General Discussion Thread #4

[whiterum]

5. I think the defence team will establish its argument upon OP's disability
and thus greater sense of vulnerability and fear as you said however his heroically taking out his gun and attacking towards a supposed threat does not even reflect the actions of an abled man in that situation let alone a disabled man in pitch darkness.. So Prosecution might have the chance of decaying their argument imo.

Exactly, like something you would see in the cowboy movies.

 

[Estelle]

This is an old but interesting article I have not seen before.

How South African visual journalists are covering the ongoing Oscar Pistorius story

http://apple.copydesk.org/2013/02/2...e-covering-the-ongoing-oscar-pistorius-story/

 

[Coldpizza]

:greetings: Lemon Tree welcome to the discussion!

 

[shane13]

I've been following this thread with great interest over the past months. Thank you for you thought-provoking and interesting observations and analysis. You have provided much food for thought. Here is my first contribution...



This has worried me for some time now: How could OP have fired so accurately, hitting RS* three times through a closed door in the dark, without knowing where, in the toilet, she* was?

OP couldn't have known exactly where RS* was if, according to OP, she* didn't make any noise. Yet three out of four shots through the door hit RS* accurately enough to kill her*.

IMO, OP heard RS* in the toilet, knew it was her*, knew exactly where she* was in the toilet and pre-meditatively shot and killed her*. Did OP intend to kill RS* with his level of accuracy? If so, then murder is at least the correct charge, not culpable hoicide.

* = or "the intruder", if you believe OP's BH Affidavit

A case of too accurate shooting through a closed door in the dark?

Welcome LT.

Many of us have wondered about that and he likely did something after the 17 minute gap--if Pros theory is correct--that allowed him to see or know where she was in the loo.

But one thing you have there is off.

OP's affidavit never claimed the bathroom was dark--only the bedroom was claimed as such.

 

[shane13]

I am so curious about the role of alcohol because of the way things escalated to this very tragic event.

Yes indeed.

I have written here and elsewhere, since the beginning, that Oscar seems to have displayed intolerance and addiction to alcohol and caffeine--for years leading up to the shooting. Caused him to have rage, poor impulse control, and other things. IMO

 

[Estelle]

Newspapers ordered to apologise to Pistorius

http://citizen.co.za/27736/newspapers-ordered-to-apologise-to-pistorius/

 

[Estelle]

Oscar’s case rests on his own words

http://citizen.co.za/27149/oscars-case-rests-on-his-own-words/

 

[kittychi]

This is an old but interesting article I have not seen before.

How South African visual journalists are covering the ongoing Oscar Pistorius story

http://apple.copydesk.org/2013/02/2...e-covering-the-ongoing-oscar-pistorius-story/

That was really interesting. I would love to see the team at Graphics24 do updated versions with what is known now: one based on Oscar's affidavit, and one based on Prosecution's theory.

 

[shane13]

Newspapers ordered to apologise to Pistorius

http://citizen.co.za/27736/newspapers-ordered-to-apologise-to-pistorius/

Thanks for this, Estelle.

Shows the value often of a MSM article--even for a trivial matter.

The popular article claimed that Oscar was caught trying to buy a new souped up sportscar or such with his bodyguard and a new flame (girlfriend.)

In reality, it was Oscar trying to buy a used car. and he was there with his brother Carl, and his female cousin.


Now for perhaps

The Final Word on the Cricket Bat:

Much of this apology for incorrect info was about City Press in SA.
Makes you wonder about their claim going back to just after the shooting that they published with some certainty that a cricket bat was first used to crush Reeva's skull.

Just how well did they vet that story, must now be asked?

Recall here I basically left the "cricket bat--crushed skull" claim when I hypothesized here 2 months ago, that the bullet that entered her head also fractured her skull on the way out--a so-called through and through" double wound. And that this was the bullet found in the toilet by Oscar's forensic person, presumably Dr. Perumal.

City Press' incorrect info on this matter could be a desire for a media frenzy, or they could have been given incorrect info from cops on scene who might have seen massive skull injuries and innocently but falsely came to the conclusion--perhaps due to inexperience in such matters--that the bat had to have been used.

 

[shane13]

Oscar’s case rests on his own words

http://citizen.co.za/27149/oscars-case-rests-on-his-own-words/

This article including the opinions of an attorney does not impress me. Please examine it thoughtfully.

The article has an attorney claiming that OP will take the stand and it will be up to him to prove his case.

I am not an attorney nor SAn. But if their system is like the one in the USA, I don't see Oscar taking the stand, if he is not forced to. The way he has cried in court without the far greater stress of taking the stand... And if he is lying about everything, is he not likely to crack under the pressure of Pros attorney--especially with the weight of massive evidence and earwitnesses, etc.?

No, unlike the attorney in that piece, I do not think the DT will offer OP up for cross-examination, if it does not have to. And if he does have to take the stand, I think he will fail terribly. (As he should if he is lying.)

So it just seems that some MSM sources putting out strange opinions for the publicity.

Recall BBC3 doc practically forcing one of Oscar's friends to say Oscar was suicidal, when he was not. And that friend retracted what he was practically forced to say.

Here there are many lawyers in SA. Indeed Reeva was about to be a full-fledged lawyer herself.

Very easy for a media entity to get one to say what it wants. But we should not accept it blindly.

 

[whiterum]

Newspapers ordered to apologise to Pistorius

http://citizen.co.za/27736/newspapers-ordered-to-apologise-to-pistorius/

How ironic, an apology for causing unnecessary harm to a person charged with premeditated murder. Sounds like the punch line to a bad joke !

 

[shane13]

"Deep" Question of the Day"

Will, or did, City Press publish the news that City Press was chastized for one of their news stories by the Press Ombudsman?

 

[Lemon Tree]

Welcome LT.

Many of us have wondered about that and he likely did something after the 17 minute gap--if Pros theory is correct--that allowed him to see or know where she was in the loo.

But one thing you have there is off.

OP's affidavit never claimed the bathroom was dark--only the bedroom was claimed as such.

Shane13 - You are correct, OP states in the BH Affidavit that the bedroom was "pitch dark". The lighting in the bathroom is indirectly referred to by OP saying "I think I must then have turned on the lights."

Based on my very amateur astronomy and the position of OP's bathroom, it would have been reasonably dark, but not pitch dark at 3am. http://is.gd/2gTcE7 (set location to South Africa | Johannesburg).

 

[Estelle]

"Deep" Question of the Day"

Will, or did, City Press publish the news that City Press was chastized for one of their news stories by the Press Ombudsman?

Retief dismissed claims brought by Pistorius, his family and Burgess that the newspapers had failed to verify its information and ignored the information they supplied to the paper. He ruled that the papers were justified in publishing the allegations as allegations, as that was the information they had at their disposal at the time of publication. ”The report was misleading, but not deliberately so,” he said.

http://citizen.co.za/27736/newspapers-ordered-to-apologise-to-pistorius/

 

[Estelle]

Some very interesting information on the work of forensic specialists

"There are lots of questions surrounding the number of shots fired, and whether there was an intermediate target like the bathroom door. There are facts in the case that have not been for public consumption, which the public will find out when the court case takes place."

http://www.citypress.co.za/features/i-see-dead-people/

BIB This presented some new thoughts for me. Was the bathroom door an intermediate target or not?

This is the first time in the MSM this possibility has been brought up. I have often wondered how OP was so accurate with his shots at RS. One possibility I thought of was that in those 17 minutes, OP tried to open the door but it was locked so he went and got the cricket bat first and knocked out the door panels and then fired at RS directly through the door space from 1.5m.

A panel is missing from the bathroom door, police tape covers two bullet holes

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-...ooting-shocking-picture-1923590#ixzz2cyYb4h2I

Note that MSM now reports Reeva's screaming BEFORE and AFTER shots were overheard.
This appears to be new information IMO. That is why the bathroom door is so important. Was RS screaming while he was bashing down the door?

Could it be that there are only two bullet holes rather than four through that bathroom door? That is why Botha removed it. I also maintain that OP could have crouched down on his knees to shoot to pretend he was on his stumps.

 

[Interested Bystander]

The forensic tags in this photo seem to 'infer' two shots having been fired through the door. Perhaps there is another through the missing panel. As we have discussed before, there seem also to be forensic markers on the floor. They appear to be where the door would have been if it was closed. A little puzzling. It has been suggested that these may have been dropped by the forensic team but I tend to not agree with that.

The door seems to be solid wood and quite thick. Would this indicate that for a bullet to penetrate them OP would need to have been very close?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ures-blood-spattered-bathroom-wreck-case.html

 

[Estelle]

The forensic tags in this photo seem to 'infer' two shots having been fired through the door. Perhaps there is another through the missing panel. As we have discussed before, there seem also to be forensic markers on the floor. They appear to be where the door would have been if it was closed. A little puzzling. It has been suggested that these may have been dropped by the forensic team but I tend to not agree with that.

The door seems to be solid wood and quite thick. Would this indicate that for a bullet to penetrate them OP would need to have been very close?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ures-blood-spattered-bathroom-wreck-case.html

Thanks for that. I have now corrected my post with this new information.

I have read that OP was 1.5m away.

 

[Estelle]

It seems from my earlier link, repeated below,


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...84466/Oscar-Pistorius-murder-charge-live.html


that the person who heard gunshots reported 8 of them. The defense will have a field day with this. What I think he/she was hearing was in fact the four gun shots plus the associated 4 echos but even if this were to be the truth the Defense are very likely to be able to rubbish the testimony.

Also we learn that there "were no signs of assault on Reeva's body" which probably puts to bed the cricket bat assault theory.

Also Botha said all 4 shots were in the bathroom, none elsewhere. That appears to eliminate the cartridge supposedly found in the bedroom or cupboard area.

One witness heard a couple arguing - so two voices - not just Pistorius shouting from the balcony. I also wonder whether in fact it was Reeva shouting from the balcony before running to the bathroom to escape from danger. Pistorius states in his Affidavit that the bedroom door was locked . If it was locked, had P. purposely done this and taken the key? Her only escape then from him was to jump from the balcony OR attempt to hide somewhere.

BIB So if this witness heard eight gunshots, could it be that OP fired four through the door and another four once the panels were off and collected four of the bullets giving them to his brother to get rid of?

I have accepted the possibility of echoes but could this also be another possibility?

 

[Estelle]

Would it really take a ballistics report to get an idea of whether OP was wearing prosthetic legs or not? It seems it would be fairly easy to see where the holes were on the door to know whether he had them on or not. I don't really see why the prosecution would care whether he had his prosthetics on or not. I guess I see that if he took the time to put his prosthetics on that he had time to prepare and was in a more "offensive" position.

On the flip side, if you are concerned your handicap would put you at a disadvantage, I don't see that you would go towards the perceived danger to an open bathroom versus getting you and your GF to a safe place and calling police.

I would say that he chose to move towards the danger, not knowing what/who might be waiting for him, hinders the defense claim that he felt vulnerable.

 

[Estelle]

Originally Posted by Interested Bystander
It seems from my earlier link, repeated below,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...arge-live.html

that the person who heard gunshots reported 8 of them.

Interested Bystander, can you please post that paragraph where the witness heard eight gunshots please? I have scanned that article and cannot find it.