He said he wanted to shoot at burglars. Either way he had intent to kill somebody(who posed no known harm to him). Case closed. He had intent to seriously injure or murder someone. This is a killer, any way you wish to look at it. If he happened to hit Reeva but he intended it for another, he is still culpable. At the very least its culpable homicide. There is no such thing as 'not guilty' in this case.
That's why it was late in the trial the defense started the GAD BS. OP adamantly changed his defense under Nel's cross. Also Nel proved he never gave the "intruders" a chance to surrender or flee. The door never moved , no one threatened him and his own expert placed the magazine rack away from Reeva when she was shot. So unless she was kicking back like a horse in a stall it didn't move. Hench all the disorder testimony, fear of sounds and general too nervous to be allowed to live as an adult to explain away his shooting for no reason.
This Pistorius is some piece of work...while Nel is giving his closing hopefully to put him away OP is yawning and texting or reading or whatever he's doing...what a sick, strange, evil person he is...South Africa's hero...if he's not found guilty I'll have no respect for "My Lady" or the South African judicial system...the world is watching!
TheBreemad I totally agree, all the little pieces of information seem to point at the fact that he knew she was behind the door and he shot with the intent to kill her but there is not one piece of conclusive evidence that shows this was the case. If Reeva could have just managed to hit the voice record button on her phone we might have had the damning evidence to show that this was murder in the 1st degree so I am sure he will go down on a culpable homicide charge with a 10 to 15 year sentence.
Up till now "My Lady" has run a tight ship but some of her interventions today were curious. I thought her intervention on Nel’s interpretation on the Whatsapp messages a little surprising. What was more concerning was the intervention on Nel’s argument that required him to refer to legislation - not judicial precedent. Perhaps her intent was different but - for the first time in a very long trial - it didn’t do her credit. Overall I think Masipa has done well. If OP is acquitted (which I very much doubt) - the next time the girlfriend gives me earache I’ll placate her with an all expenses trip to SA …
RumbleofDrums What have you watched? Which of the charges do you think people are judging OP guilty of? IMO - shooting in to a occupied toilet cubicle when he had not perceived any overt threat could only be excused by reasons of accident or diminished mental capacity (such that he did not realise he was doing wrong). After shooting four times the ‘accident’ excuse has to be dismissed and he has been assessed as mentally normal. Personally, I believe Pistorius deliberately murdered Reeva while they were having a row. I’m not sure that the state has proven that beyond reasonable doubt - so Pistorius may escape a pre-meditated murder conviction. He is guilty of murder though.
John Power I thought so too but there is a chain of legal arguments which appears to lead fairly easily to beyond reasonable doubt, due to OP's "two defences" cancelling each other out, and both being rejected. If his evidence is rejected, that's it for the proving the state case. It would be very callous to intentionally shoot in a reckless, indiscriminate, and knowing way at an intruder (for 'no reason') and then take 'no blame' when you find out it was your girlfriend. So i think once the contradictory stuff is chucked, then the state case becomes very much more compelling... Nel's arguments are just pointers but they only point in one direction and i can't see defense have done enough to avoid the inferences. Jury trial - maybe. Judge trial - i think he's run out of luck tbh,.
when i first heard this judge was on the case i was confident that with proscecutor Nel, justice would be done. However as time went on it became clear she was out of her depth. she was coached more than once by Nel, on what the ramifications were. and seemed to be casting around in the dark always leaning, and over compensating on fairness toward the accused. Her grasp of the english language is poor. We know that this would have affected what she heard and well as what she spoke. when she read out her evidence before the verdict the jumble that came out of her mouth was embarassing. since she agreed to have this trial broadcast live, South Africas reputation has been hurt probably irrepairably. Oscar is a fool, but all the tailoring of evidence that this judge said she had seen through, she nevertheless accepted. Nel did an excellent job, however it was all farting in the wind with a judge so poorly educated.
4 witnesses heard a woman scream. OP's defence did not prove he can scream like a woman. He is SO SO GUILTY. OP's story is so improbable. Its obvious. C'mon m'lady - the world is watching.
To think he is not guilty you have to believe that: He didnt see she got up by crawling across the bed She didnt scream She didnt eat two hours earlier She never replied to him The fan wasnt in the door and moved by a police officer The duvet was never on the floor but put there by a police officer who then cleverly created a trail of blood spatter from the duvet to the carpet That Reeva had a perfectly packed bag but just threw her jeans on the floor That 1 witness got it wrong that Reeva was arguing That he can scream like a woman That 4 witnesses got it wrong as they thought he sounded like a woman That he didnt intend to shoot 4 shots thru a door Etc etc He's guilty for goodness sake. Lock him up.
In response to Attorney Roux: The reasonable person intent on protecting a loved one from harm/danger would seek, with the loved individual in tow, the quickest, safest exit from the danger, in this case through the bedroom doorway and down the stairway to exit the house. The reasonable person, if he possessed one, would take his cellphone with him and call 911 ASAP. Oscar Pistorius demonstrated to the court that he can attach his leg prostheses in approx. 30-40 seconds. Running around on his stumps (if that is true) was by choice. He had time to reach for his gun and remove it from its holster, so, too, he had time to put on his "legs" which would render his less vunerable. So, this world-class athlete who exercised above average reasonableness in his athletic career as demonstrated by his willpower, determination, and achievements became in an instant less reasonable by normal standards because he has a physical disability, hmmmmmmm.
Apparently being disabled is a choice. A choice that changes accordingly. Oscar is able when it suits him & disabled when it suits him. It all depends on how it favors Oscar.
I was thinking the same thing Natasha, and how hurt other disabled people would feel about his defense, as they are always seeking to be treated as everyone else, and NOT to be seen as different! Such an insult to the handicapped, and not a hero anymore-in so many ways.
rvgirrrl I agree he pulled out his disabilitie to use in his defence, everything he stood for now gone! He sold his soul to help him stay out of jail!!
Watching this again I think Judge Masipa asked whether the whatsup messages were a reliable indicator of the state of their relationship because she favors the states version of events. I don't think Pistorius can get away from the intentional killing of a person charge or Murder. He knew what he wanted to do, he walked past the exit and out of his way to do it, regardless of who was killed. "Intent in the form of dolus eventualis or legal intention, which is present when the perpetrator objectively foresees the possibility of his act causing death and persists regardless of the consequences, *suffices to find someone guilty of murder*.
I agree with you. Roux won't be able to dodge that one. I guess it's just about the number of years he's going to get. If Roux can sufficiently discredit the state's case, OP can secure a slightly lighter sentence.
It's possible because it pushed Nel to again deal with the timing of the unhappy messages. At the point of the crucial ones the relationship is cracking, likely because Reeva was tired of his arrogant behavior. I think she was seriously attracted to him and beginning to feel it was love. At that stage many people overlook even serious issues and often blame themselves for some of the problems. Sadly many women tend to do that. Yes I know men do it too, it wrong for either sex, but still women are taught to be nice, sweet and worst of all hold things in rather than rock the boat. Reeva seemed like a non confrontational , socially pleasing person. Possibly not weak but just over nice because that's the way she was brought up to be, especially in close relationships.
Ken Ford I was surprised at her questions on the whatsapp. That was Reeva's only voice during trial. It showed the double standard and his snapping temper. She said she was afraid of him at times. I felt that was truly important. I also found it sickening that OP sat there and called Reeva a liar more than once about those messages. He should fry!
mrip75 It looks bad that she asked but she has to give detailed reasons for her decision. It cuts both ways, the defense made much of the fact most of the messages were loving during the trial. If you throw out the unhappy ones because new relationships can't be judged by those types of messages then neither can the happy ones count. It was Reeva's way to send girly bubbly whatups, but to her mother she professed love.
On April 9, 2014, Session 5, 41:16 - 41:20, O.P. testified, "THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE FAN WAS PART OF WHERE THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED", evidence from Oscar Pistorius that the "ACCIDENT" started in the BEDROOM. The statement happened so quickly that Prosecutor Nell did not catch it. Photo evidence showed "BLOOD SPLATTER" on the carpet in the bedroom and on the duvet. O.P. did not carry Reeva to that area in the room.
Carolyn Yanik Yes, I believed he tore the duvet off the bed. I also think he pulled her pants off of her. He brings that up in his testimony, and I thought it was so odd. It is pitch dark in the room and he says he saw the denim. He had to explain why they were there. You may be correct that he hit her and caused her to bleed. If that was the case, she was not going to get out of there alive. Can you imagine the damage it would have caused his reputation if Reeva went to the press and described him beating on her like that. They also said there was blood on the bed.
Alaa von Alsburg Yes, the bat had blood on it, right? Why would it have blood on it if he used it to hit the door. Once he got in why would he bring the bat in. Didn't he still have a gun in his hand, according to him?
The US judicial system should do what SA judicial system does, that is that the accused should sit by himself or herself. It makes so much more sense, because who wants to see any defendant talking, joking, kidding around, laughing, having a good all time, like in the Casey Anthony trial. Basically no social contact during the trial is brilliant. I like seeing the defendant sitting alone, squirming in his pants, thinking about his pending doom. My heart goes out to Reeva's beautiful family. I wish them well.
Even if we ignore all the ill logic of OP perceiving a phantom intruder, we only have to ask ourselves why would a very vocal not shy woman like Reeva not say anything to OP while he is supposedly shouting out to her. If she thought there was an intruder in the house she would have been talking to OP or suggesting things for him to do. The fact that he could not have seen her blonde hair lying in the bed when he went for his gun is hard to swallow.
Whatsapp question by the judge.. Why didn't Nel say that Samantha also was yelled at and treated like shit so it's a pattern. What about the blood spatter ugh
Didn't they find blood splatter on the headboard of the bed too? How come only the duvet and carpet are discussed? I believe OP hit RV with the cricket bat in the bedroom and that is why she ran to the bathroom with the phones to call the police and OP panicked and in a rage shot her so she couldn't expose the domestic violence and ruin his career.
I've never heard this part of the evidence.. except in closing arguments. If there is blood splatter on the duvet and carpet why isn't Nel driving this theory home!? It makes complete sense! He hit her in the head, and she ran for protection into the toilet taking cell phones to call for help, she never got the chance because he shot her in a rage. I SO WISH there was something on those cells Nel could use. If Pistorius doesn't get a guilty verdict.. he will strike again, it's just a matter of time.
rvgirrrl Nel started with 'the' fan turning into _fans_ then followed right through to the denim being on top of the duvet to the blood spatter, to show how False Pistorius's version was (how difficult it would have been for him to run through that area in the pitch dark without knocking things over on his way to shout for help from the balcony). More importantly Nel made it clear to the court that OP was lying and tailoring his evidence _"the duvet was on the bed, my lady - I saw the duvet on the bed covering Reeva's legs - I pushed the duvet further 'into' the bed while putting on my prosthetics"_, he dug himself in deeper and deeper. I think he hit her in the bedroom somewhere as well - something happened in that room that ended in her death.
Ken Ford While babbling on in April OP said " They didn't know the fan was part of where the accident happened". Carolyn Yanik in a post above has the exact time and date of the comment. The jeans were at the foot of the bed, likely pulled off by him so she was not far from the fans at that point. Oscar never takes responsibility so anything he did he would call and "accident". Yanking off jeans wouldn't qualify, but some sort of strike would. She may have been bleeding when she ran. Not much, just small drops that hit the duvet and slightly beyond. Any blow would have been too much for Reeva, she put up with a lot but not that. He knew her friends and family would be livid. Someone would talk and the media would know.
Blood splatter was found on the wall at the head of the bed. O.P. testified he was not able to use Reeva's phone to call 911 because he did not know the access code, so, he returned to the bedroom to fetch his phone and his hand touched the wall at the head of the bed when he reached for his cellphone on the bedside table.
Oscar is very relaxed today, even sleepy. His family also (the old lady on red is often smiling). I found the judge's question about Reeva's whatsapps very strange since she is a acknowledged expert in violence domestic and cycle of abuse.
I still don't understand why, if Reeva had a phone with her, didn't she call for help if either OP was threatening her or if he was shouting for her to call the police? and why this hasn't at any point been brought up by either the state or the defence???
I think she was shot before she could make a call. It would be the nail in his coffin if there was a 911 call made, and believe me they would've used it as evidence if they had it.
***** I don't think OP is that clever at all. It seems everyone is convinced he deliberately killed Reeva, but what about the following: 1) OP shouted/screamed Help Help Help! immediately after discovering Reeva, and he was beside himself/desperate to save her life on the night (as opposed to running away etc) Is this the action of a murderer, or just possibly someone who accidentally shot his girlfriend? 2) OP has no history of violence towards women, and he showed no such tendency during his 30 day psych test. He is definitely negligent with guns, and primed to defend himself from 'intruders'. It seems more likely from his background that he thought he was shooting at an intruder. 3) Neither OP nor Reeva was drunk on the night. There are no signs of a violent struggle between them. OP's ipad and phone records corroborate his evidence. They didn't have a history of raging physical arguments - they had spats via text message. Reeva had written 'i love you' in her valentine's card, showing that despite their recent differences their relationship was strong. 4) The timeline by the defence shows that the first bangs heard must have been the shots. All the female screaming heard came after that, when it can only have been OP screaming (because Reeva was dead) It makes sense that the second bangs were the cricket bat. From then on there was no screaming, just sobbing. 5) Inconsistencies in OP's evidence are because he is trying to avoid blame for shooting at all, and there's the lie. If it's the truth that he thought there was an intruder, then surely he's lying when he says he didn't mean to shoot them. Nel has cornered him on that. I think the evidence suggests that OP executed the 'intruder' without verbal warning. That's the only explanation for why Reeva didn't call out, and why no-one heard him shouting/screaming until after the shots. OP heard a noise, grabbed his gun, crept in 'combat mode' to the bathroom and fired. He thought that he'd shot an intruder. He went back into the bedroom and there was no-one there. He started screaming frantically - that makes sense. It makes no sense to shout and scream on the way to shooting an intruder, because you give your position away. That's why the screaming evidence doesn't add up. Anette Stipp was awake before the first bangs, so she'd have heard him shout 'get the f out my house', and screaming like never before, then.
Simon Raven Oscar Pistorius had no place to run. Calling for help was the start of his version of the accident. Remember too, he needs medical evaluation and follow-up for his physical disability, and replacement of his prostheses as indicated, thus no place to hide. Reeva's entry to the estate was recorded on video tape and in a written log by security, there would be no video or written log documentation of her exit from the estate on her own. If she "disappeared" OP would be the number one person of interest. No history of violence??? Look up the Cassidy Taylor-Memmory lawsuite against OP (he settled out of court just prior to the start of his murder trial); review Sammantha Taylor's testimony. Reeva's valentine card message was written prior to their final "spat." The "bloodcurdling" scream from a woman was heard at the start of the shooting. Oscar Pistorius made no effort to confirm that Reeva heard a noise coming from the direction of the bathroom, nor did he confirm her presence in the bedroom, bathroom, or toilet. A "reasonable" person would confirm the location of a loved one if he/she suspects an intruder is in the house .
Carolyn Yanik yep the Taylor-Memmory lawsuit is pretty damning - he punched a door and a bit of it landed on her leg, which is more evidence that he has a violent temper around women (and doors) I remember Samantha Taylor said something about him screaming angrily at her and her friends too.
Roux is as annoying as ever...but feel for him as he's in a sinking ship...OP cannot get out of this...he's guilty and his defense team has done nothing to discredit what Gerrie Nel the Prosecutor has put forth and OP's story was so improbable it is obvious that it was all a concocted story to try to evade punishment just like the other incidents...only this time...a life was taken and he must face the punishment and be sentenced to at least 15-25 years!
Ken Ford Agree totally, watching the proceedings today I felt the same uneasy, sick feeling seeing OP he seriously gives me the creeps and he showed a complete lack of respect again today constantly yawning throughout Gerrie Nel's closing arguments...he's so arrogant and I pray that the Judge does find him guilty and sentences him accordingly!
pps1fan You are correct Roux is annoying to listen to and he is hard to follow. I am not sure if it is the way he always comes across as so persistent or if it just the tone of his voice, but I am not drawn in to listen to him. Or it could be that I think OP is an arrogant, murderous, no-account creep
Karen Owens So glad to know I am not alone in feeling this way...I think it's a combination of all of what you say doesn't help that I get the sense that Roux like the majority of us know his client is GUILTY but he has to do the horrible job in defending him! I don't feel the defense has done anything to make anybody doubt his guilt...let's pray Justice is served so that Reeva can truly rest in peace...I feel for her parents who throughout have been so dignified but the heartache they must feel is unimaginable :(
It's sad all round. Reeva's Mother and Father (bless them).....Everybody connected to her... I have watched spell bound for weeks and weeks.. Yes, I think he reacted in Rage... it's very sad. Her family (Reeva Steenkamp)they have lost her.... it's beyond words when you boil it down ... : (
Does anybody knows how the judge delivers her verdict.Does she say guilty or not guilty first and then explain why, or does she reads each case witnesses and who she accepts and conclude in the end if guilty or not
Good grief it's taking Nel forever to make a point. I love Nel but it's getting on my last nerve. After arguments it will take the judge 6-8wks before she makes a judgment. Pray she sees through OP bs story.
Relating to the whatsapps, it becomes clear it could have been another problems that were not discussed by messages (primary personally). Besides, it shows the dynamic of "cycle of abuse" (the judge should know that).
It’s the most dangerous time for a woman when she’s trying to leave, or has just left. I get the feeling she was trying to break up with him and he exploded. She’d said she was afraid of him.
When Oscar Pistorius told the Court. "I've never screamed like that before!" he must have forgotten that in his version, it was before the first set of sounds, and nobody had heard any screams. Therefore, it is clearly Oscar gunshots were the second sounds. In addition, Oscar himself referred the second sounds as "grouping." Today, Mr. Nel was almost perfect!
I predict he will be found guilty of murder (dolus directus) Just re- watched the Nel closing argument. I think he covers it beautifully. Nice one Nel. OP will appeal once found guilty.
I think Mr. Nel forgot that Mr. and Mrs. Stipp heard the second sounds as three because Mr. Stipp was talking on the phone, and Mrs. Stipp was paying attention to it (even Mrs. Stipp explained that in the case of the first sound she was awake and there were not other than three sounds).
Who else thinks that even if the defense is correct, and the gun shots were first and the cricket bat after, that means then there was 5 whole minutes between when he realized he might have shot Reeva and when he went to go smash the door down with cricket bat. 5 minutes is a really long time under those circumstances- especially since his story is now claiming he was actually standing at the entrance of his bathroom, not even "in" it. Including shouting/looking for Reeva, putting on prosthetics (which I, for some reason think I read somewhere although I could be completely wrong, is said to only take him about 30 seconds), get cricket bat, go back to bathroom and start bashing. I personally think all that should take 1-2 minutes considering he never went downstairs to look for Reeva- it was all in the 5-7m space. That 5 minutes is very dodgy to me, although Nel did not really bring it up like that. I personally think, when it comes to the sequence and order of the sounds of the cricket bat and the shots, that there was some bat first (probably the louder ones that hit the thick part of the door, the neighbors might hear) then the gun shots (all as heard... 1...2,3,4) then final use of the cricket bat on the thin plywood part that is easily broken down to get through door- and not likely heard by neighbours, because the bat goes right through easily first time. There's no big bang and reverberation like there would have been on the thick parts of the door. So, that's my theory on the sequence, the scenario behind it is that Oscar and Reeva were arguing, she did run away from him into the toilet cubicle- all the while quite possibly taunting him, while he shouted profanities at her- like happens in heated relationships sometimes, at this point while his rage was building he grabbed the cricket bat with the intention of scaring her/breaking the door down... He hit once/twice and did not feel the door breaking immediately and by now was also getting more worked up and angry, as Reeva said she was going to call the police- and even possibly still taunting him about new lovers/ex lovers etc- that first attempt with the cricket bat is the first set of sounds some witnesses hear and others not at all. Also this set of sounds between the witnesses who did hear them, not all can be sure how many they heard. This was now 3:12. Oscar, now at the height of his rage decides F* this I'm going to go get my gun (this is the only part where I myself am willing to concede that here his intention to shoot "AT" the door may just have been to really want to scare her- somehow thinking the Black Talon ammunition would explode all over the door, rather than go right through and then destroy Reeva. Would be really stupid of him not to realize the bullets would go through though. Short of some stupid explanation like that, then his thinking would be to get the gun and shoot her now- to get her to shut up!) and shoot at the door/kill her. He then goes to look for the gun, finds it goes back to the bathroom (during all this time Reeva may well now have also stopped screaming because she's heard him smash the door with the cricket bat a few times and then he's gone away and it's gone quiet. Then whether they fire up again verbally or not- according to witness testimonies- he then fires the 1st shot, which sets Reeva off screaming for sure, and he in a rage/with the knowledge he knows he needs to kill her fires of shots 2,3,4. Then suddenly realizing/understanding what he's done, he uses the cricket bat, which is actually already right there, to hit once through the flimsy ply wood part and then use his hands to pull apart the rest. (Remember it is the 2nd set of sounds that almost all witnesses hear, one witness even describes the timing and and her husband recalled hearing 4/5 sounds-perhaps he did hear faintly the last cricket bat sound). My theory certainly needs refining, but I think may be what happened as the sounds happening in a mixed fashion would explain why both the state and defense, once deciding which set of sounds came first and second and thus creating their story of what happened, have both found small discrepancies with each other's story's when they have tried to tie up all the sounds, the times, the witness accounts, the screaming...
You're right about the time it takes to put on his legs, he threw it in Nel's face from the stand. He could take his time once she was shot because nothing he did that night indicates someone who wanted her to live. His dramatic story was to garner sympathy and bolster his claims couldn't have purposely shot her.
Yes, OP demonstrated to the court that he can put on his prostheses in 30-40 seconds. The demonstration was conducted to discredit Sammantha Taylor's testimony that it takes 4 minutes for OP to put on his "legs" , and so, by inference, ST's testimony about the car-roof shooting was a lie.
***** His actions immediately after the shooting are the most damning evidence of his guilt. Unbelievable arrogance led him to think he could kill without consequence and the same arrogance led him to believe by taking the stand he could fool the world into buying his story. Instead of extending his lies to pretend he was too traumatized to remember anything he just had to try to sell his version because he's the great Oscar Pistorius admired by millions. Roux and company would have done a much better job at lying and wouldn't have walked into Nel's traps. OP was easy prey and his blunders caused the defense to hastily throw up bogus experts in an attempt patch the mess he made of his version.
***** It was a gem of a moment when he effectively changed his plea. The defense team should have been properly prepared by wearing Depends by that time. I wouldn't be surprised if they skipped tea and pulled out whiskey flasks during the breaks when he was in the box. There is no way after his long,long narrative detailing the slow carefully thought out walk to the bathroom for him to explain why he never gave the "intruder/s" a chance to leave. Yes someone behind the door could have a gun and shoot first but why put yourself in front of the door? He could have peeked around ,yelled for them to leave and watch as they fled out the window. He had the advantage of a protected position even being dumb enough to advance in the first place. With his own mouth he pushed the point he believed beyond doubt someone was in the toilet so he had to expect them to make a sound at some point. So he definitely intended to shoot a human. But we must remember this is the man with the magic touch. Glocks fire at the mere touch of his hand. Black Talons fly from the nozzle by virtue of being held by Oscar Pistorius. It's a wonder he hasn't shot himself with such mystical power surging through his fingers.
yes mylady it is very clear Oscar's 'vesrion is so improbable.The state has well presented its arguments! C'mon the world is watching. Oscar is guilty!!
Holly Brook Sounds really pompous of me in hindsight! The heads read well. I think OP will be charged for Dolus Indirectus, or whichever it's called. I don't think there's enough actual evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt premeditated murder of Reeva, but I do think he showed massive negligence, coupled with malicious intent by shooting at a person four times through a door with black talon rounds, without even warning that he was armed. He'll also be charged for the restaurant shooting.
Simon Raven Malicious intent coupled to firing through the door would probably be "murder with intent", dolus directus, with a 25 year sentence. Premeditation is aggravation on top of that. It's his credibility that is the evidence. Remember it's beyond REASONABLE doubt - not beyond all POSSIBLE doubts.
Oscar will get off with 5 years’ probation, he will not do jail time. What person shoots someone is out on the street while the trial takes place, even OJ was in lock down. He will get off scott free and do probation. Hopefully Reva’s family knows some people ( not so desirable people) that will take care of Oscar as he walks the streets after this trial.
@John Power, that's just my theory of what happened. I think we all have our own theories that make sense to us.OP has way too many holes in his account of what happened. I'm not buying it for one second.
Look at Pistorius in this clip. What arrogance! He's texting and looking at his smart phone and doing anything other than pay attention to his own trial. He should get online to find out what the largest bottle of personal lubricant can be bought and whether or not he'll be allowed to take it to prison when he heads that way.
Okay so lets just say pis head torius version is the truth. Arming yourself and shooting at an intruder with the intention of killing them is MURDER so either way he is screwed!
Yes. I know he was covered in blood but still the drops in the bedroom are questionable. If he hit her it would have caused enough fear to make either make her try to get the jeans on to leave or run to the only door she could lock..
+Aeval K I've thought that too - "the only door she could lock" was the reason she was in the toilet. The nature of the wounds will cause reasonable doubt about splatters in the bedroom - but the blood on the headboard stretches credulity. Whatever about the blood - why would Reeva have taken her phone to the toilet? I’ve never known a woman to do that at 3am. Perhaps she was using it to light her way? The bathroom light worked (but not the light in the toilet cubicle), OP was awake and moving fans (allegedly) so why would she need her phone for light? OP’s testimony emphasises what he heard - window opening, door closing, magazine rack moving. What he didn’t hear was Reeva taking a leak. How did he not hear that? A lady doesn’t get up at 3am to lay a brick! She didn’t have the scutters … If any woman reading this thinks they are not heard while taking a leak in the en-suite - they need to think again. My hearing is not great - but splashes and the release of trapped wind does nothing for my libido! If Reeva wasn’t making a noise in the toilet - she wasn’t using it. So, why was she there? Is she was hiding from a intruder with OP screaming to phone the police (allegedly) wouldn't she have phoned?
John Power In response to "The nature of the wounds will cause reasonable doubt about splatters in the bedroom......................." , explosion of Reeva's brain, skull, scalp, from the impact of the bullet could have removed evidence of injury to her head from a fist/bat/cellphone, etc.
Carolyn Yanik Exactly! Oscar was well trained with guns and he knew the damage Black Talons would do. It was strange there were only four shots if he was shooting automatically out of fear. Why stop when her screaming stopped? The gun was found cocked so he intended to fire more. I think once he knew a bullet hit her in the head he was safe and didn't have to fire the next round. It didn't matter if she was wasn't dead as each wound was devastating enough to be a kill shot. She'd bleed to death while he staged the crime scene only he accidentally called security causing him to rush getting her downstairs. And the people who arrived didn't leave him alone, after he went back upstairs, long enough to complete the staging. I think he never got around to turning off the bedroom lights, moving the fans, closing the curtains etc. because he was trying to get into her phone to see if she called anyone.
Ricordo bene la storia grazie Carl Leo che poi presentai asiniscola ma c'era Francesca borozzucomune figlioingegnere murtinedu ricordo bene edicola libri Londra figlia siniscola
He said he wanted to shoot at burglars. Either way he had intent to kill somebody(who posed no known harm to him). Case closed. He had intent to seriously injure or murder someone. This is a killer, any way you wish to look at it. If he happened to hit Reeva but he intended it for another, he is still culpable. At the very least its culpable homicide. There is no such thing as 'not guilty' in this case.
That's why it was late in the trial the defense started the GAD BS. OP adamantly changed his defense under Nel's cross. Also Nel proved he never gave the "intruders" a chance to surrender or flee. The door never moved , no one threatened him and his own expert placed the magazine rack away from Reeva when she was shot. So unless she was kicking back like a horse in a stall it didn't move. Hench all the disorder testimony, fear of sounds and general too nervous to be allowed to live as an adult to explain away his shooting for no reason.
This Pistorius is some piece of work...while Nel is giving his closing hopefully to put him away OP is yawning and texting or reading or whatever he's doing...what a sick, strange, evil person he is...South Africa's hero...if he's not found guilty I'll have no respect for "My Lady" or the South African judicial system...the world is watching!
I foresee him being charged with culpable homicide.
TheBreemad I totally agree, all the little pieces of information seem to point at the fact that he knew she was behind the door and he shot with the intent to kill her but there is not one piece of conclusive evidence that shows this was the case. If Reeva could have just managed to hit the voice record button on her phone we might have had the damning evidence to show that this was murder in the 1st degree so I am sure he will go down on a culpable homicide charge with a 10 to 15 year sentence.
Up till now "My Lady" has run a tight ship but some of her interventions today were curious. I thought her intervention on Nel’s interpretation on the Whatsapp messages a little surprising. What was more concerning was the intervention on Nel’s argument that required him to refer to legislation - not judicial precedent.
Perhaps her intent was different but - for the first time in a very long trial - it didn’t do her credit.
Overall I think Masipa has done well. If OP is acquitted (which I very much doubt) - the next time the girlfriend gives me earache I’ll placate her with an all expenses trip to SA …
John Power After Nel explained his position she seemed to agree with him.
***** Yup that's what I thought - He's been like that all the way through the trial.
Thumbs up if you think he's guilty
RumbleofDrums What have you watched? Which of the charges do you think people are judging OP guilty of?
IMO - shooting in to a occupied toilet cubicle when he had not perceived any overt threat could only be excused by reasons of accident or diminished mental capacity (such that he did not realise he was doing wrong).
After shooting four times the ‘accident’ excuse has to be dismissed and he has been assessed as mentally normal.
Personally, I believe Pistorius deliberately murdered Reeva while they were having a row. I’m not sure that the state has proven that beyond reasonable doubt - so Pistorius may escape a pre-meditated murder conviction. He is guilty of murder though.
John Power
John Power
I thought so too but there is a chain of legal arguments which appears to lead fairly easily to beyond reasonable doubt, due to OP's "two defences" cancelling each other out, and both being rejected. If his evidence is rejected, that's it for the proving the state case. It would be very callous to intentionally shoot in a reckless, indiscriminate, and knowing way at an intruder (for 'no reason') and then take 'no blame' when you find out it was your girlfriend.
So i think once the contradictory stuff is chucked, then the state case becomes very much more compelling...
Nel's arguments are just pointers but they only point in one direction and i can't see defense have done enough to avoid the inferences.
Jury trial - maybe.
Judge trial - i think he's run out of luck tbh,.
***** That is a good point. I wish you kept it to your self
Nick Harris 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
when i first heard this judge was on the case i was confident that with proscecutor Nel, justice would be done. However as time went on it became clear she was out of her depth. she was coached more than once by Nel, on what the ramifications were. and seemed to be casting around in the dark always leaning, and over compensating on fairness toward the accused. Her grasp of the english language is poor. We know that this would have affected what she heard and well as what she spoke. when she read out her evidence before the verdict the jumble that came out of her mouth was embarassing. since she agreed to have this trial broadcast live, South Africas reputation has been hurt probably irrepairably.
Oscar is a fool, but all the tailoring of evidence that this judge said she had seen through, she nevertheless accepted. Nel did an excellent job, however it was all farting in the wind with a judge so poorly educated.
4 witnesses heard a woman scream. OP's defence did not prove he can scream like a woman. He is SO SO GUILTY. OP's story is so improbable. Its obvious. C'mon m'lady - the world is watching.
To think he is not guilty you have to believe that:
He didnt see she got up by crawling across the bed
She didnt scream
She didnt eat two hours earlier
She never replied to him
The fan wasnt in the door and moved by a police officer
The duvet was never on the floor but put there by a police officer who then cleverly created a trail of blood spatter from the duvet to the carpet
That Reeva had a perfectly packed bag but just threw her jeans on the floor
That 1 witness got it wrong that Reeva was arguing
That he can scream like a woman
That 4 witnesses got it wrong as they thought he sounded like a woman
That he didnt intend to shoot 4 shots thru a door
Etc etc
He's guilty for goodness sake. Lock him up.
In response to Attorney Roux: The reasonable person intent on protecting a loved one from harm/danger would seek, with the loved individual in tow, the quickest, safest exit from the danger, in this case through the bedroom doorway and down the stairway to exit the house. The reasonable person, if he possessed one, would take
his cellphone with him and call 911 ASAP. Oscar Pistorius demonstrated to the court that he can attach his leg prostheses in approx. 30-40 seconds. Running around on his stumps (if that is true) was by choice. He had time to reach for his gun and remove it from its holster, so, too, he had time to put on his "legs" which would render his less vunerable. So, this world-class athlete who exercised above average reasonableness in his athletic career as demonstrated by his willpower, determination, and achievements became in an instant less reasonable by normal standards because he has a physical disability, hmmmmmmm.
Apparently being disabled is a choice. A choice that changes accordingly. Oscar is able when it suits him & disabled when it suits him. It all depends on how it favors Oscar.
I was thinking the same thing Natasha, and how hurt other disabled people would feel about his defense, as they are always seeking to be treated as everyone else, and NOT to be seen as different! Such an insult to the handicapped, and not a hero anymore-in so many ways.
rvgirrrl I agree he pulled out his disabilitie to use in his defence, everything he stood for now gone! He sold his soul to help him stay out of jail!!
@Steph Corley He sure did!!
Watching this again I think Judge Masipa asked whether the whatsup messages were a reliable indicator of the state of their relationship because she favors the states version of events.
I don't think Pistorius can get away from the intentional killing of a person charge or Murder. He knew what he wanted to do, he walked past the exit and out of his way to do it, regardless of who was killed.
"Intent in the form of dolus eventualis or legal intention, which is present when the perpetrator objectively foresees the possibility of his act causing death and persists regardless of the consequences, *suffices to find someone guilty of murder*.
I agree with you. Roux won't be able to dodge that one. I guess it's just about the number of years he's going to get. If Roux can sufficiently discredit the state's case, OP can secure a slightly lighter sentence.
It's possible because it pushed Nel to again deal with the timing of the unhappy
messages. At the point of the crucial ones the relationship is cracking, likely because Reeva was tired of his arrogant behavior. I think she was seriously attracted to him and beginning to feel it was love. At that stage many people overlook even serious issues and often blame themselves for some of the problems. Sadly many women tend to do that. Yes I know men do it too, it wrong for either sex, but still women are taught to be nice, sweet and worst of all hold things in rather than rock the boat. Reeva seemed like a non confrontational , socially pleasing person. Possibly not weak but just over nice because that's the way she was brought up to be, especially in close relationships.
Ken Ford I was surprised at her questions on the whatsapp. That was Reeva's only voice during trial. It showed the double standard and his snapping temper. She said she was afraid of him at times. I felt that was truly important. I also found it sickening that OP sat there and called Reeva a liar more than once about those messages. He should fry!
mrip75 It looks bad that she asked but she has to give detailed reasons for her decision. It cuts both ways, the defense made much of the fact most of the messages were loving during the trial. If you throw out the unhappy ones because new relationships can't be judged by those types of messages then neither can the happy ones count. It was Reeva's way to send girly bubbly whatups, but to her mother she professed love.
Aeval K
Good point...Ty!
"I WILL TRY NOT TO LIE M'LADY" said Oscar on 9th April under x-examination.
in which session?? you know the time?
On April 9, 2014, Session 5, 41:16 - 41:20, O.P. testified, "THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE FAN WAS PART OF WHERE THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED", evidence from Oscar Pistorius that the "ACCIDENT" started in the BEDROOM. The statement happened so quickly that Prosecutor Nell did not catch it. Photo evidence showed "BLOOD SPLATTER" on the carpet in the bedroom and on the duvet. O.P. did not carry Reeva to that area in the room.
Where do you think the blood came from? The bat?
Karen Owens Possibly she was struck on the face/nose by O.P.s hand/bat/cell phone/etc. and had a nose bleed/cut lip/etc.
Carolyn Yanik
Yes, I believed he tore the duvet off the bed. I also think he pulled her pants off of her. He brings that up in his testimony, and I thought it was so odd. It is pitch dark in the room and he says he saw the denim. He had to explain why they were there. You may be correct that he hit her and caused her to bleed. If that was the case, she was not going to get out of there alive. Can you imagine the damage it would have caused his reputation if Reeva went to the press and described him beating on her like that. They also said there was blood on the bed.
Karen Owens I've thought the same for a long time...I believe he attacked her with the bat and she ran for her life!
Alaa von Alsburg
Yes, the bat had blood on it, right? Why would it have blood on it if he used it to hit the door. Once he got in why would he bring the bat in. Didn't he still have a gun in his hand, according to him?
The US judicial system should do what SA judicial system does, that is that the accused should sit by himself or herself. It makes so much more sense, because who wants to see any defendant talking, joking, kidding around, laughing, having a good all time, like in the Casey Anthony trial. Basically no social contact during the trial is brilliant. I like seeing the defendant sitting alone, squirming in his pants, thinking about his pending doom. My heart goes out to Reeva's beautiful family. I wish them well.
Even if we ignore all the ill logic of OP perceiving a phantom intruder, we only have to ask ourselves why would a very vocal not shy woman like Reeva not say anything to OP while he is supposedly shouting out to her. If she thought there was an intruder in the house she would have been talking to OP or suggesting things for him to do. The fact that he could not have seen her blonde hair lying in the bed when he went for his gun is hard to swallow.
Whatsapp question by the judge.. Why didn't Nel say that Samantha also was yelled at and treated like shit so it's a pattern. What about the blood spatter ugh
Man I wish we had the jury system. We could have guaranteed Reeva some justice.
Didn't they find blood splatter on the headboard of the bed too? How come only the duvet and carpet are discussed? I believe OP hit RV with the cricket bat in the bedroom and that is why she ran to the bathroom with the phones to call the police and OP panicked and in a rage shot her so she couldn't expose the domestic violence and ruin his career.
Bang on! Has the state proved it?
I've never heard this part of the evidence.. except in closing arguments. If there is blood splatter on the duvet and carpet why isn't Nel driving this theory home!? It makes complete sense! He hit her in the head, and she ran for protection into the toilet taking cell phones to call for help, she never got the chance because he shot her in a rage. I SO WISH there was something on those cells Nel could use. If Pistorius doesn't get a guilty verdict.. he will strike again, it's just a matter of time.
rvgirrrl Nel started with 'the' fan turning into _fans_ then followed right through to the denim being on top of the duvet to the blood spatter, to show how False Pistorius's version was (how difficult it would have been for him to run through that area in the pitch dark without knocking things over on his way to shout for help from the balcony). More importantly Nel made it clear to the court that OP was lying and tailoring his evidence _"the duvet was on the bed, my lady - I saw the duvet on the bed covering Reeva's legs - I pushed the duvet further 'into' the bed while putting on my prosthetics"_, he dug himself in deeper and deeper.
I think he hit her in the bedroom somewhere as well - something happened in that room that ended in her death.
Ken Ford While babbling on in April OP said " They didn't know the fan was part of where the accident happened". Carolyn Yanik in a post above has the exact time and date of the comment. The jeans were at the foot of the bed, likely pulled off by him so she was not far from the fans at that point. Oscar never takes responsibility so anything he did he would call and "accident". Yanking off jeans wouldn't qualify, but some sort of strike would. She may have been bleeding when she ran. Not much, just small drops that hit the duvet and slightly beyond. Any blow would have been too much for Reeva, she put up with a lot but not that. He knew her friends and family would be livid. Someone would talk and the media would know.
Blood splatter was found on the wall at the head of the bed. O.P. testified he was not able to use Reeva's phone to call 911 because he did not know the access code, so, he returned to the bedroom to fetch his phone and his hand touched the wall at the head of the bed when he reached for his cellphone on the bedside table.
Oscar is very relaxed today, even sleepy. His family also (the old lady on red is often smiling). I found the judge's question about Reeva's whatsapps very strange since she is a acknowledged expert in violence domestic and cycle of abuse.
Yes, that was ridiculous. Her messages/writing are the closest thing to her feelings and thoughts. They are to be taken deadly serious
Roux and OP are buggered. Nel wiped the floor with OP today. Roux is clutching at straws.
I still don't understand why, if Reeva had a phone with her, didn't she call for help if either OP was threatening her or if he was shouting for her to call the police? and why this hasn't at any point been brought up by either the state or the defence???
I think she was shot before she could make a call. It would be the nail in his coffin if there was a 911 call made, and believe me they would've used it as evidence if they had it.
maybe OP shot to prevent Reeva from using her phone.
***** I don't think OP is that clever at all. It seems everyone is convinced he deliberately killed Reeva, but what about the following:
1) OP shouted/screamed Help Help Help! immediately after discovering Reeva, and he was beside himself/desperate to save her life on the night (as opposed to running away etc) Is this the action of a murderer, or just possibly someone who accidentally shot his girlfriend?
2) OP has no history of violence towards women, and he showed no such tendency during his 30 day psych test. He is definitely negligent with guns, and primed to defend himself from 'intruders'. It seems more likely from his background that he thought he was shooting at an intruder.
3) Neither OP nor Reeva was drunk on the night. There are no signs of a violent struggle between them. OP's ipad and phone records corroborate his evidence. They didn't have a history of raging physical arguments - they had spats via text message. Reeva had written 'i love you' in her valentine's card, showing that despite their recent differences their relationship was strong.
4) The timeline by the defence shows that the first bangs heard must have been the shots. All the female screaming heard came after that, when it can only have been OP screaming (because Reeva was dead) It makes sense that the second bangs were the cricket bat. From then on there was no screaming, just sobbing.
5) Inconsistencies in OP's evidence are because he is trying to avoid blame for shooting at all, and there's the lie. If it's the truth that he thought there was an intruder, then surely he's lying when he says he didn't mean to shoot them. Nel has cornered him on that. I think the evidence suggests that OP executed the 'intruder' without verbal warning. That's the only explanation for why Reeva didn't call out, and why no-one heard him shouting/screaming until after the shots. OP heard a noise, grabbed his gun, crept in 'combat mode' to the bathroom and fired. He thought that he'd shot an intruder. He went back into the bedroom and there was no-one there. He started screaming frantically - that makes sense. It makes no sense to shout and scream on the way to shooting an intruder, because you give your position away. That's why the screaming evidence doesn't add up. Anette Stipp was awake before the first bangs, so she'd have heard him shout 'get the f out my house', and screaming like never before, then.
Simon Raven Oscar Pistorius had no place to run. Calling for help was the start of his version of the accident. Remember too, he needs medical evaluation and follow-up for his physical disability, and replacement of his prostheses as indicated, thus no place to hide. Reeva's entry to the estate was recorded on video tape and in a written log by security, there would be no video or written log documentation of her exit from the estate on her own. If she "disappeared" OP would be the number one person of interest. No history of violence??? Look up the Cassidy Taylor-Memmory lawsuite against OP (he settled out of court just prior to the start of his murder trial); review Sammantha Taylor's testimony. Reeva's valentine card message was written prior to their final "spat." The "bloodcurdling" scream from a woman was heard at the start of the shooting. Oscar Pistorius made no effort to confirm that Reeva heard a noise coming from the direction of the bathroom, nor did he confirm her presence in the bedroom, bathroom, or toilet. A "reasonable" person would confirm the location of a loved one if he/she suspects an intruder is in the house .
Carolyn Yanik yep the Taylor-Memmory lawsuit is pretty damning - he punched a door and a bit of it landed on her leg, which is more evidence that he has a violent temper around women (and doors) I remember Samantha Taylor said something about him screaming angrily at her and her friends too.
In a jury system OP would be guilty by Monday evening.
Roux is doing well, considering the defendant's actions he has to work with.
Roux is as annoying as ever...but feel for him as he's in a sinking ship...OP cannot get out of this...he's guilty and his defense team has done nothing to discredit what Gerrie Nel the Prosecutor has put forth and OP's story was so improbable it is obvious that it was all a concocted story to try to evade punishment just like the other incidents...only this time...a life was taken and he must face the punishment and be sentenced to at least 15-25 years!
There is something wrong if he does not get 15 - 25.
I'm pretty sure if it was some random man off the street he wouldn't have even gotten bail.
Ken Ford Agree totally, watching the proceedings today I felt the same uneasy, sick feeling seeing OP he seriously gives me the creeps and he showed a complete lack of respect again today constantly yawning throughout Gerrie Nel's closing arguments...he's so arrogant and I pray that the Judge does find him guilty and sentences him accordingly!
pps1fan
You are correct Roux is annoying to listen to and he is hard to follow. I am not sure if it is the way he always comes across as so persistent or if it just the tone of his voice, but I am not drawn in to listen to him. Or it could be that I think OP is an arrogant, murderous, no-account creep
Karen Owens So glad to know I am not alone in feeling this way...I think it's a combination of all of what you say doesn't help that I get the sense that Roux like the majority of us know his client is GUILTY but he has to do the horrible job in defending him! I don't feel the defense has done anything to make anybody doubt his guilt...let's pray Justice is served so that Reeva can truly rest in peace...I feel for her parents who throughout have been so dignified but the heartache they must feel is unimaginable :(
Your a moron for basing the trial on personality and not the facts.You probably want him set free because you think he's good looking.
It's sad all round. Reeva's Mother and Father (bless them).....Everybody connected to her... I have watched spell bound for weeks and weeks.. Yes, I think he reacted in Rage... it's very sad. Her family (Reeva Steenkamp)they have lost her.... it's beyond words when you boil it down ... : (
Does anybody knows how the judge delivers her verdict.Does she say guilty or not guilty first and then explain why, or does she reads each case witnesses and who she accepts and conclude in the end if guilty or not
Good grief it's taking Nel forever to make a point. I love Nel but it's getting on my last nerve. After arguments it will take the judge 6-8wks before she makes a judgment. Pray she sees through OP bs story.
Relating to the whatsapps, it becomes clear it could have been another problems that were not discussed by messages (primary personally). Besides, it shows the dynamic of "cycle of abuse" (the judge should know that).
How can he get 6 years instead of 25 years minimum
It’s the most dangerous time for a woman when she’s trying to leave, or has just left. I get the feeling she was trying to break up with him and he exploded. She’d said she was afraid of him.
When Oscar Pistorius told the Court. "I've never screamed like that before!" he must have forgotten that in his version, it was before the first set of sounds, and nobody had heard any screams. Therefore, it is clearly Oscar gunshots were the second sounds. In addition, Oscar himself referred the second sounds as "grouping." Today, Mr. Nel was almost perfect!
I predict he will be found guilty of murder (dolus directus) Just re- watched the Nel closing argument. I think he covers it beautifully. Nice one Nel. OP will appeal once found guilty.
Idiotic preamble by a desperate Roux. Still, he has bankrupted Pistorious.
I think Mr. Nel forgot that Mr. and Mrs. Stipp heard the second sounds as three because Mr. Stipp was talking on the phone, and Mrs. Stipp was paying attention to it (even Mrs. Stipp explained that in the case of the first sound she was awake and there were not other than three sounds).
Who else thinks that even if the defense is correct, and the gun shots were first and the cricket bat after, that means then there was 5 whole minutes between when he realized he might have shot Reeva and when he went to go smash the door down with cricket bat. 5 minutes is a really long time under those circumstances- especially since his story is now claiming he was actually standing at the entrance of his bathroom, not even "in" it. Including shouting/looking for Reeva, putting on prosthetics (which I, for some reason think I read somewhere although I could be completely wrong, is said to only take him about 30 seconds), get cricket bat, go back to bathroom and start bashing. I personally think all that should take 1-2 minutes considering he never went downstairs to look for Reeva- it was all in the 5-7m space. That 5 minutes is very dodgy to me, although Nel did not really bring it up like that. I personally think, when it comes to the sequence and order of the sounds of the cricket bat and the shots, that there was some bat first (probably the louder ones that hit the thick part of the door, the neighbors might hear) then the gun shots (all as heard... 1...2,3,4) then final use of the cricket bat on the thin plywood part that is easily broken down to get through door- and not likely heard by neighbours, because the bat goes right through easily first time. There's no big bang and reverberation like there would have been on the thick parts of the door. So, that's my theory on the sequence, the scenario behind it is that Oscar and Reeva were arguing, she did run away from him into the toilet cubicle- all the while quite possibly taunting him, while he shouted profanities at her- like happens in heated relationships sometimes, at this point while his rage was building he grabbed the cricket bat with the intention of scaring her/breaking the door down... He hit once/twice and did not feel the door breaking immediately and by now was also getting more worked up and angry, as Reeva said she was going to call the police- and even possibly still taunting him about new lovers/ex lovers etc- that first attempt with the cricket bat is the first set of sounds some witnesses hear and others not at all. Also this set of sounds between the witnesses who did hear them, not all can be sure how many they heard. This was now 3:12. Oscar, now at the height of his rage decides F* this I'm going to go get my gun (this is the only part where I myself am willing to concede that here his intention to shoot "AT" the door may just have been to really want to scare her- somehow thinking the Black Talon ammunition would explode all over the door, rather than go right through and then destroy Reeva. Would be really stupid of him not to realize the bullets would go through though. Short of some stupid explanation like that, then his thinking would be to get the gun and shoot her now- to get her to shut up!) and shoot at the door/kill her. He then goes to look for the gun, finds it goes back to the bathroom (during all this time Reeva may well now have also stopped screaming because she's heard him smash the door with the cricket bat a few times and then he's gone away and it's gone quiet. Then whether they fire up again verbally or not- according to witness testimonies- he then fires the 1st shot, which sets Reeva off screaming for sure, and he in a rage/with the knowledge he knows he needs to kill her fires of shots 2,3,4. Then suddenly realizing/understanding what he's done, he uses the cricket bat, which is actually already right there, to hit once through the flimsy ply wood part and then use his hands to pull apart the rest. (Remember it is the 2nd set of sounds that almost all witnesses hear, one witness even describes the timing and and her husband recalled hearing 4/5 sounds-perhaps he did hear faintly the last cricket bat sound). My theory certainly needs refining, but I think may be what happened as the sounds happening in a mixed fashion would explain why both the state and defense, once deciding which set of sounds came first and second and thus creating their story of what happened, have both found small discrepancies with each other's story's when they have tried to tie up all the sounds, the times, the witness accounts, the screaming...
Spot on Josh. Another proof that he is lying. guilty - lock him up.
You're right about the time it takes to put on his legs, he threw it in Nel's face from the stand. He could take his time once she was shot because nothing he did that night indicates someone who wanted her to live. His dramatic story was to garner sympathy and bolster his claims couldn't have purposely shot her.
Yes, OP demonstrated to the court that he can put on his prostheses in 30-40 seconds. The demonstration was conducted to discredit Sammantha Taylor's testimony that it takes 4 minutes for OP to put on his "legs" , and so, by inference, ST's testimony about the car-roof shooting was a lie.
***** His actions immediately after the shooting are the most damning evidence of his guilt. Unbelievable arrogance led him to think he could kill without consequence and the same arrogance led him to believe by taking the stand he could fool the world into buying his story. Instead of extending his lies to pretend he was too traumatized to remember anything he just had to try to sell his version because he's the great Oscar Pistorius admired by millions.
Roux and company would have done a much better job at lying and wouldn't have walked into Nel's traps. OP was easy prey and his blunders caused the defense to hastily throw up bogus experts in an attempt patch the mess he made of his version.
***** It was a gem of a moment when he effectively changed his plea. The defense team should have been properly prepared by wearing Depends by that time. I wouldn't be surprised if they skipped tea and pulled out whiskey flasks during the breaks when he was in the box.
There is no way after his long,long narrative detailing the slow carefully thought out walk to the bathroom for him to explain why he never gave the "intruder/s" a chance to leave. Yes someone behind the door could have a gun and shoot first but why put yourself in front of the door? He could have peeked around ,yelled for them to leave and watch as they fled out the window. He had the advantage of a protected position even being dumb enough to advance in the first place. With his own mouth he pushed the point he believed beyond doubt someone was in the toilet so he had to expect them to make a sound at some point. So he definitely intended to shoot a human.
But we must remember this is the man with the magic touch. Glocks fire at the mere touch of his hand. Black Talons fly from the nozzle by virtue of being held by Oscar Pistorius. It's a wonder he hasn't shot himself with such mystical power surging through his fingers.
yes mylady it is very clear Oscar's 'vesrion is so improbable.The state has well presented its arguments! C'mon the world is watching. Oscar is guilty!!
Agreed
I really don't think the judge agrees with Roux by looking at her expressions
I find Nel's closing argument uncharacteristically badly presented and quite hard to follow.
Holly Brook
Unfortunately Nell's argument lacks passion previously exhibited when "testing" OP's version of events.
I hope my statements are showing up, I don't see them.
Holly Brook Sounds really pompous of me in hindsight! The heads read well. I think OP will be charged for Dolus Indirectus, or whichever it's called. I don't think there's enough actual evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt premeditated murder of Reeva, but I do think he showed massive negligence, coupled with malicious intent by shooting at a person four times through a door with black talon rounds, without even warning that he was armed. He'll also be charged for the restaurant shooting.
Simon Raven
Malicious intent coupled to firing through the door would probably be "murder with intent", dolus directus, with a 25 year sentence. Premeditation is aggravation on top of that.
It's his credibility that is the evidence.
Remember it's beyond REASONABLE doubt - not beyond all POSSIBLE doubts.
Oscar will get off with 5 years’ probation, he will not do jail time. What person shoots someone is out on the street while the trial takes place, even OJ was in lock down. He will get off scott free and do probation. Hopefully Reva’s family knows some people ( not so desirable people) that will take care of Oscar as he walks the streets after this trial.
@John Power, that's just my theory of what happened. I think we all have our own theories that make sense to us.OP has way too many holes in his account of what happened. I'm not buying it for one second.
He later got confused by his own evidence!The pause was 2make she's dead,simple isn't right?!!!!!!
In a million years from now the lady will still not understand wat Mr. Nel trying to tell her ..banana court
In addition of being excellent lawyer, Mr. Nel is charming!
No. Way this judge should be doing this case .she should have retired years ago
He thought cuz he's a celebrity,he'll b able 2get away with it!Horrendous!!!!!
Look at Pistorius in this clip. What arrogance! He's texting and looking at his smart phone and doing anything other than pay attention to his own trial. He should get online to find out what the largest bottle of personal lubricant can be bought and whether or not he'll be allowed to take it to prison when he heads that way.
Okay so lets just say pis head torius version is the truth.
Arming yourself and shooting at an intruder with the intention of killing them is MURDER so either way he is screwed!
They should have use a sheep to judge the case .murderer and liar .should have recieve the death penalty
Strano che non abbiano chiamato anche a me complice di Pistorius a casa sua strano
I have watched every minute of this trial. My opinion is not guilty. I do not care what response I get. I just want to express my view.
I also watched every minuta of this trial. My opinion is guilty.
Not guilty of what?
Yeah, not guilty of what?
So what evidence did you see that made you think Oscar screams like a woman?
indigotoblue - that's what i also - always - said:-)
Causing harm 2a unarmed woman*
The neighbor heard screams b4 that
The "BLOOD SPLATTERED" duvet and carpet were close to the "THE FAN".
Yes. I know he was covered in blood but still the drops in the bedroom are questionable. If he hit her it would have caused enough fear to make either make her try to get the jeans on to leave or run to the only door she could lock..
+Aeval K I've thought that too - "the only door she could lock" was the reason she was in the toilet.
The nature of the wounds will cause reasonable doubt about splatters in the bedroom - but the blood on the headboard stretches credulity.
Whatever about the blood - why would Reeva have taken her phone to the toilet? I’ve never known a woman to do that at 3am. Perhaps she was using it to light her way? The bathroom light worked (but not the light in the toilet cubicle), OP was awake and moving fans (allegedly) so why would she need her phone for light?
OP’s testimony emphasises what he heard - window opening, door closing, magazine rack moving. What he didn’t hear was Reeva taking a leak. How did he not hear that? A lady doesn’t get up at 3am to lay a brick! She didn’t have the scutters …
If any woman reading this thinks they are not heard while taking a leak in the en-suite - they need to think again. My hearing is not great - but splashes and the release of trapped wind does nothing for my libido!
If Reeva wasn’t making a noise in the toilet - she wasn’t using it. So, why was she there? Is she was hiding from a intruder with OP screaming to phone the police (allegedly) wouldn't she have phoned?
John Power In response to "The nature of the wounds will cause reasonable doubt about splatters in the bedroom......................." , explosion of Reeva's brain, skull, scalp, from the impact of the bullet could have removed evidence of injury to her head from a fist/bat/cellphone, etc.
Carolyn Yanik Exactly! Oscar was well trained with guns and he knew the damage Black Talons would do. It was strange there were only four shots if he was shooting automatically out of fear. Why stop when her screaming stopped? The gun was found cocked so he intended to fire more. I think once he knew a bullet hit her in the head he was safe and didn't have to fire the next round. It didn't matter if she was wasn't dead as each wound was devastating enough to be a kill shot. She'd bleed to death while he staged the crime scene only he accidentally called security causing him to rush getting her downstairs. And the people who arrived didn't leave him alone, after he went back upstairs, long enough to complete the staging. I think he never got around to turning off the bedroom lights, moving the fans, closing the curtains etc. because he was trying to get into her phone to see if she called anyone.
Aeval K Yes, I too suspect he staged the scene.
Ocercato di fare di tutto anche per te non sapete conbqualisacrifici ma non ci sono riuscita
Oscar is innocent. The intruder must of climbed down the balcony.
Oscar is the best
i agree:-)
I think Roux was hoping he could start first thing tomorrow because his open is rambling and messy
She is smart, before a JUDGE a lawyer and extremely active in women's violence and abuse..She knows he abused her!
Oscar can hear like anyone in the world can hear there loved one getting out of bed less then inches away
Ricordo bene la storia grazie Carl Leo che poi presentai asiniscola ma c'era Francesca borozzucomune figlioingegnere murtinedu ricordo bene edicola libri Londra figlia siniscola
Well just a quick visit....... Roux is doing a fine job...... money well spent.
we make templates drop by its simple.
Mylady go back to sleep
Haaa M eleka, rly am I? eish
CIVIL SUIT
CIVIL SUIT
CIVIL SUIT