General Discussion Thread #4

[Carol70]

Doesn't the point about the bullets relate mainly to the trajectory of the bullets? If the bullets hit the door low, then OP must have known that RS was cowering low on our right hand side beside the toilet looking at it and where most of the blood was and that he knew she was not standing or on our left hand side. So how did he know that? IMO he must have heard her voice or movements.

He did hear her movements, he clearly stated he heard movement and opened fire. Where she was in the loo is under debate but as we can see, there really was no place to hide from his bullets. I don't believe now that she was standing close to the door and agree she was either sitting on the toilet or crouched down( depending where the other 2 bullets entered the door)

 

[Carol70]

Something else may be of significance in these recent
//sniped

It says: "In one poignant scene, a Valentine's gift for Pistorius, 26, from his girlfriend remains unopened."

This could tie in with reports of loud arguing etc heard on Wed. night, implying that Oscar never even opened his gift?

He never opened the gift. She gave it to him and told him he could only open it the following day.

 

[Carol70]

:h:

Yes/Yea = celebrating?

Celebrating is usually arty: or artyguy: or :fireworks:

Hahaha lol

 

[Estelle]

People are still not really talking about it anymore to be honest. And more than ever, people think he is guilty as charged.

I was dismayed to see the new YOU mag this week. Reevas parents invited the mag to watch the scattering of her ashes. Handful of people and a journalist. I found it abit uncouth. I bought it but haven't read the article yet. To me, that should have been private.

I read that as a sign that Reeva's parents of both the fact that they have their own PR team to counter OP's PR team in the MSM and to stand up for Reeva perhaps also to attract public sympathy because if they remain silent it is all about "poor Oscar" and his being depicted as a victim. Reeva is the real victim here and by default her parents have become victims too.

But also, I think they have reached another stage of the grieving process. There are five stages in the grieving process:

"The stages of mourning are universal and are experienced by people from all walks of life. Mourning occurs in response to an individual’s own terminal illness or to the death of a valued being, human or animal. There are five stages of normal grief. They were first proposed by Elsabeth Kubler-Ross in her 1969 book “On Death and Dying.”

In our bereavement, we spend different lengths of time working through each step and express each stage more or less intensely. The five stages do not necessarily occur in order. We often move between stages before achieving a more peaceful acceptance of death.

1. Denial and Isolation

The first reaction to learning of the death of a cherished loved one is to deny the reality of the situation. It is a normal reaction to rationalize overwhelming emotions. It is a defense mechanism that buffers the immediate shock. We block out the words and hide from the facts. This is a temporary response that carries us through the first wave of pain.

2. Anger

As the masking effects of denial and isolation begin to wear, reality and its pain re-emerge. We are not ready. The intense emotion is deflected from our vulnerable core, redirected and expressed instead as anger. The anger may be aimed at inanimate objects, complete strangers, friends or family. Anger may be directed at our dying or deceased loved one. Rationally, we know the person is not to be blamed. Emotionally, however, we may resent the person for causing us pain or for leaving us. We feel guilty for being angry, and this makes us more angry.

3. Bargaining

The normal reaction to feelings of helplessness and vulnerability is often a need to regain control–

If only we had sought medical attention sooner…
If only we got a second opinion from another doctor…
If only we had tried to be a better person toward them…
Secretly, we may make a deal with God or our higher power in an attempt to postpone the inevitable. This is a weaker line of defense to protect us from the painful reality.

4. Depression

Two types of depression are associated with mourning. The first one is a reaction to practical implications relating to the loss. Sadness and regret predominate this type of depression. We worry about the costs and burial. We worry that, in our grief, we have spent less time with others that depend on us. This phase may be eased by simple clarification and reassurance. We may need a bit of helpful cooperation and a few kind words. The second type of depression is more subtle and, in a sense, perhaps more private. It is our quiet preparation to separate and to bid our loved one farewell. Sometimes all we really need is a hug.

5. Acceptance

Reaching this stage of mourning is a gift not afforded to everyone. Death may be sudden and unexpected or we may never see beyond our anger or denial. It is not necessarily a mark of bravery to resist the inevitable and to deny ourselves the opportunity to make our peace. This phase is marked by withdrawal and calm. This is not a period of happiness and must be distinguished from depression.

http://psychcentral.com/lib/2006/the-5-stages-of-loss-and-grief/

IMO Reeva's parents have now reached the ANGER stage of grieving and are now ready to reveal all.

 

[Estelle]

Shane, if he was moving quickly down the stairs, then I would imagine there wouldn't be massive amounts of blood on the actual stairs but rather at the bottom where he laid her down??

But wasn't she wrapped in towels before he even carried her down the stairs?

 

[Carol70]

WOW, the whole Silverwood Estate must be full of OP's people this day. Let me repeat who was there:

- OP's brother Carl
- OP's father Henke (he WAS there)
- OP's sister Aimee
- OP's lawyer Kenny Oldwage
- a locksmith
- Stander
- an unknown doctor
- a female neighbour (maybe the daughter of Stander, also a lawyer, talked with Justin Divaris by phone)
- Justin Divaris
- Samantha Greyvenstein (girlfriend of Justin)
- OP's agent Peet van Zyl
- OP's coach Ampie Louw
- paramedics
- a lot of police officers
- Hilton Botha

Did I forget anyone?

It actually makes no difference if OP father was there or not however, I thought we established that he was in fact ,NOT there. He said in an interview on his way to court the next morning that he had NOT seen OP and didn't know the girl in question. I'm pretty sure if he was at the scene, he would have at least been able to see his son.

 

[shane13]

He never opened the gift. She gave it to him and told him he could only open it the following day.

Well if you go with the Pros. side of things, they were up aplenty the next morning.
They could have taken a break from the arguing, to to open gifts--but I guess they were past that point alas.

 

[shane13]

It actually makes no difference if OP father was there or not however, I thought we established that he was in fact ,NOT there. He said in an interview on his way to court the next morning that he had NOT seen OP and didn't know the girl in question. I'm pretty sure if he was at the scene, he would have at least been able to see his son.

Yes, we established several times here, via the video you cite, that Henke himself said he was not there.

 

[Carol70]

But wasn't she wrapped in towels before he even carried her down the stairs?

I'm not sure actually, it would seem more likely OP grabbed a towel while still in the bathroom to stem the flow of blood. I just recall the paras saying she was wrapped when they arrived?? Could be wrong!

 

[shane13]

But wasn't she wrapped in towels before he even carried her down the stairs?

I believe the towels came after she was declared dead by paramedics.

 

[Carol70]

If OP first shot Reeva near the foyer, why was no shell casing found downstairs? Do you think he may have collected it when he went downstairs to unlock the front door? Also - if he shot Reeva downstairs, wouldn't there have been blood spatter on other surfaces near the sofa, as well?

I'm still trying to make sense of this and to work out what it may mean, without getting too attached to a scenario.

I'm interested in how you & others think it may have played out. At this point, I'm open to various possibilities.

I'm not going to go with the theory that she was first shot in the foyer/lounge area. If she ran up the stairs wounded, there would be a lot more blood I imagine on the stairway. Also, I think I agree with Estelle that she may have been covered with a towel from the bathroom as there is not much blood in the passage area between the bathroom and bedroom. I'm not a blood splatter specialist but can believe that if he was running down the stairs with her, carrying a limp person, one arm under her legs, the other under her back, her head may have been swinging somewhat, perhaps causing blood from her head wound to fall to the sofa below the stairs as he ran past it.

 

[whiterum]

To me this sounds like more BS from the nearly monolithic MSM.
I posted months ago,that the way to prove what could be heard is only by having actors arguing, screaming, and finally a gun being fired from Oscar's hall and bathroom, and emplacing people and microphones at where the earwitnesses were.

Theoretical train simulations or simulations anywhere other than the actual crime scene are not valid when specific re-enactments can be undertaken.

Totally agree, more BS to try and frighten potential ear witnesses but where are the real questions that need answered such as , why the defence and OP withheld a vital piece of evidence, his phone, from the police, knowing they had taken other irrelevant phones belonging to him. Also not why he shot through the door on stumps or prosthetics but why did he walk to the bathroom and shoot through that door at all. How he managed to get there is of no relevance to Reeva being shot through that door.

 

[shane13]

Totally agree, more BS to try and frighten potential ear witnesses and why are the real questions that need answered such as why the defence and OP withheld a vital piece of evidence, his phone from the police. Knowing they had taken other irrelevant phones belonging to him. Also not why he shot through the door on stumps or presthetics

Great insight.

That to me is one of the more remarkable things to come out of the bail hearing.

Roux admitted that they took that from the crime scene--which I think means either Carl P, or atty Oldwage, took the fifth phone--that was the one actually used to call people. Pros. didn't seem to make a stink about this, neither did the media.

Something no one talks about--not just that that phone was used to call people after the shooting.
But...what about the possibility of calls made during the 17 minute gap?!
I trust you know who might have been the possible recipient(s)?

Who can be trusted to analyze it now--if you follow my drift?

 

[Estelle]

I disagree with this first statement. The prosecution does not have to prove motive in a premeditated murder case. It only has to prove intention to kill. So IMO the following statement is false.

The prosecution must provide a motive to have him convicted of premeditated murder, and part of that case relies on two witness statements saying the couple were arguing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ter-the-shouts-the-whispers-grow-8640799.html

The prosecutor, Gerrie Nel, pointed out that premeditation didn’t need to be a long-held plan; it could be contained in the time it took Pistorius to walk the eight yards or so from his bed—under which he kept his gun, and where Steenkamp had been earlier—to the bathroom, where she had gone.

"The motive was, he wanted to kill,” the prosecutors said.

Earlier in the hearing, he had mentioned that the prosecution had a sense of why Steenkamp had locked herself in that tiny room. (“She locked that door for a purpose. We’ll get to that purpose.&#8221 He said that legally, in terms of a motive, it would be enough to say that Pistorius walked to the door with a strong desire to kill his girlfriend, but he suggested that there would be more. Early police statements indicated that neighbors had heard exchanges between them; the mother of a former girlfriend also talked about “a few occasions where things could have gone wrong with her and his gun during the time they dated.”

In reply, Roux kept arguing as if love and premeditation are not compatible things—that if he can only keep finding people who say that Reeva would have said yes if Oscar proposed, then murder would be deemed impossible.

That is not how love or domestic violence work. The belief that they might, has been known to keep women close to people who hurt them. And regret, as Nel noted, doesn’t undo premeditation. (“If he felt bad after that, that’s something different.&#8221 Neither do tears. Trying to efface the reality of a sad and violent death with protestations of romance is less so. Love may remain; Reeva Steenkamp, however, is dead.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...love-and-murder-the-oscar-pistorius-case.html

Why was the issue of premeditation such a focus of the bail hearing?

There is only one crime of murder in South Africa -- and premeditation is not a requirement. It is simply defined as the intentional unlawful killing of another human being.
However, premeditation plays a role for bail and sentencing. For the purposes of bail, if the charge is premeditated, it falls into a category with the most serious crimes, for which the defense must show exceptional circumstances to obtain bail.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/22/world/africa/pistorius-legal-q-and-a

 

[Estelle]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pisto_lius
WOW, the whole Silverwood Estate must be full of OP's people this day. Let me repeat who was there:

1. - OP's brother Carl
2. - OP's father Henke (he WAS there)?
3. - OP's sister Aimee
4. - OP's lawyer Kenny Oldwage
5. - a locksmith
6. - Stander
7. - an unknown doctor
8. - a female neighbour (maybe the daughter of Stander, also a lawyer, talked with Justin Divaris by phone)
9. - Justin Divaris
10. - Samantha Greyvenstein (girlfriend of Justin)
11. - OP's agent Peet van Zyl
12. - OP's coach Ampie Louw
13. - paramedics
14. - a lot of police officers
15. - Hilton Botha

Did I forget anyone?

Neighbour and best friend, Christo Menelao who lent OP the ladder was probably there

Possibly 15 people plus many police officers and paramedics - up to 30?

So any of these could have stolen the watch (if that story can be proved) and contaminated the crime scene.

Have you ever heard of so many people turning up to a crime scene?
IMO it could be unprecedented in history!!!

 

[whiterum]

Great insight.

That to me is one of the more remarkable things to come out of the bail hearing.

Roux admitted that they took that from the crime scene--which I think means either Carl P, or atty Oldwage, took the fifth phone--that was the one actually used to call people. Pros. didn't seem to make a stink about this, neither did the media.

Something no one talks about--not just that that phone was used to call people after the shooting.
But...what about the possibility of calls made during the 17 minute gap?!
I trust you know who might have been the possible recipient(s)?

Who can be trusted to analyze it now--if you follow my drift?

I certainly do get your drift. All this 'the door is the key' and 'prosthetics v stumps' are manipulative diversions. IMO, OP's withheld phone is a more relevant key but seems to have been lost in a cleverly devised attempt to direct attention away from the real evidence.

 

[shane13]

I certainly do get your drift. All this 'the door is the key' and 'prosthetics v stumps' are manipulative diversions. IMO, OP's withheld phone is a more relevant key but seems to have been lost in a cleverly devised attempt to direct attention away from the real evidence.

Indeed. Great insight again. IIRC, the last mention of this 5th phone was by Roux to a reporter. It was almost like a tacit acknowledgement of what he could get away with.

Speaking of the door--note how the MSM jumps to proclaim that it proves OP must be innocent. When we only have 2 of the 4 bullet holes. And the photo may well be cropped not to show the top of the door...
The other 2 holes can only be either in the top of the door or in the smashed in panel.

 

[Estelle]

Great insight.

That to me is one of the more remarkable things to come out of the bail hearing.

Roux admitted that they took that from the crime scene--which I think means either Carl P, or atty Oldwage, took the fifth phone--that was the one actually used to call people. Pros. didn't seem to make a stink about this, neither did the media.

Something no one talks about--not just that that phone was used to call people after the shooting.
But...what about the possibility of calls made during the 17 minute gap?!
I trust you know who might have been the possible recipient(s)?

Who can be trusted to analyze it now--if you follow my drift?

The question remains for me, why did OP call all those people to come over to his house at such a crucial time if it was not to help him with ideas and actions to hide or distort evidence and help him to cover up and get his story right before police arrived.

It appears Christo heard those shots to 3.08am and there was long delay before paramedics and police were notified and could get there giving OP's "cover up" team time to think of strategies and lies.

For example as said earlier, the body was found at the bottom of the stairs wrapped in a blanket as well as towels.

But we are given the story that this was only done after she died in one report (at least) by a neighbour on OP's team. How do we know that this is true? Was the neighbour told to say that by OP?

Doesn't it make more sense that OP gave her CPR first while she was still in the toilet supposedly still alive then grabbed the towels from the bathroom as he walked past them then grabbed a blanket from his bed to carry her down the stairs to protect them from dripping blood and in preparation to put her in his car to take her to hospital so as to also protect the car seats?

But we are given the hero story that she was still alive so he carried her down the stairs with her head and arms dangling, he then gave her CPR when he thought he had an audience (and IMO she was probably already dead) then raced upstairs contaminating the crime scene himself to get the towels and blanket!

IMO THERE WAS NO URGENCY IN ANYTHING HE DID FOR REEVA. THE ONLY URGENCY HE HAD WAS TO CONTACT HIS OWN TEAM AND GET THEM THERE BEFORE POLICE AND PARAMEDICS ARRIVED SO THEY COULD HELP HIM TO COVER UP TO SUPPORT HIS STORY.

 

[shane13]

The question remains for me, why did OP call all those people to come over to his house at such a crucial time if it was not to help him with ideas and actions to hide or distort evidence and help him to cover up and get his story right before police arrived.

It appears Christo heard those shots to 3.08am and there was long delay before paramedics and police were notified and could get there giving OP's "cover up" team time to think of strategies and lies.

For example as said earlier, the body was found at the bottom of the stairs wrapped in a blanket as well as towels.

But we are given the story that this was only done after she died in one report (at least) by a neighbour on OP's team. How do we know that this is true? Was the neighbour told to say that by OP?

Doesn't it make more sense that OP gave her CPR first while she was still in the toilet supposedly still alive then grabbed the towels from the bathroom as he walked past them then grabbed a blanket from his bed to carry her down the stairs to protect them from dripping blood and in preparation to put her in his car to take her to hospital so as to also protect the car seats?

But we are given the hero story that she was still alive so he carried her down the stairs with her head and arms dangling, he then gave her CPR when he thought he had an audience (and IMO she was probably already dead) then raced upstairs contaminating the crime scene himself to get the towels and blanket!

IMO THERE WAS NO URGENCY IN ANYTHING HE DID FOR REEVA. THE ONLY URGENCY HE HAD WAS TO CONTACT HIS OWN TEAM AND GET THEM THERE BEFORE POLICE AND PARAMEDICS ARRIVED SO THEY COULD HELP HIM TO COVER UP TO SUPPORT HIS STORY.

Well first the 3:08 appears to be the 2nd set of shots--17 minutes after the first (single) shot.

Then RE towels, not sure that matters in any way, and you can find statements made by paramedics and they do not cite that they found her with towels around her.

And as far as giving CPR--maybe.
DId you see the movie, Internal Affairs with Richard Gere playing a real bad cop?

 

[Estelle]

I'm not going to go with the theory that she was first shot in the foyer/lounge area. If she ran up the stairs wounded, there would be a lot more blood I imagine on the stairway. Also, I think I agree with Estelle that she may have been covered with a towel from the bathroom as there is not much blood in the passage area between the bathroom and bedroom. I'm not a blood splatter specialist but can believe that if he was running down the stairs with her, carrying a limp person, one arm under her legs, the other under her back, her head may have been swinging somewhat, perhaps causing blood from her head wound to fall to the sofa below the stairs as he ran past it.

What about if the cricket bat story is true about OP hitting her on the head with it? Could OP have brought it down from his bedroom while she was sitting on the sofa and then could he have hit her on the head with it causing minor blood spatter on the sofa then she raced up the stairs to lock herself in the toilet to get away from him and protect herself? He then could have taken the cricket bat back upstairs and got his gun to shoot and kill her as he was afraid she would report him for domestic violence.