Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #62 ~ the appeal~

[GR_Turner]

Since everyone seems to be answering for everyone else I will put in my two bob`s worth. If he did see her, then it is definitely murder eh. If he didn`t see her he still managed to hit her with three out of four bullets which, had she been an intruder and standing in the same position the end result would have essentially been the same. For all his talk of not meaning to shoot anyone, he was fully aware of what his gun was loaded with and the capabilities of that type of ammo.

Remember that the state's version is that she was arguing with him which is why she was standing facing the door but she was also on their version screaming in terror for around 5 minutes because she believed she was about to be attacked.

The question is, did he think he had the right to shoot when he perceived that there was an 'intruder' there?

 

[aftermath]

BIB

Which is what she would have done if she suspected it really was an intruder. By standing directly behind the door it is far more likely she knew it was OP and was possibly talking to him and trying to calm him down, not even knowing he had a gun with him and certainly not suspecting, even if he had, that he would use it.

Maybe- but the witnesses described screaming up to the second set of bangs, so it can't be that she was just talking to him unless the witnesses were wrong?

By standing in front of the door she could have been listening to hear what was going on with the intruder. If she leaned against the door that could explain the 'wood moving' noise that prompted pistorius to fire. Some doors make a creaking cracking sound if leaned on...

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Since everyone seems to be answering for everyone else I will put in my two bob`s worth. If he did see her, then it is definitely murder eh. If he didn`t see her he still managed to hit her with three out of four bullets which, had she been an intruder and standing in the same position the end result would have essentially been the same. For all his talk of not meaning to shoot anyone, he was fully aware of what his gun was loaded with and the capabilities of that type of ammo.

I do not want to quarrel, I much prefer to answer when I am not asked. :happydance:

 

[lithgow1]

Remember that the state's version is that she was arguing with him which is why she was standing facing the door but she was also on their version screaming in terror for around 5 minutes because she believed she was about to be attacked.

The question is, did he think he had the right to shoot when he perceived that there was an 'intruder' there?

From what I understand no he didn`t have the right to shoot when he was in no immediate danger. He obviously thought differently if he thought it was an intruder.

Still wondering about the `42cm is plenty of room` comment.

 

[Colin de France]

Maybe- but the witnesses described screaming up to the second set of bangs, so it can't be that she was just talking to him unless the witnesses were wrong?

By standing in front of the door she could have been listening to hear what was going on with the intruder. If she leaned against the door that could explain the 'wood moving' noise that prompted pistorius to fire. Some doors make a creaking cracking sound if leaned on...

...................................... "Baba please don't shoot, it's only me having a peepee"................

 

[GR_Turner]

From what I understand no he didn`t have the right to shoot when he was in no immediate danger. He obviously thought differently if he thought it was an intruder.

Still wondering about the `42cm is plenty of room` comment.

The question keeping changing. Did he know he would probably kill whoever was behind the door - probably yes or that there would be a good chance but whether he had time to think about what he was doing is another matter. Was it legal in his situation? We don't really know this - hence all the discussion around PPD etc.

Perhaps read the posts? A poster claimed that there was no room to be anywhere other than in front of the door but it is clear that there was room and a wall for protection. Most people would assume a wall would provide more protection than a wooden door so I'd have expected someone being attacked to get far from the door - which was possible. It doesn't matter whether the wall would in fact have done so btw.

 

[GR_Turner]

From what I understand no he didn`t have the right to shoot when he was in no immediate danger. He obviously thought differently if he thought it was an intruder.

Still wondering about the `42cm is plenty of room` comment.

The question keeps changing. Did he know he would probably kill whoever was behind the door - probably yes or that there would be a good chance but whether he had time to think about what he was doing is another matter. Was it legal in his situation? We don't really know this - hence all the discussion around PPD etc.

Perhaps read the posts? A poster claimed that there was no room to be anywhere other than in front of the door but it is clear that there was room and a wall for protection. Most people would assume a wall would provide more protection than a wooden door so I'd have expected someone being attacked to get far from the door - which was possible. It doesn't matter whether the wall would in fact have given protection btw.

 

[Colin de France]

The question keeps changing. Did he know he would probably kill whoever was behind the door - probably yes or that there would be a good chance but whether he had time to think about what he was doing is another matter. Was it legal in his situation? We don't really know this - hence all the discussion around PPD etc.

Perhaps read the posts? A poster claimed that there was no room to be anywhere other than in front of the door but it is clear that there was room and a wall for protection. Most people would assume a wall would provide more protection than a wooden door so I'd have expected someone being attacked to get far from the door - which was possible. It doesn't matter whether the wall would in fact have given protection btw.

............"but it is clear that there was room and a wall for protection"........wow !...........reached bottom there....

 

[cottonweaver]

I appreciate you’ve now moved onto speculating about what happened between OP and RS that fateful night and what sparked it all.
I’ve certainly posted my speculations in the past but obviously it’s so difficult to contribute something meaningful as we will never know. I’ve certainly gone through four or five potential, plausible, different realistic triggers for the row.

Of course he knew he had no right to shoot through a closed door at an unseen target – Rens bought his gun “exam” /paper to court with OP’s own answers on legit responses in case of "private defence"/assailant in the home etc.

I am happy to go back there but just want to return to lithgows questions from this morning.

Was Aimee taking the handbag a reasonable thing to do in the circumstances?
Has anyone answered it because I can’t see the answer? Only something along the lines of: she took it for the reasons we have been told or I believe Aimee which is not really Lithgow’s point/ question- unless Lithgow says different

 

[Deleted member 102539]

...................................... "Baba please don't shoot, it's only me having a peepee"................

"No please - please no!!" Who had heard that call from Reeva?

Edit: Thanks to Mr. Fossil: 3:15/3:16 Mr. Nhlengethwa

Was that evidence in court? If not: why not? It proves that Reeva saw the danger coming in some way.

 

[cottonweaver]

oops you have moved further on while i was writing my post--- you're now room to hide from black talons in that tiny bathroom :scared:
and onto why RS was facing the door.

 

[lithgow1]

The question keeps changing. Did he know he would probably kill whoever was behind the door - probably yes or that there would be a good chance but whether he had time to think about what he was doing is another matter. Was it legal in his situation? We don't really know this - hence all the discussion around PPD etc.

Perhaps read the posts? A poster claimed that there was no room to be anywhere other than in front of the door but it is clear that there was room and a wall for protection. Most people would assume a wall would provide more protection than a wooden door so I'd have expected someone being attacked to get far from the door - which was possible. It doesn't matter whether the wall would in fact have given protection btw.

Fair enough but perhaps you could have explained that rather than making a comment that came across as quite glib given we are discussing the small space in which someone was shot to death. Plus no matter where she stood she would have been in danger from ricochet and bullet fragments. Pistorius himself chose not to take the risk of firing a warning shot in the much bigger bathroom because of those factors.

 

[lithgow1]

oops you have moved further on while i was writing my post--- you're now room to hide from black talons in that tiny bathroom :scared:
and onto why RS was facing the door.

Yep we are moving faster than Oscar Pistorius jumps to conclusions and his sister snatches handbags from crime scenes!

 

[Colin de France]

....so thanks from FromGermany and my little bit of madness post 245 it's made me see something........Pistorius is in the hallway but thinks Reeva is in the bedroom.......Reeva is in the WC......Reeva hears Pistorius cry out for the intruder to get out.............. what's missing ?..........................."Baba where's the intruder".....!!

 

[GR_Turner]

I appreciate you’ve now moved onto speculating about what happened between OP and RS that fateful night and what sparked it all.
I’ve certainly posted my speculations in the past but obviously it’s so difficult to contribute something meaningful as we will never know. I’ve certainly gone through four or five potential, plausible, different realistic triggers for the row.

Of course he knew he had no right to shoot through a closed door at an unseen target – Rens bought his gun “exam” /paper to court with OP’s own answers on legit responses in case of "private defence"/assailant in the home etc.

I am happy to go back there but just want to return to lithgows questions from this morning.

Was Aimee taking the handbag a reasonable thing to do in the circumstances?
Has anyone answered it because I can’t see the answer? Only something along the lines of: she took it for the reasons we have been told or I believe Aimee which is not really Lithgow’s point/ question- unless Lithgow says different

I think we have moved on now to speculating why Reeva was still behind the door when shot and how this seems unlikely if she believed she was in terrible danger.

I've no idea whether aimee taking the bag was reasonable or not. She knew Reeva and made no secret that she took it so probably she just though she was helping
. There may have been contact info there the police could use. That's what I'd be thinking.

 

[aftermath]

I appreciate you’ve now moved onto speculating about what happened between OP and RS that fateful night and what sparked it all.
I’ve certainly posted my speculations in the past but obviously it’s so difficult to contribute something meaningful as we will never know. I’ve certainly gone through four or five potential, plausible, different realistic triggers for the row.

Of course he knew he had no right to shoot through a closed door at an unseen target – Rens bought his gun “exam” /paper to court with OP’s own answers on legit responses in case of "private defence"/assailant in the home etc.

I am happy to go back there but just want to return to lithgows questions from this morning.

Was Aimee taking the handbag a reasonable thing to do in the circumstances?
Has anyone answered it because I can’t see the answer? Only something along the lines of: she took it for the reasons we have been told or I believe Aimee which is not really Lithgow’s point/ question- unless Lithgow says different

I can understand why someone - especially a woman who uses handbags- might not like the idea of just leaving a dead woman's handbag in a house. - especially if I wasn't sure if I could trust the police. Had the missing watches already been noticed by the time the bag was taken to the police station, does anyone know?

Anecdotally, when a colleague died suddenly at work, it seemed wrong to just leave his broken glasses on the desk- so a different colleague took them, with his hat, to our dead colleague's wife. Obviously his death wasn't suspicious, and it is a specific anecdote, but perhaps because of this I can understand aimee and carice's desire to help/do something/ make sure it got to her mother...

 

[Colin de France]

I can understand why someone - especially a woman who uses handbags- might not like the idea of just leaving a dead woman's handbag in a house. - especially if I wasn't sure if I could trust the police. Had the missing watches already been noticed by the time the bag was taken to the police station, does anyone know?

Anecdotally, when a colleague died suddenly at work, it seemed wrong to just leave his broken glasses on the desk- so a different colleague took them, with his hat, to our dead colleague's wife. Obviously his death wasn't suspicious, and it is a specific anecdote, but perhaps because of this I can understand aimee and carice's desire to help/do something/ make sure it got to her mother...

..........but this was a crime scene, moreover to help Pistorius.......so why would she want to help Reeva exactly ? .......it's pushing the possibles too far, virtually bordering on ridicule...sounds dodgy to me.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

....so thanks from FromGermany and my little bit of madness post 245 it's made me see something........Pistorius is in the hallway but thinks Reeva is in the bedroom.......Reeva is in the WC......Reeva hears Pistorius cry out for the intruder to get out.............. what's missing ?..........................."Baba where's the intruder".....!!

Exactly!!!

But Reeva remained silent most of the night ... :silenced:

 

[cottonweaver]

....so thanks from FromGermany and my little bit of madness post 245 it's made me see something........Pistorius is in the hallway but thinks Reeva is in the bedroom.......Reeva is in the WC......Reeva hears Pistorius cry out for the intruder to get out.............. what's missing ?..........................."Baba where's the intruder".....!!

Yes RS was a an elective mute.

That's the same woman who was doing some public speaking the next day!

 

[aftermath]

..........but this was a crime scene........but help Pistorius yes.......why would she want to help Reeva exactly ? .......it's pushing the possibles too far, virtually bordering on ridicule...

Yes it was a crime scene, but as another poster said earlier- pistorius was saying from the outset that it was an accident. Why would aimee and carice doubt him- unless you think he quietly confessed to one of them at some point? She would want to help reeva because she is a human being capable of compassion for another human being. I don't agree that it is pushing possibles too far or bordering on ridicule.