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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Judgejudi said:
Speaking to a national newspaper this week, June said: “I remember the 5am phone call from Inspector Botha.
“He was the detective in charge of the case. He asked me if I had a daughter, and what was her name.

“He said that there had been an accident and someone had been shot, my Reeva was dead.”

June said she rang her husband, Barry, who was out collecting fire wood.

She said: “I was crying and screaming over the phone and he couldn’t take in what I was trying to tell him. Since that moment all the joy has gone out of our lives.”

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u..._left__heartbroken__by_Reeva_s_death/?ref=rss
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the same story that was in the Daily Mail. I don't doubt the early call, just that Botha would have placed it using Reeva's phone. I'm also interested to learn how he got the Passcode and at that time in the morning.
 
foxbluff said:
Lordy yes... I'll bet one of them was Frank, too !!

This is only the second article I've ever read where Hilton Botha was interviewed at length. He said some things that I found very interesting. For example, I knew that he was the person who telephoned the Steenkamps that awful morning to tell them Reeva was dead, but I didn't know until now that he used Reeva's cell phone.

<snipped> Telling them Reeva was dead was one of the worst things I&#8217;ve ever had to do during my time in the police.

&#8220;I had Reeva&#8217;s phone and I had to get someone to help me find Reeva&#8217;s pin number so I could use the phone to phone her mum.

&#8220;At first she started crying. She asked me if I was sure, I said yes...." <snipped>

@Mr.Fos and others working on phone charts: I've read a couple of articles where Mrs. Steenkamp was interviewed. In one IIRC she said she received the call at about 7AM. In the other article she said she received the call at 7:30AM.
Click to expand...

Judgejudi said:
Speaking to a national newspaper this week, June said: &#8220;I remember the 5am phone call from Inspector Botha.
&#8220;He was the detective in charge of the case. He asked me if I had a daughter, and what was her name.

&#8220;He said that there had been an accident and someone had been shot, my Reeva was dead.&#8221;

June said she rang her husband, Barry, who was out collecting fire wood.

She said: &#8220;I was crying and screaming over the phone and he couldn&#8217;t take in what I was trying to tell him. Since that moment all the joy has gone out of our lives.&#8221;

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u..._left__heartbroken__by_Reeva_s_death/?ref=rss
Click to expand...

Ok. So in this interview the police call in person and phone at 07:30 that morning to tell Reeva's parents. It's from an interview in Feb 2013. I'll keep researching! Perhaps I can find the Carte Blanche interview.

ETA (1): Estelle transcribed the Carte Blanche programme dated 24 Feb 2013 in which June Steenkamp was interviewed (the link to the programme video no longer appears to work) here.

The relevant bit is this:

June Steenkamp (Reeva's mother): "I had a phone call at half-past-seven that morning. And the man said to me, 'Is your... what's your name?' And I said, 'It's June.' And he said: 'Do you have a daughter?' And I said, 'Yes.' And he said: 'Reeva?' I said, 'Yes.' He said, 'There's been an accident and she's been shot.' And I said, 'All I want to know now is if she's alive or is she dead.' And the man said he was with the police, and he said, 'I'm sorry I have to tell you, but I don't want you to go out and read in the papers... she's dead.'"

So from this I think it's reasonable to accept that June Steenkamp was told on the telephone at 07:30. Now to figure how Botha got Reeva's Passcode at that time in the morning and if he really used her phone to place the call.

ETA (2): There were plenty of hacks around on the iPhone 4 at that time to bypass the iPhone Passcode. I recall trying one myself and it worked. A quick google (setting the date to 14 Feb 2013) showed a number of examples, so the police could easily have been aware of quick ways in. This could well account for the GPRS activity on 5353 at 07:28 onwards, as Botha moves about with the phone and the signal quality changes or the hack itself causes the signal to falter.

When Botha says "use her phone to phone her mum" I think he means to get the phone number rather than place the call. I'll leave it at that.
 
There was an article published this morning on the front page of the Sunday Times, saying Pistorius "lost it" with a group of Sunday Times journos who recently tried to interview him. He had just arrived back at his uncle's house in a brand new Subaru. Interestingly, the article also explains he's sold two other properties he owns in SA. Ostensibly to help fund the ongoing legal costs, but one can't help but wonder whether there are plans to leave the country... Ulrich Roux says in his column that this would increase the likelihood of him being denied bail as he no longer has any immovable assets in the country (He might still own one piece of vacant land somewhere in the Cape, but has now sold all the others).

Sorry, I don't have any links, as I read it in the actual paper.
 
vansleuths said:
BIB

I'm sure an officer informing a family member that one of their loved ones has passed away is very difficult, but I wonder why Botha said that in this case this was one of the "worst things I&#8217;ve ever had to do during my time in the police."
Click to expand...

Botha with the knowledge about the very brutal act (of which we only know 50% ??) to a young harmless woman, done by a dangerous young man who is known all over the world (and who was never punished before though there were reasons), but not allowed to tell her parents the truth - that is a worse duty, possible the worst. IMO
 
jassy writer said:
There was an article published this morning on the front page of the Sunday Times, saying Pistorius "lost it" with a group of Sunday Times journos who recently tried to interview him. He had just arrived back at his uncle's house in a brand new Subaru. Interestingly, the article also explains he's sold two other properties he owns in SA. Ostensibly to help fund the ongoing legal costs, but one can't help but wonder whether there are plans to leave the country... Ulrich Roux says in his column that this would increase the likelihood of him being denied bail as he no longer has any immovable assets in the country (He might still own one piece of vacant land somewhere in the Cape, but has now sold all the others).

Sorry, I don't have any links, as I read it in the actual paper.
Click to expand...

BIB

Here is the link http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...s-tantrum-days-ahead-of-murder-trial-judgment .

When I went directly to the link, I was able to read the article, but coming from Google, it said I had to be a paid subscriber. In case anyone else has trouble, I have included the article below.

Clearly showing the strain of his ordeal, a bearded and stressed Pistorius admitted that he was not coping with the pressure.

It also emerged this week that the disabled athlete has ditched all of the homes he owned in South Africa, which suggests he is bracing for a lengthy legal battle if convicted on Thursday when Judge Thokozile Masipa hands down judgment.

Pistorius exploded with anger when he pulled up to the Waterkloof house in a new white Volvo XC60 on Friday and saw a Sunday Times team.

He has pleaded not guilty to murdering his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, who the state alleges he shot in a fit of rage on Valentine's Day last year. Pistorius claims he mistook her for an intruder.

Asked how he was doing, Pistorius, who appeared to have just come from the gym, angrily snapped: "How can you ask me that? Do you really have the audacity to ask me how I am doing at this point in my life? What I am going through and feeling ... I really cannot deal with this right now."

Trembling with anger, Pistorius said he deserved privacy.

The fallen athletics star, who is out on bail of R1-million, sold the house where he killed Steenkamp at the Silver Woods Country Estate for R4.5-million this year.

It has now emerged that he has since sold two other Pretoria homes, which were listed as immovable assets in his bail application in February last year.

With a defence team consisting of a senior and junior advocate and a small army of other lawyers and forensic experts, his legal bill for the trial - which has run for 41 court days so far - is estimated at well over R3-million.

The two houses at the Weeping Willow Estates in Equestria, Pretoria, were sold for R1-million and R1.03-million, according to deeds records which listed the transfer dates as July 16 and 31.

The sale of these properties fuels speculation that he is raising cash for further legal fees in the event he is found guilty.

If convicted of murder, the fact that he no longer owns property in South Africa could count against him should he have to re-apply for bail.

Professor Stephen Tuson of the University of the Witwatersrand's law clinic said the court was likely to reconsider the question of bail in the event of a conviction.

" The court is required to reconsider, because after conviction the accused could be considered a more serious flight risk. The defence would have to make an application for bail, pending the outcome of an appeal," Tuson said.

Lawyer Ulrich Roux said: "The argument is of course that the temptation to flee is so much stronger when a convicted person is possibly faced with a lengthy period of imprisonment."

Roux said when an applicant for bail had immovable property registered in his name, it provided a measure of security "in that he has a vested interest and valuable assets in the country which he will forfeit should he abscond".

"Not having any fixed property makes it easier for a person to flee as there is no risk of losing the said property and suffering substantial financial losses."

Roux said Pistorius's legal bill could be running as high as R100,000 per court day.

The athlete's two homes in Weeping Willow Estates were sold below the price houses in this estate usually go for. Photos of one of the units, listed on a property website, show it has three bedrooms, two bathrooms and a pool.

Arena Viljoen, an estate agent for Homesdot who has sold houses in Weeping Willow Estates, said the usual price for a three-bedroom, two-bathroom unit was in the region of R1.15-million.

One of Pistorius's properties in the estate was bought by a company called Eben Kruger Bemarking. A manager at this company, Ryno van Niekerk, confirmed the purchase but declined to comment.

Pistorius bought the house in 2007 for R674,700.

The other property, which Pistorius bought in 2008 for R800,000, was sold to a young businessman who the Sunday Times was unable to reach for comment.

Pistorius, who earned about R5.6-million a year at the time of the shooting, had listed the Silver Woods house, the two Weeping Willow units and a vacant stand in Langebaan in the Western Cape as assets.

It is not clear whether the Langebaan stand has also been sold.

Pistorius, in his bail application, also said he owned cars, jewellery and furniture worth more than R500,000 and had "cash investments" of more than R1-million with South African banks.

However, he also faces a potential civil claim from Steenkamp's parents, June and Barry, who have indicated their legal action is on hold pending the outcome of the murder trial.

Roux said Pistorius would not be able to plead poverty should a civil claim be lodged.

"The fact that he placed on record that he owned four properties and was in a strong financial position, as well as his access to funds through other means, will all be considered. Any proceeds derived from the sale of the properties will be considered accordingly."
 
44ALLAN said:
Hi eimajjjj,

I think the easiest way to answer your question is........................they cannot defend a 'guilty client' if the evidence is against him.
OP decided to take the stand and be XD'D and he made a right mess of defending himself and his version of events.
If his version had been true then the defence team would have been able to 'manage to defend' him properly because his demeanor and answers to questions would have come across both credible and truthful.................exactly like we have seen from OP on the stand:facepalm:
Click to expand...

I am going to call my reply - The Absence Of Frank.

44ALLAN - The bold text above is perhaps one of the most crucial aspects of this trial - however, OP did not 'decide' to take the stand. As the only first hand witness, he was compelled to provide an account of what happened. In essence, he could not avoid taking the stand. This has given the State an opportunity to test him & question his version (s) and IMHO will lead to his conviction.

No one could have foreseen what a terrible witness he has been. However, in terms of Justice, I believe it to be very fortunate as if Team OP would have thought about it, they should have ensured Frank was a witness.

The Absence of Frank......

I have read many posts about Frank, and that it is a travesty that he did not testify. Actually, I think the opposite. It means that Justice will Prevail and the defence team have missed what could have been the simplest way to get their client acquitted. They should have got him to say that he heard no argument and the dogs were barking. Also that he heard OP shouting to Reeva to call the Police. Then, he was running into the house to help when he heard the shots from upstairs......

A small set piece to create. It would have been easy to do and would have created a huge problem for the State, because then OP would not have been the only first hand witness and could have declined to give evidence saying he was too distraught. Frank would have been thrown under the Bus and OP's version would never have been challenged.

As it is, the Absence of Frank is actually a good thing for the State & it would not surprise me if this wasn't a deliberate ploy.

Just my humble opinion.
 
vansleuths said:
A. OP fired because he said he heard wood moving which was the magazine rack. It was impossible for Reeva to be at the back of the WC to cause the magazine rack to move and then be at the front of the WC near the door where she sustained the hip wound with splinters.
Click to expand...

I'm going to disagree slightly with this, because I think Reeva could easily have dislodged the magazine rack with her foot while moving within the toilet. It's quite a narrow space between door and wall.

However!

It didn't happen.

When Pistorius said he heard "wood moving", he meant to imply that the door was opening, the sound of wood rubbing against wood.
But he had to abandon this because having said that the door was locked, he would have heard the key turn first.
If the magazine rack had moved, it would have made either a rattling or scraping sound on tiles. That's not "wood moving".
 
My favourite Dixon bit is when he was asked if he was a sound expert, and he replied that yes, he thought his evidence was sound. :floorlaugh:
 
jassy writer said:
There was an article published this morning on the front page of the Sunday Times, saying Pistorius "lost it" with a group of Sunday Times journos who recently tried to interview him. He had just arrived back at his uncle's house in a brand new Subaru. Interestingly, the article also explains he's sold two other properties he owns in SA. Ostensibly to help fund the ongoing legal costs, but one can't help but wonder whether there are plans to leave the country... Ulrich Roux says in his column that this would increase the likelihood of him being denied bail as he no longer has any immovable assets in the country (He might still own one piece of vacant land somewhere in the Cape, but has now sold all the others).

Sorry, I don't have any links, as I read it in the actual paper.
Click to expand...

Very good point UR makes here. It is something I had given no thought to.
 
<Respectfully snipped>

vansleuths said:
BIB

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...s-tantrum-days-ahead-of-murder-trial-judgment .

It also emerged this week that the disabled athlete has ditched all of the homes he owned in South Africa ...

If convicted of murder, the fact that he no longer owns property in South Africa could count against him should he have to re-apply for bail.

"The court is required to reconsider, because after conviction the accused could be considered a more serious flight risk.

Lawyer Ulrich Roux said: "The argument is of course that the temptation to flee is so much stronger when a convicted person is possibly faced with a lengthy period of imprisonment."

Roux said when an applicant for bail had immovable property registered in his name, it provided a measure of security "in that he has a vested interest and valuable assets in the country which he will forfeit should he abscond".

"Not having any fixed property makes it easier for a person to flee as there is no risk of losing the said property and suffering substantial financial losses.""Any proceeds derived from the sale of the properties will be considered accordingly."
Click to expand...

I can't believe we're learning this mere days before judgment. I think Nel will strongly oppose bail based on these facts. IMO he's an extremely serious flight risk now.

OP must be a ticking time bomb right now. I thought he was dangerous before but now ... :stormingmad: :bombshell:
 
PrimeSuspect said:
034865-8d19e490-2e57-11e4-8816-75edfb844e64.jpg


OP left this gaping hole in his downstairs window for months?! :facepalm:
Click to expand...

~rsbm~

Crikey .. is this the window that everyone had been referring to? When I asked on here about it some months back, I was told that it was only a tiny hole and I immediately thought that it wouldn't really pose that much of a breach in security of his house, but that hole in that photo is a totally different thing altogether .. that is just ridiculous, especially if he is going to claim he is so scared of possible intruders!
 
Judgejudi said:
<Respectfully snipped>



I can't believe we're learning this mere days before judgment. I think Nel will strongly oppose bail based on these facts. IMO he's an extremely serious flight risk now.

OP must be a ticking time bomb right now. I thought he was dangerous before but now ... :stormingmad: :bombshell:
Click to expand...

I agree. It greatly reduces his chances of bail. I have read recently that it may take a day or two to determine eventual sentence due to mitigation arguments. Does OP stay on his current bail conditions until after that?
 
RSBM:

vansleuths said:
Here is the link http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/20...s-tantrum-days-ahead-of-murder-trial-judgment .


Pistorius exploded with anger when he pulled up to the Waterkloof house in a new white Volvo XC60 on Friday and saw a Sunday Times team.

He has pleaded not guilty to murdering his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, who the state alleges he shot in a fit of rage on Valentine's Day last year. Pistorius claims he mistook her for an intruder.

Asked how he was doing, Pistorius, who appeared to have just come from the gym, angrily snapped: "How can you ask me that? Do you really have the audacity to ask me how I am doing at this point in my life? What I am going through and feeling ... I really cannot deal with this right now."

Trembling with anger, Pistorius said he deserved privacy.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That whole section just makes me angry. It's all about OP. Remorse for killing Reeva, my a$$.
 
If it's true that Pistorius has liquidated all his SA assets, he needs to be taken into custody at once following the verdicts. (It is not feasible that he could be found not guilty on all charges.) I wouldn't trust him further than I could throw him.
 
Interested Bystander said:
I agree. It greatly reduces his chances of bail. I have read recently that it may take a day or two to determine eventual sentence due to mitigation arguments. Does OP stay on his current bail conditions until after that?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure but I would imagine until the conclusion of the trial, i.e. when the sentence is announced.
 
Assuming OP is convicted, but prior to sentencing, I think the SAPS should covertly put tracking devices on all family members' cars in case they decide to head towards the Mozambique border. South Africans don't need visas to cross the border. All they need is original registration documents, and if it's not your vehicle, a letter from the owner granting permission to take the vehicle in to Mozambique together with 3rd party insurance.

A vehicle would attract far less attention than, say, a chopper. I don't believe any family members would involve themselves to the point where they'd commit a serious criminal offence, so they could drive OP to the border and he could continue on.
 
Judgejudi said:
Assuming OP is convicted and gets a term of imprisonment (is there any doubt???), I think the SAPS should covertly put tracking devices on all family members' cars in case they decide to head towards the Mozambique border. South Africans don't need visas to cross the border. All they need is original registration documents, and if it's not your vehicle, a letter from the owner granting permission to take the vehicle in to Mozambique together with 3rd party insurance.

A vehicle would attract far less attention than, say, a chopper.
Click to expand...

First language in Mozambique is English. Very convenient.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 134 more.
Total: 1,784 (members: 135, guests: 1,649)

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
1,649
Total visitors
1,784
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,900
Messages
18,115,357
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top