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

[lisasalinger]

:blushing:

Lisa, I so think you are right on with this! I think a lot of the arguing occurred when Reeva was behind the locked bedroom door. This is why Oscar's voice was muffled to some of the neighbours. I think that in order for Reeva to have become so angry she must have witnessed something very upsetting or foreign to her sensibilities.
I,too think think the abrasion with striations was probably caused by a pellet having gone through the bedroom door striking her in the back. It almost looks like a burn blister injury with the weave imprint (from heat) of he shirt embedded into it.
I also can entertain the possibility that after running screaming in terror to the bathroom, holding her phone, Oscar hit the phone out of her left hand, causing the abrasion between the second and third fingers. I am also not sure that she had the key to lock herself into the toilet (that key set may have been still in the bedroom door and later moved by Oscar). That is why she stood holding the door. I also think the breaking down of the bullet panels might have been done to conceal the crime. Perhaps after he pulled her from the toilet. Hence the panel thrown or placed over the blood.

:twocents:

Thanks, Laf. I like some of your thoughts here. Just a few things...

The injury between her fingers was from a bullet. The ME and Mangena seem pretty confident about that. Mangena testified that her hands were up over her head when the bullet went thru the left hand fingers and struck her head (see pic below).

As for the door panels, I'm not sure how getting rid of those panels helps him. The alternative is that he looked right at her and shot her as opposed to shooting her through the door. Both are bad. Perhaps, can you explain to me your thinking on that a little bit more. What exactly on the door would he want/need to conceal?

 

[Cymbaline]

In regards to the airgun shots and the bedroom door...

I keep going back and forth in my mind about the "first bangs" possibilities and something stuck out at me tonight while listening to Mrs. Stipp's cross-examination by Oldwage.

First, I really have to say... If I posted what I really thought about Oldwage, I would get a week long TO. I can't stand him. If I can make it thru this cross-examination again without losing my sanity, it will be a miracle.

Ok, so Oldwage asks Mrs. Stipp if the screaming that she heard immediately after the first set of bangs sounded muffled. Mrs. Stipp answers no, it sounded very clear to her. Of course, this makes Oldwage happy because clear screaming surely must mean that it was OP screaming (not Reeva). BUT...

What if Reeva was not in the enclosed toilet room yet. As we know, Mrs. Stipp also testified that as the screams continued, they sounded like they were getting closer.

This tends to support my original thoughts that the first set of bangs occurred at the bedroom door (not on the toilet room door).

Reeva likely locked herself in the bedroom, OP beat on the door, shot off the airgun a few times (possibly hit Reeva in the back) and that's when the super loud screaming started.

OP gets in to the room, the fight continues and ultimately ends up in the bathroom. I think the cricket bat was in somebody's hand (not sure if OP or Reeva) ready for protection, and also Reeva had her phone. OP knocks her phone to the ground, or it falls on its own during a scuffle, and she scrambles in to the toilet room and locks it.

No doubt, she would be terrified and screaming for her life, hence the escalated screams. It would match up with the screams heard and I would imagine OP would be royally angry at this point.

He shoots her and then immediately bashes the door down, not out of sorrow and need to get her out of there, but still out of anger. He did a number on that door, and the bathroom.

What do you think?

Yeah. I think that OP shot her outside the toilet door. Then, pushed her into the toilet propped up using the magazine rack and shot her again thru the door.

It explains the casing in the entrance, the broken tiles on the outside of the toilet door and the damaged metal plate.


JMO

 

[Laf]

Thanks, Laf. I like some of your thoughts here. Just a few things...

The injury between her fingers was from a bullet. The ME and Mangena seem pretty confident about that. Mangena testified that her hands were up over her head when the bullet went thru the left hand fingers and struck her head (see pic below).

As for the door panels, I'm not sure how getting rid of those panels helps him. The alternative is that he looked right at her and shot her as opposed to shooting her through the door. Both are bad. Perhaps, can you explain to me your thinking on that a little bit more. What exactly on the door would he want/need to conceal?

I'm thinking that the only hard physical evidence that Oscar had to deal with was poor Reeva's body and the door panels with bullet evidence. His whole behavior after the shooting seems suspect. Perhaps his mindset at the time was to get rid of all physical evidence of the shooting. It was something he would have to get rid of if he was to deny any connection to the crime.
I was also impressed with a FM investigation into the plank on top of the blood evidence in the toilet. I will look for a link.

I defer to your knowledge on the injuries. I have enjoyed reading your blog. Impressive!

 

[Murphys_Law]

IIRC. There are three photos of the hole in the bedroom door. Find all three and look at the holes very closely and look at the associated labels. One label is labeled wrongly as to which side of the door the photo was taken, bedroom or TV room.

Regarding splintering, wood being blown off of the door by the pellet passing through it. Go back to Magena's testimony regarding the gunshot to Reeva's head. The entry hole would blow bone fragments in to her head. The exit hole would show bone fragments exiting her head. The BR door is no different; where splinters are blown outward is where the pellet exited.

Just trying to be helpful, really.

There were 5 photos shown of the holes in the bedroom door.
Photos 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44 of Album E

To my knowledge, no evidence has been presented that they were mislabelled...and Van Staden did go thru any mislabelled photos on his last day delivering evidence in chief. Would love to hear if you have evidence otherwise.

I put together a collage of the above mentioned 5 photos a few weeks ago.

The top row, comprised of 3 photos relates to the TV room side, while the 2 photos in the bottom row relates to the bedroom side.

Imo:

• #44 is an exit mark (on tv room side). It is also a close up of #43 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #41 may be an entry mark on the bedroom side. It is also a close up of #40 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #42 appears to be a non fully penetrating entry mark on the tv side

The height of these holes, to my knowledge has not been stated.
That said, a standard/common door is about 80". However, I think that Mangena said that the height of the bathroom door was taller than commonly available, so likely it about 84" door.

The inset panels on the bedroom door are approx. 1/4 to 1/3 the total height of the door based on the other attached photo. So, for an 84" door, that would put the panel height in the range of 21" to 28".

The marks are approx 18" above the panel. Therefore, the estimated height is around 40" or roughly 1.0 meters.

A pellet hole through the door at a height of approximately 1 metre, could be a source of the bruise in Reeva's lower back...tho, admittedly this is very speculative...based on height alone.

 

[Cymbaline]

Haha... Argh!

I agree. It has to just remain a thought. Does this mean I can stop watching Oldwage now :skip:

I originally was re-watching the cross to see the part about the toilet room light but honestly, at this point she could testify that she saw a Christmas tree and Santa Claus in the window and I could care less.

Oh also... I agree with you without question that those doors were damaged for some other nefarious reason... not to simply open them :banghead:

I think he tore down the toilet door as an after thought.

I imagine him thinking... No one will ever buy this intruder BS, the bullet holes aren't all going to match up.

 

[lisasalinger]

I'm thinking that the only hard physical evidence that Oscar had to deal with was poor Reeva's body and the door panels with bullet evidence. His whole behavior after the shooting seems suspect. Perhaps his mindset at the time was to get rid of all physical evidence of the shooting. It was something he would have to get rid of if he was to deny any connection to the crime.
I was also impressed with a FM investigation into the plank on top of the blood evidence in the toilet. I will look for a link.

I defer to your knowledge on the injuries. I have enjoyed reading your blog. Impressive!

I think you mean homegirl's posts. She has some great posts over on the "doors" thread.

 

[LauraT]

I've always believed that she was infact injured and or shot at least once outside of that toilet. I believe there was probably blood evidence outside the toilet door and that is why it was imperative that he move her.

 

[Laf]

I think you mean homegirl's posts. She has some great posts over on the "doors" thread.

That's the member! I am trying to figure out how to quote from another thread but I'm having some challenges! :banghead:

 

[BritsKate]

That's the member! I am trying to figure out how to quote from another thread but I'm having some challenges! :banghead:

If that thread is closed, you can't use the quote button. All you can do, tmk, is a copy/paste and attribute it.

If you're trying to move it from one open thread to another, quote like you would be posting a responce in that thread, ctrl+a, right click to copy, open the thread you want, click reply, and paste in the content from the other thread. I've never moved posts from one thread to respond on a different one, so you may want to just note that its been moved.

HTH


Please pardon errors as posted via Tapatalk with a less than stellar user.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I think it has to do with timing. The shots, Reeva's position. Her screams.

Mangena: Shot..pause..missed shot..shot..shot
Oscar: Shot..shot..shot..shot

Mangena's shot 2 (the miss, bullet hole B) together with the pause gives her time to fall onto the magazine rack. Time for her body to pitch forward. And time to protect her head with her hands. And time to scream. Not necessarily in that order.

So the defense has to give a version where she had no time to cover her head or to scream or to pitch forward.

(Edit: So the defense team has her falling during the four shots. No time to protect herself. No time to scream. And no time to pitch forward. According to Mangena the magazine rack would have stopped her fall. And if she was seated on the rack her body must bend forward to line up her head with the bullet and the mark on the wall. This takes time. So the defense says look at the marks on her back, she missed the rack, she didn't have time to pitch forward and she was on the floor. Ergo no time to scream. So if she was on the floor, they now need the higher hole B to be the one that hit her in the head.)

They have two problems though, they never put it to Mangena that B was not the bullet that missed. Because they were going for double tap at the time. And the second problem: bullet hole B, from the position OP says he was when he shot, is the only hole that lines up laser perfect with the ricochet mark on the wall.

But didn't Roux retract the double tap by saying he, Roux, made a mistake and that it was in fact shots fired in quick succession? I understand they're calling a ballistics expert and so he'll probably have to come up with another story.

No wonder our heads are spinning because nothing is straight forward from the DT.

 

[sleuth-d-]

There were 5 photos shown of the holes in the bedroom door.
Photos 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44 of Album E

To my knowledge, no evidence has been presented that they were mislabelled...and Van Staden did go thru any mislabelled photos on his last day delivering evidence in chief. Would love to hear if you have evidence otherwise.

I put together a collage of the above mentioned 5 photos a few weeks ago.

The top row, comprised of 3 photos relates to the TV room side, while the 2 photos in the bottom row relates to the bedroom side.

Imo:

• #44 is an exit mark (on tv room side). It is also a close up of #43 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #41 may be an entry mark on the bedroom side. It is also a close up of #40 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #42 appears to be a non fully penetrating entry mark on the tv side

The height of these holes, to my knowledge has not been stated.
That said, a standard/common door is about 80". However, I think that Mangena said that the height of the bathroom door was taller than commonly available, so likely it about 84" door.

The inset panels on the bedroom door are approx. 1/4 to 1/3 the total height of the door based on the other attached photo. So, for an 84" door, that would put the panel height in the range of 21" to 28".

The marks are approx 18" above the panel. Therefore, the estimated height is around 40" or roughly 1.0 meters.

A pellet hole through the door at a height of approximately 1 metre, could be a source of the bruise in Reeva's lower back...tho, admittedly this is very speculative...based on height alone.

thanks for the images...

imo #44 is an indent, note the inverted chevron shape in the wood.

#42 is the entry mark of the pellet from tv room side.
#43, #44 is the exit mark on the bedroom side.

imo, there was one pellet, fired from tv room to bedroom, which possibly hit rs in the lower back. the pellet and the dent are evidence - along with the damage to the bedroom door around the lock - of a primary barrier/locked door/altercation/op-breaking-through, before the final toilet door event.

surely no coincidence that the air rifle is found right by that door.

all part of the argument escalating.

i think the difficulty for the pt in including the bedroom door in their case, is the fact that they haven't found the pellet. without the pellet, the pellet hole cannot be proven to have happened that night. also, without the pellet, it is difficult to argue the back wound was caused by the pellet.

imo it was crucial for op to retrieve this pellet during 'cleanup' - otherwise his intruder story would not even vaguely fit.

 

[Viper]

There were 5 photos shown of the holes in the bedroom door.
Photos 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44 of Album E

To my knowledge, no evidence has been presented that they were mislabelled...and Van Staden did go thru any mislabelled photos on his last day delivering evidence in chief. Would love to hear if you have evidence otherwise.

I put together a collage of the above mentioned 5 photos a few weeks ago.

The top row, comprised of 3 photos relates to the TV room side, while the 2 photos in the bottom row relates to the bedroom side.

Imo:

• #44 is an exit mark (on tv room side). It is also a close up of #43 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #41 may be an entry mark on the bedroom side. It is also a close up of #40 based on similar surrounding wood marks and imperfections
• #42 appears to be a non fully penetrating entry mark on the tv side

The height of these holes, to my knowledge has not been stated.
That said, a standard/common door is about 80". However, I think that Mangena said that the height of the bathroom door was taller than commonly available, so likely it about 84" door.

The inset panels on the bedroom door are approx. 1/4 to 1/3 the total height of the door based on the other attached photo. So, for an 84" door, that would put the panel height in the range of 21" to 28".

The marks are approx 18" above the panel. Therefore, the estimated height is around 40" or roughly 1.0 meters.

A pellet hole through the door at a height of approximately 1 metre, could be a source of the bruise in Reeva's lower back...tho, admittedly this is very speculative...based on height alone.

Are you saying that I am wrong about a photo being mislabeled while providing me with photos that show that a photo is mislabeled? That seems odd, but that's fine. Carefully look at the three photos on the top of your collage. Look at the thee holes, and then note the labeling of either TV side or Bedroom side.
#43 TV side - exit hole
#44 same photo just magnified, TV side - exit hole
#42 new photo, again labeled TV side but it is a different hole, there is no splintering, it is on the Bedroom side and is mislabeled as TV side.

Finally, compare #41 to #44 directly under it. Those demonstrate the respective two sides of the door, and they are correctly labeled. The shot was fired from the Bedroom out to the TV room, and it was at eye level, impossible to hit Reeva's lower back.

 

[Laf]

Thanks so much BritsKate!

 

[Karmady]

My sincere apologies if I misunderstood. But are you saying the picture is from the back of Reeva's shirt?

Because the picture in your post is of the front Reeva's shirt. The white specks are bone fragments. The bullet amputated her arm. Fragments went through her arm and hit her on the chest. There are tissue, pieces of bone and holes in the shirt where the bullet fragments tore through the shirt.

But the shirt was on backward, so the front would have been on her back, no?

 

[Viper]

But the shirt was on backward, so the front would have been on her back, no?

I apparently missed the testimony about the shirt having brain and bone fragments on the front of it. For that to be so, she would have to be wearing it backwards.

I see the shirt and the two holes in the right chest area as a bullet going under Reeva's breast. The tissue on the shirt IMO is from the gunshot wound to her arm blowing bodily tissue on to the chest area of her shirt, in front.

 

[Karmady]

I apparently missed the testimony about the shirt having brain and bone fragments on the front of it. For that to be so, she would have to be wearing it backwards.

I see the shirt and the two holes in the right chest area as a bullet going under Reeva's breast. The tissue on the shirt IMO is from the gunshot wound to her arm blowing bodily tissue on to the chest area of her shirt, in front.

I thought it was undisputed that she WAS wearing the shirt backwards. Am I wrong about that. I've seen it posted a dozen times.

 

[Murphys_Law]

I thought it was undisputed that she WAS wearing the shirt backwards. Am I wrong about that. I've seen it posted a dozen times.

IMO, the shirt appears to be on backwards in the photo taken on the scene.(see ttached minus the full head view)

However, the 2 photos that were circulating around the forum (attached) appear to be very similar except one is embedded in the autopsy report and is referred to as photo 50 in the autopsy report. It shows the front of the shirt and the title of the photos is:
"Photo 50 Position of the hole in the vest worn by the deceased during the incident"

Van Staden photographed her on the scene with clothes and without. She would have been removed from the scene without clothes.

IF the shirt was on backwards when Van Staden photographed her
AND IF the front does contain tissue and bone fragments on the right,
then the ONLY inference that can be drawn is that OP switched the shirt from front to back AFTER his murderous rampage.

Why? I can only guess that if it happened it was to cover up something he felt might be very incriminating.

 

[Viper]

I thought it was undisputed that she WAS wearing the shirt backwards. Am I wrong about that. I've seen it posted a dozen times.

BIB. Then it is probably true. LOL! I had not seen any of those posts, so I obviously missed out on the conversation. The two holes are in the front of the shirt though, and there really was testimony about a bullet passing by Reeva's chest causing a mark of some sort. And too Magena was very specific about bone and brain exiting the rear of Reeva's head, not being blown out of the entry wound in the front of her head.

 

[Karmady]

IMO, the shirt appears to be on backwards in the photo taken on the scene.(see ttached minus the full head view)

However, the 2 photos that were circulating around the forum (attached) appear to be very similar except one is embedded in the autopsy report and is referred to as photo 50 in the autopsy report. It shows the front of the shirt and the title of the photos is:
"Photo 50 Position of the hole in the vest worn by the deceased during the incident"

Van Staden photographed her on the scene with clothes and without. She would have been removed from the scene without clothes.

IF the shirt was on backwards when Van Staden photographed her
AND IF the front does contain tissue and bone fragments on the right,
then the ONLY inference that can be drawn is that OP switched the shirt from front to back AFTER his murderous rampage.

Why? I can only guess that if it happened it was to cover up something he felt might be very incriminating.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I completely reject as beyond absurd that Oscar turned her shirt around. No reason to do it since he admitted shooting her while she was locked in the toilet. jmo

 

[Viper]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I completely reject as beyond absurd that Oscar turned her shirt around. No reason to do it since he admitted shooting her while she was locked in the toilet. jmo

Indeed! My lady! :thumb: