His story is just ridiculous.
He hears a noise in his bathroom and deduces that a burglar is in the bathroom and not his girlfriend who had been sleeping with him.
Did he think a burglar broke into his house to take a poop? Are pooping burglars a problem in South Africa?
She found the steroids, threatened to turn him in, so he killed her.
By the way, she sleeps around, is not a lily white virgin, and neither is he.
Why? Mr Blade Runner will soon be enjoying companionship with a different male lover every night.
Although the story in sum sounds ridiculous, when you take each element of the story it seems like you can make an almost reasonable argument for how each step COULD possibly happen in some crazy circumstance... I guess that's what defense lawyers are for...
Personally, I agree it seems super unlikely that the simpler version didn't happen (he freaked out and shot her during a fight).
Gotta love the onion article too:
If the blades don't fit, you must acquit.
And Armstrong never tested positive....two peas in a pod...lies, lies and more lies.
Wow, there's so much going on here with so many details that I don't know and so many reports I'm not sure are confirmed. I almost wish there was some kind of system where the authorities could collect all the evidence and decide whether or not to charge him, and if so, they would then have to present all of their evidence, with Oscar and his representatives given the chance to cross examine the evidence and present evidence of their own. If they had something like that, after it was over I'd feel fairly confident about developing an opinion.
Obvious issue - she would have screamed as soon as the first shot was fired. No way he fired multimple shots through the door without immediately realizing it was her.
Why he is lying:
How come there is no mention of the huge screaming fight he had that same evening that the neighbors complained about?
He hears a noise. Most men would then wake their partner up to protect them or be ready for trouble. He didn't.
He goes off to confront dangerous criminals without his legs?
He knew his gf was home. Wouldn't he have yelled for her when he had his gun drawn at the bathroom door, to make sure she wasn't inside?
Why in the world would a criminal enter a house and lock himself in a very tiny toilet with no escape?
Before he started shooting, would he not have demanded an answer at the bathroom door?
Why would Reeva herself not have yelled at him not to shoot if she was using the toilet at the time? Especially if she heard odd noises outside the door?
Why didn't she scream for him to stop once the shooting began (assuming she wasn't killed by the first shot)?
This was Pistorius being the arrogant, angry, thug he was known to be. he killed her in cold blood and is crying like a baby coz he knows he screwed up this time.
Ambien + alcohol = black out. that stuff is nuts. add in steroids and your sub conscience can do some crazy stuff I would imagine.
BlindMan wrote:
She found the steroids, threatened to turn him in, so he killed her.
You are wrong. Oscar turned down her marriage proposal too close to Valentine's Day and that is what triggered the argument that got just a little out of hand. Why isn't Nike willing to pick up the tab for his attorney?
I would love for Oscar to be innocent of murder, but the reported facts show too many holes in his story (and it breaks my heart).
1) If her skull was indeed crushed, game over, it's murder. The gun was used to finish her off.
2) The screaming reported by neighbors, he offers no explanation.
3) The fact that she LOCKED the bathroom door. No one locks a bathroom door when simply using the toilet in the middle of the night, perhaps completely shutting the door at most, but there is no reason to lock the door when your companion is laying in bed nearby. If the door was indeed locked (he claims he needed to bash the door in) it was because she was terrified of him and trying to protect herself.
Note the detail. The bathroom has a separate little room for the toilet. So his story is that he heard a noise, went to the bathroom to investigate, saw a window open and the door to the toilet closed, panicked and fired bullets into the toilet room. What criminal breaks into a house to lock themselves in the toilet? Makes no sense at all.
Further, in the 27 years that I've shared a bed with another person, I can't think of a single time that I've gotten out of the bed without noticing whether my girlfriend or wife is in the bed or our if it. Ambien or not. Shitfaced or not. It is just something you know.
Finally, the hand and arm wounds are defensive. She was covering up to try to protect herself which means she was under assault.
Even if every word of Pistorius' affidavit is true, I have no problem with him spending the next 25 years of his life in prison. His actions, as he describes them, are so reckless and irresponsible he deserves to labeled a murderer.
I have taken an extensive gun course as a contractual requirement for work I do in dangerous countries. We were taught to escape vehicles and buildings under fire. One thing I can say is that, even when you know it is only a training exercise, you really get into a tunnel vision zone when you are under attack and you will do all kinds of things that you later realize were retarded. Many people in combat situations get killed because of stupid action under panic. The main things we were being taught is not to accidentally point our muzzle at "friendlies" while maneuvering in and out of vehicles, and just the general experience of doing dumb stuff while in training in hopes that we would be smarter if we encountered a real world situation. As an example of something stupid I did, I tried to escape a vehicle for about 10 seconds with my seatbelt on. Your mind just does not work the same way under fire.
I think OP is guilty but I can understand how he could do many of the stupid things he claims to have done. I don't know about the court system in SA, but if this was a jury trial in the US he would have a decent chance of getting off. However, I believe the police are going to have some bombshell evidence.
One way Reeva could have gotten a fractured skull is if she fell and hit her head on a tile floor after being shot. Forensics should easily be able to determine that because if she was hit with the cricket bat, there will probably be wood fibers in her skull.
OP seems the type of guy who should not be owning a gun. However I work with a bunch of gun nuts and most of them are well trained and stable mentally...but I think they would shoot first and ask questions later if their home were being invaded. But none of them would be likely to shoot through a door without knowing for sure who was behind it.
Smart people who want to defend their home and not accidentally kill loved ones/neighbors would also wield a shotgun.
I don't like the guy (I don't think he should be competing against able-body athletes, and I don't like the way the science around his prosthetics has been treated), but in this case I actually believe him completely. His story is basically what I thought happened when I first heard the news.
On the one hand, I've always thought he was an idiot for being so gun-happy. But let's face it, South Africa is a messed up country. He's a target as a celebrity, and he's handicapped, and he's got a bit of machismo. So I kind of understand his relationship with guns.
As far as the premeditation charges, I'm going to chalk that up to an overzealous prosecutor in a messed up country.
It's a terrible tragedy and I send my best wishes to everyone involved.
Why does the affidavit say he has "cash investments in excess of R1 million at various banks within the RSA", yet no mention of how much he has outside the RSA. Makes R5.5M per year, and only has R1M left in country. Seems like a pretty gaping hole in the affidavit. Doesn't that matter in evaluating whether he's a flight risk? Intentional? Isn't bond amount a function of your assets?
Oscar headed somewhere?
He says: I grabbed my 9mm pistol from underneath my bed.
Then he says: I knew I had to protect Reeva...
He wants to protect her, but he doesn't make sure where she is?
I'm not sure about others, but that would be the first thing I'd want to check, the location of the person that I'm protecting.
He says: On my way to the bathroom I screamed words to the effect for him/them to get out of my house
So even though he won't turn a light on, he doesn't mind giving away his location by screaming out. But when he gets to the bathroom, he doesn't call out to try to identify the person in the toilet... why not, he already let them know he was coming from his earlier screaming?
Then he says: I felt trapped as my bedroom door was locked and I have limited mobility on my stumps
So the bedroom door is locked (how?) and he can't get back in?
If the bedroom door is lockable, why not lock it from the inside and call the police/security?
If the bad guy(s) try to break down the door, *then* you shoot.
Then he says: Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom and I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding.
Wait, so it was no problem to get back in the bedroom now.
Is this the best that his PR firm and legal team can come up with?
Call me skeptical, but too many inconsitencies.
And I thought that GUNS were the solution to all problems related to personal safety! Someone call the NRA! We need MOAR GUNS IN SOUTH AFRICA TO SHOOT OUR PARTNERS