilkblog.co.uk/morgan-silk-blog/2009/3/18/south-africa-volvo-liv-magazine.html

That magazine rack locks very much like the one that was in the bathroom! Maybe he had more than one. If not, this explains his slightly odd reply when asked by Nel where he usually kept it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have wondered about that magazine rack ever since I first saw that photo a long while back.

Yes, perhaps he had two, but then again maybe not...

 

[jay-jay]

I certainly have doubts and that is enough. I think the help help help that witnesses heard at this point introduces reasonable doubt.

No-one would ever be convicted if that was the case and plenty of criminals are actually convicted on circumstantial evidence, all of which could actually be argued away and deemed as 'reasonable doubt' in the eyes of some .. fortunately, in the majority of cases, sensible people preside over them and deliver the correct verdicts.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

Why didn’t OP shoot his washing machine?
Why didn’t OP shoot Sam Taylor?
Why didn’t OP shoot his friend Dexter Azzi?
Why didn’t OP shoot his friend Martyn Rooney (who, at one point, was staying with OP and Reeva at his house)?

MANY people have stayed overnight at OP’s house - one assumes they opened windows, doors, made all sorts of sudden, strange sounds (he’s used to f##king noises!).

None of them came out of his house in a body bag except Reeva Steenkamp.

The common denominator?
“Sounds”.

The single, damning difference?
OP investigated, spoke/yelled to everyone else and never shot anyone - except the night of Feb. 14.

Why did he so radically deviate from his usual response?

 

[jay-jay]

Why didn’t OP shoot his washing machine?
Why didn’t OP shoot Sam Taylor?
Why didn’t OP shoot his friend Dexter Azzi?
Why didn’t OP shoot his friend Martyn Rooney (who, at one point, was staying with OP and Reeva at his house)?

MANY people have stayed overnight at OP’s house - one assumes they opened windows, doors, made all sorts of sudden, strange sounds (he’s used to f##king noises!).

None of them came out of his house in a body bag except Reeva Steenkamp.

The common denominator?
“Sounds”.

The single, damning difference?
OP investigated, spoke/yelled to everyone else and never shot anyone - except the night of Feb. 14.

Why did he so radically deviate from his usual response?

People shouldn't underestimate the significance of it being February the 14th either .. this is no coincidence that it happened that particular night.

 

[Exchange973]

No-one would ever be convicted if that was the case and plenty of criminals are actually convicted on circumstantial evidence, all of which could actually be argued away and deemed as 'reasonable doubt' in the eyes of some .. fortunately, in the majority of cases, sensible people preside over them and deliver the correct verdicts.

OK, well we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I, like you I think, agree that Judge Masipa is sensible and so in the end we'll have to see what she decides and respect and accept that as being the correct judgment.

 

[IndianSummer]

No-one would ever be convicted if that was the case and plenty of criminals are actually convicted on circumstantial evidence, all of which could actually be argued away and deemed as 'reasonable doubt' in the eyes of some .. fortunately, in the majority of cases, sensible people preside over them and deliver the correct verdicts.

The judge knows Path also

RS stomach & bladder show that:
- she ate @ approx 1am -
awake to argue and scream for her life
- her bladder was empty- ( clothes on btw)
in toilet cube to escape OP

Was not ,according to OP,in bed asleep previously
Was not, according to OP, at time of shooting in toilet to empty bladder


Path + ear witness = OP is a liar
JMO

 

[Cherwell]

I certainly have doubts and that is enough. I think the help help help that witnesses heard at this point introduces reasonable doubt.

I think the calls of "help" were nothing more than a cunning cynical attempt to camouflage the fact that he was terrorising his girlfriend. He would have realised that people must be hearing her screams, and so he added some of his own.

 

[Lux et Veritas]

His astrological charts reveal configurations identical to all dictators and famous murderers of our time. His eyes (the windows to the soul) often reflect this coldness.
- Plutusplutus youtube

Whether you believe in astrology or not, this observation is fascinating taken in context with certain photos of OP.

 

[Ncl1968]

Lets not forget frank the live in house keeper who was awake dressed and greeting police outside as they arrived
Why did op defense not call on frank to say he heard no arguments that night.... mmmm maybe cos nel would have gotten information from frank that team op would not like..the judge knows frank was there she knows op lies and has lots of wealth at his disposal
She also knows reeva screaming for her life is obvious
I think the judge will study the gun charges to insure he is locked up during the appeal of murder

 

[JudgeJudi]

Can the State appeal an acquittal?

No, only sentence.

 

[JudgeJudi]

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..

I believe she'll be reading her "Reasons for Judgment" (at least that's what we call it in Oz), i.e. reading a document prepared by her on how she reached her verdict. This can be a very lengthy process in my country and can actually take hours, but I'm not sure about SA. I'm looking forward to hearing the weight she gives the evidence.

I believe Roux will be ready to announce that his client will be appealing and the most likely grounds will be an unfair trial (the fact that it was televised even though he conceded to this eventually pre-trial) and that Masipa erred in law somehow. Many posters thought that Masipa was overly kind to OP in allowing breaks for his crying, puking etc, and she pulled Nel up from time to time on minor matters. However, the most interesting part for me though was that when points of law were argued, IIRC Nel nearly always came out the winner, and that includes the psych assessment. The lady assessor, Henzen-du Toit, is well known as an advocate who has defended murders and rapes. She joined the Pretoria Bar in 1998. She’s an expert in criminal justice with an Honours degree in psychology and Master's degree in criminal justice and criminal prosecution and is working on a doctorate in criminal law, criminal prosecution, evidence and constitutional interpretation. I would be extremely surprised if Masipa made an error in law having regard to the fact that she has such an able assessor well versed in criminal law.

 

[JudgeJudi]

Exactly, Soozie! It's bad enough the guy's a brazen liar himself but expects others to lie and cover for him! What kind of a man, what kind of a "hero" is that?

If he lied his azz off about Tasha's, it's guaranteed he lied about murder.

OP is nothing more than a selfish, self-absorbed weasel in fancy running shoes.

Not to mention the fact that he'd already said "I'll try not to lie", and his lying about Tasha's came before Nel even started on the events of Valentine's Day. Then to admit guilt re Tasha's at the end of the trial ... this alone makes all his testimony suspect IMO.

 

[Jake18]

Re the timeline : This should be obvious but in an emergency situation it's very common for time perception to be altered. Those who have been involved in medical resuscitations will know what I mean - your whole focus can be on getting an airway, or getting iv access or, in this situation, assessing the source of the screams and calling for help. In emergency departments this issue with time perception has been recognised and many will have a a large digital clock and one person whose main job during the rusus is to give time reminders "We've been two minutes with out an airway", "The second adrenaline bolus was five minutes ago" etc.

Imagine you're the one of the first at the scene at a car crash - you're overstimulated by the sounds and the smell and the fear and trying to call for assistance. Is your recollection of the time line going be exactly the same as the other assistants?

Roux knows this, of course, hence his attempts to confuse the PT's witnesses with subtle shifts along the time line to suit Op's version. Nel knows this too - his assertion that the minor inconsistencies in the PT witnesses version actually strengthen the overall picture are, IMO. correct. The minute perfect timeline is Roux's dance because it's all he's got. However, Nel's of a woman's screams followed by shots (around 3:17) and no more screams but Oscar wailing/crying/shouting is much more accurate.

As for Dr Stipp's 0 second phone call at 3:27 I'm surprised Roux even tried that one because i'm pretty sure Dr Stipp was at Op's by then.

 

[JudgeJudi]

<Respectfully snipped>

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

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.

I've thought about this a lot myself, in fact more than a lot. While anything is possible, if there was one person he may have told I think it would be Carl. OP could always have given him a watered down version of what happened. I've watched Carl and Aimee's faces very carefully. Carl's face doesn't ever give anything away and he never seems to be surprised at what he hears. Aimee is a very different kettle of fish. She obviously knows "his version" and she participated in the show aired on TV. To me though, she seems to be going through a lot of mental anguish as she hears his story unfold and his testimony destroyed by Nel. And then there's her constant praying. I'm inclined to the view that she's praying "Please god, please tell me this isn't true" or something along those lines. I think she wants to believe OP's story because they're so close and she probably doesn't think her brother would be capable of this.

And then there's Uncle Arnold and Lois. I think OP has definitely lied to them. He has a huge amount to lose IMO by telling them the truth. While I absolutely detest both of them for many reasons, I can only think that the reason they're standing by him so staunchly is because in they're eyes it defies belief that a family member could do something so evil.

I agree that murder is definitely crossing the line but I don't agree OP would have to be certain that Carl and Aimee share the same exact values and mind set. For many, many years it's always been the three of them together, minus parents, and I'm sure he'd know he'd always have their love. Respect is a different thing entirely. I think OP knows he could confide in Carl and that he wouldn't betray him, but as I said, Carl may not know the whole truth.

I don't know, and we'll never know, and I could be totally wrong. These are just my thoughts as of today.

 

[JudgeJudi]

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.

Not to mention the fact that it would be seriously criminal, especially in the case of a murder trial. I'm not sure if even Carl would do this if he thought there was any likelihood of it being discovered.