Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #63 ~ the appeal~

[Susza]

It has nothing to do with Pistorius` innocence or guilt but I found Oldwadge to be a particularly odious example of the arrogant, public school boy type. The kind of person that makes me think wistfully of tumbrels, guillotines, Che Guevara and up against the wall. Well maybe not that far. Bankruptcy and a particularly lurid sex scandal that leads to disbarment would be enough. For all his twisting and turning I didn`t find Roux to be personally repellant in the way Oldwadge was.

BBM - I totally agree. I am unable to find a better word to describe what I felt when he was talking... Too strange. How is it possible that a person I don't know at all can provoke such an impression just by being visible and audible????

 

[soozieqtips]

If you don't want to discuss it then don't discuss it. If you do, then perhaps do it sensibly without the insults?

I expressed an opinion based on what I've read. Also, it's against WS policy to tell other members how to post - so please stop doing it. Thank you.

 

[cottonweaver]

I'd struggle with the idea that the bats came first I'm afraid. I can't see any reason for OP to have stopped once he'd started and to then go get a gun to shoot through the door. It makes no sense at all to me.

RSBM - too much in the post to tackle at once.
Why do you say it makes no sense to cease with the bat? Can you elaborate on that part.

 

[cottonweaver]

BBM - I totally agree. I am unable to find a better word to describe what I felt when he was talking... Too strange. How is it possible that a person I don't know at all can provoke such an impression just by being visible and audible????

...and is it purely a coincidence that Odwadge was selected to cross certain witnesses?

 

[cottonweaver]

I know some posters argue that he was out of control but I'd have thought that breaking a door down and actually physically attacking Reeva would be far better if he wanted to teach her a lesson (I guess).

RSBM as a lot of points in that post


Appreciate you will not agree to some in this list, some may not be true:

What always struck me as significant about OP ( and struck others) is that despite "a temper" was that he never actually used his fists with men either . I always thought that was rather characteristic of his rage and we discussed it here a long time ago, not new.

He used his gun ( sun-roof, BMW following) ,
lashed out with doors ( Casssidy Memmory),
made threats over the phone ( breaking legs Batchelor) ,
wielded the law as a threat,
locked exGF in rooms ( S.Taylor),
threw inanimate objects ( chairs Olympics) ,
used speed ( car) .....
can't actually remember them all now- feel free to add

Even if I exclude some , I always saw a significant pattern there and I def don't think my thoughts are unique on this.
Out of control - yes IMO. Wanting to use direct violence, with his fists - no, never come across that in any of the accounts, usually more "indirect" in expression. (Don't know how better to describe it than indirect, a bloke would perhaps explain it better for you.)

 

[cottonweaver]

....the reason he stopped with the bat was because he wasn't getting anywhere fast.......and he got angry...........

and /or the bat caused just too much screaming perhaps?

 

[aftermath]

and /or the bat caused just too much screaming perhaps?

Why would pistorius risk insisting he had his legs on when hitting the door with the bat?

 

[Trotterly]

I'd struggle with the idea that the bats came first I'm afraid. I can't see any reason for OP to have stopped once he'd started and to then go get a gun to shoot through the door. It makes no sense at all to me. It all suggests someone intent on murder but for no reason at all and without any interest in deaths and murder or a history of threatening to kill anyone. I know some posters argue that he was out of control but I'd have thought that breaking a door down and actually physically attacking Reeva would be far better if he wanted to teach her a lesson (I guess). Moreover we know he'd had many rocky relationships before involving cheating on both sides so it's hard to see what could have precipitated such a rage reaction in the absence of drugs or alcohol if it never did or even came close to this before. That's not the answer you wanted I know. Sorry.

His motivation, whilst not essential for a conviction, was vital for the state's case here. The "argument" was a busted flush and it was down to the messages to convince the judge that OP was a potential murderer ready to kill. Hmmmm, it was never going to work was it.

 

[cottonweaver]

Why would pistorius risk insisting he had his legs on when hitting the door with the bat?

Sorry , I can't really work with one-liners. Just not my style.

 

[Marfa Lights]

Here's the simple schematic I'm using to visualise the witness testimony based on a bat then gun scenario. As stated earlier (see posts #263 and #270) it requires that the Burger/Johnson gunshots are moved to before the helps they hear. Although it shows no times, I have used times where known to correlate events. It's very much a work in progress which I knocked up earlier to assist with the development of WTA3. As such it may well change.

View attachment 79776

I always feel like standing up and applauding your timelines. This is so simple it's brilliant!

 

[Deleted member 102539]

RSBM as a lot of points in that post


Appreciate you will not agree to some in this list, some may not be true:

What always struck me as significant about OP ( and struck others) is that despite "a temper" was that he never actually used his fists with men either . I always thought that was rather characteristic of his rage and we discussed it here a long time ago, not new.

He used his gun ( sun-roof, BMW following) ,
lashed out with doors ( Casssidy Memmory),
made threats over the phone ( breaking legs Batchelor) ,
wielded the law as a threat,
locked exGF in rooms ( S.Taylor),
threw inanimate objects ( chairs Olympics) ,
used speed ( car) .....
can't actually remember them all now- feel free to add

Even if I exclude some , I always saw a significant pattern there and I def don't think my thoughts are unique on this.
Out of control - yes IMO. Wanting to use direct violence, with his fists - no, never come across that in any of the accounts, usually more "indirect" in expression. (Don't know how better to describe it than indirect, a bloke would perhaps explain it better for you.)

OP once had a black eye and nevertheless met a film crew to shoot a commercial film. He didn't want to say how it had happened. I can't imagine him to get a black eye without fighting back. - But you are right: obviously he mostly didn't use his fists. Probably too little distance then (psychologically and physiologically)?
The bat makes 100% sense, the gun anyway. Possibly an air rifle too. And an evil, nasty, deceitful verbally threat also (IF he faked a burglary for Reeva).
I have to add a phone to your list - he is always using one of his several phones to threaten a person, no matter whom.
I have to add a speed boat to your list.
Weapons for an vain coward (though he readily accepts ca. 100 medical stings in his face).

 

[Colin de France]

.......supposing that it is bat/scream/shots and that his intention wasn't to kill and it went wrong plus the idea that she had a phone with her which was the reason everything went so fast...........surely his sister would know and how about the family, i can't see him lying somehow to his family.......for all we know, what we think they know is only the tip of the iceberg........and i'll go one further, supposing the family know what's the chances of the judge knowing......and if so would that and could that of influenced her decision.........?

 

[GR_Turner]

RSBM - too much in the post to tackle at once.
Why do you say it makes no sense to cease with the bat? Can you elaborate on that part.

I can see two reasons to stop. Either because he didn't want to break down the door - perhaps only trying to scare her - or because he couldn't break it down and needed to try a different approach. In the first case, why then go get a gun and shoot if he was only trying to frighten? In the second case, he clearly had pretty much already broken the door with the three strikes so why not just break it open completely?

 

[aftermath]

Sorry , I can't really work with one-liners. Just not my style.

Ironic reply length, given the message it holds!
Perhaps another poster will respond to my question: if bat strikes were first, but pistorius needed to claim they came last, why risk insisting from the time of the bail hearing that his legs were on when he struck the door with the bat?

 

[Colin de France]

I can see two reasons to stop. Either because he didn't want to break down the door - perhaps only trying to scare her - or because he couldn't break it down and needed to try a different approach. In the first case, why then go get a gun and shoot if he was only trying to frighten? In the second case, he clearly had pretty much already broken the door with the three strikes so why not just break it open completely?

.......i think he went for the gun thinking the door was going to react like the watermelon, except it didn't..........more than that, making a hole in a door is one thing puting your hand through whilst someone is on the other side is another he may well of realised that during the bat stage......lastly there was his anger and frustration at not being able to retreive the telephone fast enough ........

 

[Mr Fossil]

Ironic reply length, given the message it holds!
Perhaps another poster will respond to my question: if bat strikes were first, but pistorius needed to claim they came last, why risk insisting from the time of the bail hearing that his legs were on when he struck the door with the bat?

The reason I gave in #263 is because at the time (in his version) that he is batting the door he doesn't know for certain it is Reeva in the toilet. He hopes it isn't, fears it is, but also has to demonstrate his continued fear that there may be an intruder in the toilet or on the ladder. On his stumps he would leave himself extremely vulnerable to his perceived threat.

 

[Colin de France]

Ironic reply length, given the message it holds!
Perhaps another poster will respond to my question: if bat strikes were first, but pistorius needed to claim they came last, why risk insisting from the time of the bail hearing that his legs were on when he struck the door with the bat?

...........it's an area for me that's not been studied enough.....his legs were on when he struck the door before the shooting but as he said he was in bed they had to be off and to justify the marks on the door they would of had to of been on again afterwards according to his version .......i'm not convinced that his legs were off at any given time .....and yes that includes the moment he fired on the door ...

 

[cottonweaver]

Ironic reply length, given the message it holds!
Perhaps another poster will respond to my question: if bat strikes were first, but pistorius needed to claim they came last, why risk insisting from the time of the bail hearing that his legs were on when he struck the door with the bat?

Agreed and i did consider that before I pressed submit but thought WTH , be hoist with own petard, meaning still clear.
So you see, since you came over here from DS to WS* you have posted a great deal of one liners typically questions- across three threads . I don't want to play the game any more aftermath, especially after both you and GRT gave "No's " to a couple of significant invitations/questions.

* Not going into detail

 

[aftermath]

The reason I gave in #263 is because at the time (in his version) that he is batting the door he doesn't know for certain it is Reeva in the toilet. He hopes it isn't, fears it is, but also has to demonstrate his continued fear that there may be an intruder in the toilet or on the ladder. On his stumps he would leave himself extremely vulnerable to his perceived threat.

On his version, I thought he put his legs on to try to kick open the door, then went back to get the bat when he realised he couldn't kick it/shoulder barge it. Putting them on to go back and use the bat on the door isn't essential to his account - if he said he tried desperately to get in using the bat once he realised that it could be Reeva (still on stumps), it doesn't affect the credibility of his account. It would just appear that he was so desperate to get to Reeva that he didn't stop to put his legs on.

Instead, he insisted legs off for the shots and legs on for the bat. With police arrivals and Reeva's desth it would be clear there would be an investigation -including a ballistics/forensic investigation. So why risk lying about legs on for bat, when the evidence could prove him to be false?

Also - based on the testimonies of those witnesses who have seen pistorius's mobility and balance on stumps, I don't believe he would have had the balance to be able to break the door with three forceful bat strikes.

 

[Mr Fossil]

I would also add that, in the bat then gun scenario, it is perfectly plausible for OP to be on his prostheses to fire the shots. Mangena's report does not exclude this possibility. OP could not have said prostheses for this in his version because if he had time to put them on, he'd have known Reeva was not in bed amongst other things.