Oscar Pistorius - Discussion Thread #63 ~ the appeal~

[Interested Bystander]

BIB - not 'surely'.
We might want him to remember about the alarm one way or another, and some might expect him to remember, but ultimately in a panic/crisis /trauma incident, I don't think it so surprising if he doesn't remember. At that point his focus would have been on getting Reeva downstairs and to hospital... Not necessarily on whether the alarm had to be deactivated or not.

Most alarms record whether or not it has been activated, at what time, how many times etc. At least mine does and I don't think mine is unusual. In fact I don't know anyone whose standard, fitted, alarm works any differently.

 

[Colin de France]

Ok so you're assuming that the trial went completely differently. If he said exactly what happened (as you described) I think the court would reject that he wasn't thinking as it'd be far more likely he was, in the absence of mental illness. They'd at the least say it was DE and probably bordering on DD if not outright DD. SA doesn't make exceptions for crimes of passion.

.........the thing is and the more you think about it, firing on the door because he wasn't getting anywhere with the bat is sound when put into context of someone in a blind rage, having to move fast and with a woman screaming in the middle of the night..........no it wasn't the court that was off track, it was the whole enquiry from beginning to end.......a very poor job....

 

[Interested Bystander]

.....you're right......that was an afterthought to explain why he didn't fire a warning shot for the intruder version.........a mistake on his part ......

It was one of the few truthful responses he made during the trial, IMO.

 

[Colin de France]

It was one of the few truthful responses he made during the trial, IMO.

....which he had learnt from the actual killing .......

 

[GR_Turner]

.........the thing is and the more you think about it, firing on the door because he wasn't getting anywhere with the bat is sound when put into context of someone in a blind rage, having to move fast and with a screaming woman in the middle of the night..........no it wasn't the court that was off track, it was the whole enquiry from beginning to end.......a very poor job....

I don't really see how you conclude this from what was presented in court. Plainly he could have knocked the door down with the bat so there was no need to shoot.

 

[aftermath]

Most alarms record whether or not it has been activated, at what time, how many times etc. At least mine does and I don't think mine is unusual. In fact I don't know anyone whose standard, fitted, alarm works any differently.

So the state could have requested pistorius's alarm data as part of their investigation? So it shouldn't matter if he can remember or not

 

[Interested Bystander]

.........the thing is and the more you think about it, firing on the door because he wasn't getting anywhere with the bat is sound when put into context of someone in a blind rage, having to move fast and with a screaming woman in the middle of the night..........no it wasn't the court that was off track, it was the whole enquiry from beginning to end.......a very poor job....

If he was in a rage, which I think is a safe assumption, I am sure she would have locked herself in the toilet but I am also pretty sure she would have tried to calm him down and that is why she was shot whilst standing facing the door. I think if she had thought there was any chance OP was actually going to shoot she would have taken cover in the left-hand, front corner of the cubicle, ie way to the left of where she was actually standing where she would at least have had a solid wall between her and OP. However, the likelihood that she would still have been killed by several ricochets was very great indeed.

 

[Interested Bystander]

So the state could have requested pistorius's alarm data as part of their investigation? So it shouldn't matter if he can remember or not

I think that is probably correct.

The alarm history would also indicate whether any sensors were not working. I would be really surprised if on an estate such as Silverwoods that alarms that did not record usage. The engineer that services mine can tell me every press of every button and the exact time that it happened.

 

[Interested Bystander]

....which he had learnt from the actual killing .......

I give up. You are entitled to your opinion regardless of whether anyone else thinks you have mislaid the plot. fftobed: for me.

 

[Colin de France]

I don't really see how you conclude this from what was presented in court. Plainly he could have knocked the door down with the bat so there was no need to shoot.

........the reason he went for the gun was because he wasn't geting anywhere fast with the bat so if he did think it would of been along the lines of.......door = gun = watermelon = hole........you're right to say that i didn't conclude this from evidence presented in court quite simply because since the killing the debate has been around the intruder or direct murder......the reason why this version works is because we are finally starting to take the sequence Bat/Scream/Gun seriously plus all the evidence to back that theory up.....so shooting on the door with the intention to gain access and intimidate, just drops in perfectly...........

 

[Colin de France]

If he was in a rage, which I think is a safe assumption, I am sure she would have locked herself in the toilet but I am also pretty sure she would have tried to calm him down and that is why she was shot whilst standing facing the door. I think if she had thought there was any chance OP was actually going to shoot she would have taken cover in the left-hand, front corner of the cubicle, ie way to the left of where she was actually standing where she would at least have had a solid wall between her and OP. However, the likelihood that she would still have been killed by several ricochets was very great indeed.

.....i don't think she knew he was going to shoot !......... apart from trying to gain access the shooting on the door was also about intimidation........

 

[Colin de France]

I give up. You are entitled to your opinion regardless of whether anyone else thinks you have mislaid the plot. fftobed: for me.

.........if there is a possibility of another version to explain what happened that night it has just as much right as the intruder or the direct murder version......i don't think anyone on this site has the monopoly on clairvoyance.......

 

[Interested Bystander]

.........if there is a possibility of another version to explain what happened that night it has just as much right as the intruder or the direct murder version......i don't think anyone on this site has the monopoly on clairvoyance.......[/QUOTE ]

You are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you like.

 

[Colin de France]

.........if there is a possibility of another version to explain what happened that night it has just as much right as the intruder or the direct murder version......i don't think anyone on this site has the monopoly on clairvoyance.......[/QUOTE ]

You are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you like.

.......good......and the same applies to you and everyone else......i don't want to see this thread or discussion brought down to clans where certain ideas are banished because they don't fit....i would like to see the thread open to all new theories........because otherwise there really is no point in participating...........if he had wanted to kill her he would of shot in the direction where he thought she was on the right instead of away to the left.....not only that but going from the bat to "i'm going to kill her" is too much, the jump is too big ......what's more, there was no reason to of made that jump....and lastly why even bother to use the bat why not just fire straight away.......no the murder version really is a lost cause, there's nothing to back it up .........

 

[lithgow1]

.......good......and the same applies to you and everyone else......i don't want to see this thread or discussion brought down to clans where certain ideas are banished because they don't fit....i would like to see the thread open to all new theories........because otherwise there really is no point in participating...........if he had wanted to kill her he would of shot in the direction where he thought she was on the right instead of away to the left.....not only that but going from the bat to "i'm going to kill her" is too much, the jump is too big ......what's more, there was no reason to of made that jump....and lastly why even bother to use the bat why not fire straight away........no the murder version really is a lost cause, there's nothing to back it up .........

Except for a woman who witnesses claim to have heard screaming before she was shot. If he shot at the door to try and open it, as you now seem to believe, and she was standing behind it and was killed, how is that not DE at the very least?

 

[Colin de France]

Except for a woman who witnesses claim to have heard screaming before she was shot. If he shot at the door to try and open it, as you now seem to believe, and she was standing behind it and was killed, how is that not DE at the very least?

........there was screaming before she was shot that's why he took avoiding action but didn't know she had slightly moved........he didn't intend to kill her, that i'm sure of.......as for the legal definition, that dépends on the country........he certainly was reckless....

 

[JudgeJudi]

OP will only be able to leave his house to go to church when he is freed next Friday.

A mystery donor, apparently from the US, is said to have offered to help fund the appeal bid.

A source on his legal team said “Oscar will be out of prison next week. He has been told his release date will either be August 21, 22 or 23. He will not really be a free man, although the world will claim he is. He goes out on very strict house arrest conditions.

He can’t drink, party, smoke or leave the house unless accompanied to church or work if he gets a job. He will have to hire someone to go shopping for food.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/oscar-pistorius-given-strict-bail-6259974

While under “house arrest” at his uncle’s home he will be allowed few visitors, who will have to be approved by the court, and someone will have to shop for him under strict parole conditions.

The source on OP's legal team said “The appeal court can’t send him back to prison, they can only order a retrial. Is it impossible? No. Is it likely, also no.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/oscar-pistorius-freed-next-week-6260458

It probably won't happen but I'd love a retrial. The prosecution would handle some things differently now and would be much better prepared for the earlier litany of lies served up to them by OP together with much of the nonsense Roux got away with the first time. Pity the poor ear witnesses though.

 

[lithgow1]

........there was screaming before she was shot that's why he took avoiding action but didn't know she had slightly moved........he didn't intend to kill her, that i'm sure of.......as for the legal definition, that dépends on the country........he certainly was reckless....

Can't agree with you. If he knew she was in there but didn`t intend to kill her he wouldn`t have fired four hollow point bullets into such a small space, if he was thinking about what he was doing in any way, shape or form. He was aware of their power and the danger of ricochet.

 

[mrjitty]

I think that is probably correct.

The alarm history would also indicate whether any sensors were not working. I would be really surprised if on an estate such as Silverwoods that alarms that did not record usage. The engineer that services mine can tell me every press of every button and the exact time that it happened.

IIRC - though you might be correct, OPs alarm had no such data.

 

[mrjitty]

So the state could have requested pistorius's alarm data as part of their investigation? So it shouldn't matter if he can remember or not

They don't need to request it - the Police were in possession of the crime scene.