Discussion Thread #61 ~ the appeal~

[Colin de France]

In some gated estates it has been security who were in on the break ins.

Also if the window heard opening had been outside of the 'safe room' bedroom-suite area, then setting off an alarm might be a good idea- alerting everyone around whilst remaining safely locked away from danger. The problem is the window that was heard indicated a breach of that safety-zone... To an extent I think it depends on what the alarm actually does if triggered and how to trigger it.

...you don't sound too sure of yourself there....eleborate on the choice on the police than the internal security......

 

[GR_Turner]

You say you would call for help. Me too. What did OP do? Well we all know the answer to that. Got his gun in a pitch dark room, didn`t check up at all on the love of his life, went screaming down a dark hallway towards that which terrified him, and pumped four bullets into a cubicle believing there was a human being on the other side of the door and yet his supporters maintain that it was self defence and justifiable, albeit a `stupid thing` to do. It is quite unbelievable to me that people can defend his actions but I guess it takes all sorts.

I can imagine that I might investigate a noise or that I might barricade myself in and call the police. However I would be unarmed. If I had a gun to defend myself from intruders I might be more inclined to confront them and try to scare them away before they attacked. It does make sense to do this imo given that there was no door to close between the bathroom and bedroom and running away would have involved him on his stumps or him spending 30 seconds messing around with his legs in the dark with a possible intruder a few metres away in the other room.

 

[lithgow1]

.....not being from a hot country can anyone tell me why there was need to bring a fan in from the outside and close the door, can't see it .....

I`d like to know why someone so paranoid about security went to sleep with the balcony doors wide open believing that painters had left ladders up against the walls of his house. Anyone could have climbed in and murdered him in his bed. Actually I`d also like to know why he went to sleep knowing that those ladders were there, especially since it is the first thing he thought of when he heard the `window moving` noise. For such a nervy person he was pretty slack about his personal security.

 

[Colin de France]

No witnesses testified that Reeva was screaming. The only voice identified that night was OP's.

Your version has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to the exclusion of my version. It was not.

....are you sure of what you've just said there ?.....

 

[lithgow1]

I can imagine that I might investigate a noise or that I might barricade myself in and call the police. However I would be unarmed. If I had a gun to defend myself from intruders I might be more inclined to confront them and try to scare them away before they attacked. It does make sense to do this imo given that there was no door to close between the bathroom and bedroom and running away would have involved him on his stumps or him spending 30 seconds messing around with his legs in the dark with a possible intruder a few metres away in the other room.

But he didn`t try to scare `them` away did he. He went and shot `them`.

 

[GR_Turner]

.......and if ...and if.....just face it, Pistorius murdered Reeva.......

I don't think a statement of your belief actually adds to the argument. You seem to be saying that you would indeed ignore all the evidence that suggests the female screaming may have been a mistake.

 

[Trotterly]

Just a second for four shots, including taking the time to adjust aim. How did you work out that time frame? In other words, where`s the evidence, as introduced in court, for that assertion/assumption.

From what I've seen it doesn't take long to fire 4 shots and if you're not particularly aiming then "adjust aim" could easily be movement from the recoil of the gun.

 

[Colin de France]

I can imagine that I might investigate a noise or that I might barricade myself in and call the police. However I would be unarmed. If I had a gun to defend myself from intruders I might be more inclined to confront them and try to scare them away before they attacked. It does make sense to do this imo given that there was no door to close between the bathroom and bedroom and running away would have involved him on his stumps or him spending 30 seconds messing around with his legs in the dark with a possible intruder a few metres away in the other room.

....you wouldn't use your expensive practical alarm and internal security .....

 

[Colin de France]

I don't think a statement of your belief actually adds to the argument. You seem to be saying that you would indeed ignore all the evidence that suggests the female screaming may have been a mistake.

.....but no....this case is so rich there's no need for "and if's"......

 

[lithgow1]

From what I've seen it doesn't take long to fire 4 shots and if you're not particularly aiming then "adjust aim" could easily be movement from the recoil of the gun.

What do you mean by `not particularly aiming`? He had his gun pointed at the door and fired it. Sounds like aiming to me when you know someone is on the other side of it, which he did, whether by 'your` version or `mine`.

 

[GR_Turner]

...i don't know the in's and out's of SA law but i do know that in most countries the act of self defense has to be in proportion to the attack, secondly as mentioned above the fact that he coudn't hear after the first shot leaving no chance for the intruder to be heard, is without doubt excessive use of force...... therefore it's murder......otherwise accept the screams and it's murder anyway ...

Well we know that in SA one shot is regarded as acceptable in these circumstances as it's regarded as someone acting in panic it seems from other cases. And if one shot indicates panic then 4 shots might just indicate more panic. Maybe the SCA will find that its murder but I'm waiting for the Heads to decide what I think about DE.

 

[GR_Turner]

I know. It`s just such a crock. I don`t disbelieve that someone can mistake someone for an intruder and shoot them - it has happened quite often - but this particular story with it`s myriad weak points and improbabilities, nah, I don`t buy it at all.

I think you overstate the improbabilities. Just because you might not act the way he did doesn't mean that he couldn't have done so.

 

[GR_Turner]

Snipped from your post GR Turner: Yes, I know what the bail application statement said and agree it's different. I was referring to how a misunderstanding between the lawyers and OP might have arisen.

I know it has been pointed out before but it is worth repeating: with all that was on the line don`t you think they would have gone over that statement line by line, word by word, making sure it was a totally accurate retelling of his version of events? That they wouldn`t have is not um `logical`.

Yes, I agree. And we could make the same point about the state not including Johnson's and Stipps (and probably also Mr VdM's) phone records. Both sides did things that seem surprising.

 

[lithgow1]

I think you overstate the improbabilities. Just because you might not act the way he did doesn't mean that he couldn't have done so.

It`s the cumulative effect of the many improbabilties and contradictions. And I`d hazard a guess that it is not just me who thinks his behaviour reckless and his story extremely suspicious. The majority of South Africans think he is lying.

So do you have any ideas beyond `people are different` as to why this security conscious man went to bed with balcony doors flung open and knowing there were ladders outside. Doesn`t that seem to belie his deep fears? You`re never more vulnerable really than when you are asleep and yet he dozed off, windows open and ladders nice and handy. Again, it is all a crock.

 

[Colin de France]

Well we know that in SA one shot is regarded as acceptable in these circumstances as it's regarded as someone acting in panic it seems from other cases. And if one shot indicates panic then 4 shots might just indicate more panic. Maybe the SCA will find that its murder but I'm waiting for the Heads to decide what I think about DE.

....with sincere respect what you've just said there about panic is ridiculous....we are talking about self defense, in certain situations one shot may well be explainable but not the following three if there was no significant change of situation after the first shot...i'm afraid you are on very fragile ground here if not mud, this is an area which has not been fully discussed in this thread and i believe he's cooked well and truly, he certainly would of been had he been in my country......but anyway this is just a diversion, but it's a diversion which has turned into a legal trap........

 

[GR_Turner]

The below is from his bail application. No mention of telling Reeva (in a soft tone) to get down and call the police. Totally different description. Too scared to turn a light on but he grabs his gun from under the bed (with no difficulty in a pitch dark room) and heads off screaming down the hallway.

"I felt a sense of terror rushing over me. There are no burglar bars across the bathroom window and I knew that contractors who worked at my house had left the ladders outside. Although I did not have my prosthetic legs on I have mobility on my stumps. I believed that someone had entered my house. I was too scared to switch a light on.

I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed. On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house and for Reeva to phone the police. It was pitch dark in the bedroom and I thought Reeva was in bed.

He wasn't obliged to give anything other than a general idea of what happened at the bail hearing.

 

[lithgow1]

He wasn't obliged to give anything other than a general idea of what happened at the bail hearing.

The whole point is that the `general idea` differs in a number of significant aspects to what he later said in court. And he had to give a detailed outline, not a general idea as you claim, otherwise the seriousness of the charge would have seen him remanded in custody.

 

[Colin de France]

He wasn't obliged to give anything other than a general idea of what happened at the bail hearing.

...but he did though.....and what a comic he turned out to be ....

 

[lithgow1]

Yes, I agree. And we could make the same point about the state not including Johnson's and Stipps (and probably also Mr VdM's) phone records. Both sides did things that seem surprising.

So which one do you think he lied in re the balcony? The bail statement or the one in court? Both can't be true.

 

[GR_Turner]

It`s the cumulative effect of the many improbabilties and contradictions. And I`d hazard a guess that it is not just me who thinks his behaviour reckless and his story extremely suspicious. The majority of South Africans think he is lying.

So do you have any ideas beyond `people are different` as to why this security conscious man went to bed with balcony doors flung open and knowing there were ladders outside. Doesn`t that seem to belie his deep fears? You`re never more vulnerable really than when you are asleep and yet he dozed off, windows open and ladders nice and handy. Again, it is all a crock.

There are indications that he was worried about security, enough to buy a gun and Sam Taylor said he investigated several possible intruder situations. I think he had got lax about security and it wasn't the obsession that the defense psychiatrist tried to suggest it was. But I've gone to sleep leaving things boiling on the hob and been woken up by the smoke so I can say for sure that sometimes tired people do fall asleep without planning everything thoroughly or at all even.