For those who still thinks it was an accident the only thing that would make you think he murdered her is if he admitted it
He could have shot her anywhere in the flat made some excuse as to why he thought she was an intruder to cover any circumstance
He had no reason to think it was an intruder and not his girlfriend. She was not some unexpected guest he didn't know about
But going back to my main point you are basically allowing any guy to shoot his wife claim he though it was a burglar for no reason and get off with it
ukathleticscoach wrote:
But going back to my main point you are basically allowing any guy to shoot his wife claim he though it was a burglar for no reason and get off with it
'Any guy' who did this would have a motive. What was Oscar's motive?
ukathleticscoach wrote:
For those who still thinks it was an accident the only thing that would make you think he murdered her is if he admitted it
He could have shot her anywhere in the flat made some excuse as to why he thought she was an intruder to cover any circumstance
He had no reason to think it was an intruder and not his girlfriend. She was not some unexpected guest he didn't know about
But going back to my main point you are basically allowing any guy to shoot his wife claim he though it was a burglar for no reason and get off with it
Wrong. Wheres your head at?
Some of us are actually considering the information available, both about OP and what we have heard so far. We await more evidence and more questions asked to OP in trial.
You on the other hand generalise both OP and everyone talking about this.
Whatever knowledge we get about this case, your opinion is: He killed her on purpose, no matter what. Thats it for you.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
But going back to my main point you are basically allowing any guy to shoot his wife claim he though it was a burglar for no reason and get off with it
'Any guy' who did this would have a motive. What was Oscar's motive?[/quote]
Jeezes man, what a stupid generalising claim.
Its like me saying:
-> "You are basically calling anyone who shoots someone by mistake a liar"
Lots of Geb, Lance, Bolt fan types on this thread sadly.
trollism wrote:
Lots of Geb, Lance, Bolt fan types on this thread sadly.
How come?
'Whatever knowledge we get about this case, your opinion is: He killed her on purpose, no matter what. That's it for you'
Just the same of as you whatever BS he comes out with you believe that's how it happened
Answer these then:
Why change the side of the bed if you have a sore side. You just turn over!
How did he grab the gun when it was dark especially as it was not on its usual side
Why did he not reach up or to check if his gf was in bed. He had 2 opportunities to do this and could have asked verbally
Why was the bathroom window open if he was so scared about security
Why did she lock the door
Was the window big enough for someone to fit through
How did he have time to remember this in an emergency situation
How did he not notice that his gf got up when he went to the balcony. There could be only a couple of seconds when he was out there
Having heard her go to the loo probably every night and with other gf's why assume its a burglar and not the normal situation
Why did he not ask 'is that you' at the loo door. Again everyone who is married has heard this phrase a hundred times
Why did he not notice the light on the edges of the bathroom door, a burglar does not turn the light on
Why was a cartridge found outside the door
Why did he not turn the light on
Why did he assume it was a burglar and not his gf when he had no reason whatsoever to think that
What shouting did the witnesses hear and was it one shot and then 3 more. 600m was mentioned but I doubt his nearest neighbour was so far.
You could get away was with explaining all of those but what is the probability of all things falling in place
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'Whatever knowledge we get about this case, your opinion is: He killed her on purpose, no matter what. That's it for you'
Just the same of as you whatever BS he comes out with you believe that's how it happened
Bullshit! I think he should go to jail and is a fvcking idiot for behaving like he did, regardless if he killed her on purpose or if it was an accident.
What I am doing is looking at the facts, considering.
Why the heck har you repeating this which already have been answered? If you want to have a serious discussion you should at least acknowledge that several of the things you mention is easy to explain and fairly normal.
Locked the door again? Come on, jeeez.
My gf does that all the time, its very usual for girls.
I'll answer the rest after the finals of world champ x skiing right now
[/quote]
'Any guy' who did this would have a motive. What was Oscar's motive?[/quote]
Purely speculation here, not reporting this as fact:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/reeva-steenkamp-close-friendship-pistorius-1714096
Police are investigating her ipdad, phone, etc to see if any info can be gained from them. It's worth noting that Hougaard denies being involved.
I think if this bail hearing is indicative of the trial then it's going to be very difficult for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that OP is guilty of the premeditated murder of his girlfriend. They are already talking about a lesser charge of culpable homicide which could just involve a fine and no prison time.
Their case so far has been pulled apart by the defense and it's now reached farcical levels after the investigating officer has been pulled because he himself is being investigated for the attempted murder of 7 people.
None of this means he's innocent, but without compelling evidence it's going to be difficult for this seemingly incompetent state prosecution to prove beyond doubt that he was guilty of what he's currently been charged with.
i wouldn't exactly call what the defense has done "pulling apart" the prosecution's case. it has presented a suspend-all-notions-of-reality explanation and has attempted to rebut many of the prosecution's claims. since this just is a bail hearing, there's no cross examination so you can make statements that are false but that won't get ripped apart (for both sides). the credibility of the neighbor's testimony will be critical as will be the angle that the bullets penetrated the door. if the bullets marks indicate that the bullets were shot from above, then OP's explanation quickly crumbles.
no no... wrote:
'Any guy' who did this would have a motive. What was Oscar's motive?
Not saying this is what happened, just a theory... they are in a domestic dispute, he was verbally abusing her, grabbed the gun to keep her from leaving, locked her in the bedroom, etc. He's fired the gun once already (I think witnesses heard one shot with a delay until the next shots, plus there is one casing separate from the rest), and he's in a rage. She's a violence against women advocate, and he's got this reputation to uphold. Now he's gone too far and if this becomes public, he's toast. Shoots her and now she's not around to tell everyone what really happened.
He could also just be a bully who is simply pissed that the woman in his life isn't doing what he's telling her to do, and in a fit a rage, he shoots her. This is a much more frequent scenario than mistaking a loved one for an intruder.
Men kill their wives/girlfriends everyday, everywhere in the world. And after the man kills the woman, he almost always comes up with some excuse about what happened... she attacked me first, we were fighting over the gun and it accidentally went off, I left to buy cigarettes and when I came home she was dead on the kitchen floor. Unfortunately, she can't testify otherwise, and you have to hope the facts bring out the truth.
Well, Hilton Botha the lead investigator has now had charges of murder re-instated against him. Looking better for me all the time!
this is a non-issue. it's actually much worse for OP because a better prosecutor now is on the case and he won't be able to blow up the prosecutor down the road. had this news come out during the actual trial, it would have been a disaster for the prosecution.
Botha is still a witness after the fact and presumably could still be called and torn apart on the witness stand...
i don't know exactly how SA criminal investigations are run but tearing apart a prosecutor who was on the case for a week won't matter (particularly if the bullet holes are angled down and the witness testimony is credible). we aren't dealing with a stupid jury here like OJ enjoyed.
He intentionally killed her and he's going to be found not guilty.
Key Factors:
He admits he killed her. There no question here.
There apparently were some past altercations between them. There's also some eyewitness testimony about what they heard and when.
The crime scene and investigation were comprimised. A big plus for the defense.
He's disable. Another big plus for the defense.
There's no clear motive.
At the end most people will feel he likely did it intentionally but lack of hard evidence against pre-meditated homocide, some sympathy, along with a botched investigation will win out.
Blade Runner walks
Time will tell. But why do you say the investigation was botched? Because a savvy defense lawyer was able to cross examine the chief investigator and get him to admit he should not have worn his shoes in the home, or to admit that OP's story has been consistently told even if it lacks a shred of credibility? So what?
You hit the nail on the head, he admitted he did this. His story as to why he killed his girlfriend does not make any sense at all. Why is the bogeyman locked in the bathroom and why doesn't he notice his lover is not in bed (hint, because she retreated to the bathroom in terror)? His story does not comport with common sense reasoning. If OP testifies, he will not withstand cross examination; if he does not, he is toast, because he admitted he pulled the trigger at least 4 times. As for motive? He got angry, nothing fancy about that, but it is not a mitigating defense.
The prosecution will push him hard when he testifies. He will lose it and reveal to the public what he is capable of. Given his current state of mind I really think right now he would break down and blurt out the truth